It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Not One More !

page: 14
11
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No, what I fear is how american men seem to only find courage anymore with weapons and blaming women.

Like I tell my son, sometimes you gotta stimulate the big brain on your shoulders, not just the littlle one.




posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
No, what I fear is how american men seem to only find courage anymore with weapons and blaming women.


Firstly, where in this thread is anyone blaming women for anything? The overall consensus, other then one disingenuous European, is that this was a mental health issue, not a women issue.
Secondly, how is it cowardice to want to protect my family and property as effectively as possible? If someone enters my home unlawfully what do you suggest I use to defend my self effectively?


Like I tell my son, sometimes you gotta stimulate the big brain on your shoulders, not just the littlle one.


Defending my home is not about my dick, it is about my life.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: voyger2
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Almost every tool can be use to kill, if you want to kill, and if the other person can't be able of defending herself!

With a gun or a rifle, as long is pointed at you (at distance, usually by cowards) you can't defend yourself. The bullet is to fast!

In other hand, knife or hammer.. i don't know.. anything, that doesn't fire bullets or explosives, at least the person being threatened can defend her self with her own speed and strength and even benefit from help of others.

Fatality rate of Gun's / Rifle's are by far higher than tool's!!

people should stop to use ban tools as an argument... it's sick.
dude, stop and think. I will give another test to see if you are thinking. What kills more children in the usa, guns or swimming pools? Hah, its swimming pools. Even though i tell you the answer i bet you get it wrong in the explanation of your logic.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: voyger2
The mental illness issue was directed to those who personally attacked me along this 12 pages. For the ones who got offend after, and continued attacking me, well they just fit very well on that statement.



People who are disagreeing with you are "attacking" you and "attacking" you means they're 'mental [SIC] ill'?

Whoo-boy! How do you type on a keyboard with your arms nailed to the cross like that? This honestly has not got one single thing to do with what somebody in Portugal thinks, man. Americans who support the 2nd Amendment get very defensive when they see any attempt at limiting the freedom... might have something to do with the hundreds of thousands of Americans who have died earning and then protecting the right over the past 250 years.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Way back on page 2, I posted. . .

"What we need is less freedom.

Less freedom to act, less freedom to choose, less freedom to decide our own paths.

We need more laws, harsher penalties, and a kind benevolent tyranny to control our every thought, motive and desire.


Now, I know most probably thought it was me simply being sarcastic, but there is some truth to what I said.

Those of you who wish for gun control may regret that decision to cede your rights.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: NavyDoc

"There are many solutions but disarming the law abiding is not one of them."

That is right, "law abiding citizens". We have to do something about the mentally ill getting guns.

I am woman, I believe and do a lot of things. That is another conversation.



Or conversely, those who are too dangerous to be out among us shouldn't be out among us.

Is it another conversation? Restricting a woman's right to choose to defend herself is a pertinent issue given that this person in California hated women and wanted to hurt them.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No, what I fear is how american men seem to only find courage anymore with weapons and blaming women.

Like I tell my son, sometimes you gotta stimulate the big brain on your shoulders, not just the littlle one.
you tell your son that?mmmmm..k...thats your wisdom for the day in mother/son relations?... sometimes?... man that is a power punch of a sentence.
edit: wait wait, he has a big and little brain? And they are both on his shoulders?
Sorry, think we were all thinking of something else that related to something sexual and...well, whew....but sorry about your son. I'm sure you found the blessings in it. Like the 2 brains part. Do they think together or seperate? This sounds fascinating
edit on 28-5-2014 by manna2 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

I have argued that certain types of weapons should be restricted or severely controlled but the pro-guns people bottom line is that guns aren't the problem,if you argue restricting high rate of fire weapons minimizes the chance of mass killings you will be told that is just a few acting out and that the main problem is handguns,if you argue to restrict hand guns your told your infringing on peoples right to defend themselves but all this is a moot point there are over 300 million guns in America it doesn't matter what you do someone determined to get a gun will always get one.I have been told the murder rate in my city is the same as in Texas where they are gun mad,perhaps if everyone has a gun there is less violence but there are places in the world where everyone has an assault rifle,Mogadishu comes to mind.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: khnum

You simply want to have "gun rights" replaced with "gun privileges".

You want the state, the controlling central authority; to determine what type of firearm, what caliber, what rate of fire an individual should own.

DO I have that correct?

Not going to jump on you, but I want the definitions clear here.

