Obama: "Weapons of war have no place on our streets".

a reply to: Sunwolf

That's what Thermite is for ,it's easy to make and 100 % effective....Armor is simple to sneak up on and kill.

These "weapons of war" only belong to the terrorist groups that he supports.

OP, have seen a couple of these vehicles recently descend upon our wonderful little town tucked in the mountains up north, a long with jets that has been chem trailing the h out of us since Memorial day. My youngest child came running inside yesterday and told me she saw 7 planes going all over above her with "smoke". Husband and I went out, looked up and were witnessing a grid of crap being laid out above us. This morning I woke up and they had done more.

We are all sick here with burning eyes, skin, and sore throats today.

I'm sure that someone is going to be along now to tell me I'm full of it, but I'm living here and seeing it/experiencing it.

How times have changed. There is a storm brewing.

a reply to: gladtobehere>>> Whether you're against Obama or support him, just ignore him and don't listen to anything he says. Save yourselves from a headache.

a reply to: macman

The country where nation wide polls are conducted - polls that show the majority of Americans want tougher laws. These are the polls that FOX'NEWS" doesn't mention, (nor the NRA), so I'm not surprised you haven't heard of them.

a reply to: Sunwolf

No. I have common sense, a majority of voters and the knowledge that I'm on the right side of history. As I've said, I'm not anti-gun - I'm anti-stupidity. Allowing just about any one to get an assault rifle is stupid.

a reply to: TownCryer

Care to provide these polls....you know, the ones were the polling company contacts 1000 people and pretends to play that off as what the country's mood is.

Care to also answer this question?

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: TownCryer
And allowing anyone who can fill out an application to get a rifle that armies issue to their soldiers, is foolish, and will change, whether you like it or not.

And what rifle are you talking about?

Also, when you visit and sign up with groups like MDA and Brady, when they hand out the talking points for arguments, is the statement of "Tell them you are for gun rights as well, just common sense gun rights" at the top of the list?

Care to address the FACT that firearms sales are off the charts?

Care to address the FACT that applications, not renewals, for CCW permits are exploding?

Care to address the FACT that Governor Hickenlooper has now backpedaled on his Anti-2nd stance and has been caught lying?

Care to address that MDA has yet to rally a large group for to support their Anti-2nd agenda?

Nah, I don't suppose you would, as those things not mentioned on Code Pink, MDA, Media Matters or CNN.

originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: Sunwolf

No. I have common sense, a majority of voters and the knowledge that I'm on the right side of history. As I've said, I'm not anti-gun - I'm anti-stupidity. Allowing just about any one to get an assault rifle is stupid.

Oh, then you are Anti-people then.

I get it.

How very authoritarian of you.

originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: macman

The country where nation wide polls are conducted - polls that show the majority of Americans want tougher laws.

Those polls are worthless for the simple fact that there is no baseline.

An awful lot of people have no clue what current laws are. They still think you can walk into Walmart and buy a machinegun. You see that ignorance everyday here on ATS or pouring out of the mouth of a politician.

Half the anti's who post on ATS claiming to want "tougher" gun laws always just cite laws that already exist when confronted with the simple "what laws would you like to see?" question.

a reply to: macman

You can dispute the findings of the many polls that have been taken. That doesn't change the validity. Peiople who believe that guns should be avialable to anyone who can use a pen are in the minority.

a reply to: macman

If eveyone in your state bought 10 guns each, you'd still be in the minority as far as those who don't own a gun. You know the counrty is larger than just your nieghborhood, right?

Gee, a politician changes his mind!?! Stopt the presses!! He's trying to keep his job. he's feeling pressure from gun rights groups who theaten to not vote for him. Do you need me to draw you a picture?

The NRA is not your friend. It's a corporation that wants you money, and the money of gun manufacturers. That's it. If they could make more money by fighting against gun ownership, you better believe they'd bombing the air waves with anti-gun ads.

You really are nieve, aren't you?

a reply to: TownCryer

So, shall I again, re-post my questions? Or are you eventually going to address them with more then "Because I said so"?

originally posted by: TownCryer


If eveyone in your state bought 10 guns each, you'd still be in the minority as far as those who don't own a gun. You know the counrty is larger than just your nieghborhood, right?

You do realize those numbers are NATION wide right?
Instead of putting words in my mouth, why not actually read and answer the question.

originally posted by: TownCryer
Gee, a politician changes his mind!?! Stopt the presses!! He's trying to keep his job. he's feeling pressure from gun rights groups who theaten to not vote for him. Do you need me to draw you a picture?

Not only change his mind, but flat out lie and ten lie about lying.
And the Sheriffs in his state have flat out stated they will not enforce the law he passed.

originally posted by: TownCryer
The NRA is not your friend. It's a corporation that wants you money, and the money of gun manufacturers. That's it. If they could make more money by fighting against gun ownership, you better believe they'd bombing the air waves with anti-gun ads.

When did I say the NRA is/was my friend?

You sure do have a habit of putting your own words into people's statements.

originally posted by: TownCryer
You really are nieve, aren't you?

Nieve??? I don't know what that means.

a reply to: TownCryer

Oh look, an attempt at being clever. I like it. Not really subtle, or original, but I will give you this. It definitely sounds like most of the people from the MDA group.

I shall ask again, care to provide those polls, versus sales numbers (Nationally) and CCW permit applications (On a national scale)?

originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: macman

If eveyone in your state bought 10 guns each, you'd still be in the minority as far as those who don't own a gun. You know the counrty is larger than just your nieghborhood, right?

Gee, a politician changes his mind!?! Stopt the presses!! He's trying to keep his job. he's feeling pressure from gun rights groups who theaten to not vote for him. Do you need me to draw you a picture?

The NRA is not your friend. It's a corporation that wants you money, and the money of gun manufacturers. That's it. If they could make more money by fighting against gun ownership, you better believe they'd bombing the air waves with anti-gun ads.

You really are nieve, aren't you?

You are wrong,you can post all the talking points of media matters,daily kos,etc but you and they are wrong.I hope all the leftys keep believing the propaganda,it will make it easier.
What is nieve?

originally posted by: oblvion

originally posted by: MDDoxs
I won't disagree with the slight hypocrisy of Obama's statement, but a lot of this equipment has a legitimate and historically justified purposes.

When you have a such a large population of individuals, with incredibly high densities and you ask a comparatively small force to police them, you make up for the numerical disadvantage by being better equipped.

Now this numerical disadvantage isn't always the case, but their current policies on equipment does allow them to be effective when the situation requires it.

I saw a lot of pictures of officers in protective gears wielding clubs, yes with some weapons, but remind me last time the US occupied a foreign country with melee weapons alone?

I see a lot of standard issue equipment that has some modern flare to it, though the tracked tanks do seem a bit excessive

Just to conclude, I am not defending OBama's statement, just pointing out that the comparison illustrated is a bit unfair.

You are right, it is unfair, it is unfair to run military hardware in the urban environ.

It is unfair for the police to run around by the hundreds pointing loaded "assault weapons" at unarmed civies.

It is unfair for them to put every single civie around them in danger so they can pretent to be soldiers.

It is unfair for those that couldnt make it, or didnt have the balls to join the military to play soldier against the American