Once you start restricting "gun rights" then it stops being a right and becomes a privilege allowed by the state.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: beezzer



I have argued that certain types of weapons should be restricted or severely controlled but the pro-guns people bottom line is that guns aren't the problem,if you argue restricting high rate of fire weapons minimizes the chance of mass killings you will be told that is just a few acting out and that the main problem is handguns,if you argue to restrict hand guns your told your infringing on peoples right to defend themselves but all this is a moot point there are over 300 million guns in America it doesn't matter what you do someone determined to get a gun will always get one.I have been told the murder rate in my city is the same as in Texas where they are gun mad,perhaps if everyone has a gun there is less violence but there are places in the world where everyone has an assault rifle,Mogadishu comes to mind.


Here's the issue, and it is a separate one from a person's right to defend themselves and their own.
THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Nowhere in there are there any caveats saying:
*except in regards to high capacity magazines
*except for fully automatic carbines
*except for handguns

There is a method of due process by which the courts can remove an individual's 2nd Amendment rights for cause. Outside of that, any attempt to restrict for the whole of society is absolutely an infringement.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

If you have a criminal record you cant vote,you shouldn't get a gun either,if you dont pass a psychological questionaire like we have here you shouldn't get one either,no you cant restrict calibres after the horse has bolted but you can monitor and regulate who gets 5.56,7.62 and 9mm ammunition and if your not a registered sports shooter,hunter or living on acreage with large animals and feral pests perhaps you dont get that ammunition as you have no reason to have it.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc



Or conversely, those who are too dangerous to be out among us shouldn't be out among us.

^^ This^^

I always love it when we hear that a criminal has paid their debt to society... but we don't let them have the right to own a gun again. Why are they turning them loose on us if they are not safe to own a gun? They can buy and possess archery equipment, knives, axes and automobiles for criminy's sake. If they are dangerous (same goes for releasing loonies from the loony bin) keep them out of civilized society.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Hell, you know what, I'm gonna go ahead and point out the giant-assed elephant standing in the middle of America's room.

Abortions kill just over a million American babies each year.
Firearms are responsible for about 32,000 American deaths each year.

*sings*
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong.

I find this nation to be a hypocritical pile of crap for creating a legislation from the bench (which is unconstitutional, btw) manufacturing "a woman's right to choose" while simultaneously attempting to force the abdication of an honest-to-God, set in stone Constitutional Right. There are clinics in America which perform the equivalent of the Sandy Hook massacre EVERY WEEKDAY. Where's the freaking outrage and where's the perspective?
edit on 28-5-2014 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Well thats fine but another 100,000 will die in the next decade just like the last and you'll probably have another 20 or more mass killing if your society accepts that so that your blessed rights aren't infringed then so be it.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: khnum
if your not a registered sports shooter,hunter or living on acreage with large animals and feral pests perhaps you dont get that ammunition as you have no reason to have it.

(bolding mine)

Name me one other Constitutional Right you have to qualify for, name me one. There was a chance of "voting" being added to the list, but apparently the same folks who are so goddamned eager to restrict the Second Amendment consider mandatory voter registration to be racist/classist/partisan... The hypocrisy of America is sickening.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: burdman30ott6



Well thats fine but another 100,000 will die in the next decade just like the last and you'll probably have another 20 or more mass killing if your society accepts that so that your blessed rights aren't infringed then so be it.


See above. I see your "100,000" and raise you the 57 million babies dead by abortion since 1973. Thoughts? Defenses? Excuses?



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Hell, you know what, I'm gonna go ahead and point out the giant-assed elephant standing in the middle of America's room.

Abortions kill just over a million American babies each year.
Firearms are responsible for about 32,000 American deaths each year.

*sings*
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong.

I find this nation to be a hypocritical pile of crap for creating a legislation from the bench (which is unconstitutional, btw) manufacturing "a woman's right to choose" while simultaneously attempting to force the abdication of an honest-to-God, set in stone Constitutional Right. There are clinics in America which perform the equivalent of the Sandy Hook massacre EVERY WEEKDAY. Where's the freaking outrage and where's the perspective?



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This.

Beautifully put.

Really the end of discussion.

*applause*



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: beezzer

If you have a criminal record you cant vote,you shouldn't get a gun either,if you dont pass a psychological questionaire like we have here you shouldn't get one either,no you cant restrict calibres after the horse has bolted but you can monitor and regulate who gets 5.56,7.62 and 9mm ammunition and if your not a registered sports shooter,hunter or living on acreage with large animals and feral pests perhaps you dont get that ammunition as you have no reason to have it.


So I have to pass a test before owning a gun?

What kind of test would I have to pass to exercise my 1st Amendment right?



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Thats another discussion but the truth is all you have is priveleges they still extend you not rights the constitution these days after the Patriot Act and all the rest of it is just an interesting historical document.Because good men did nothing.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: manna2

Well, at least it got you stimulated and the wheels turning in your big brain.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join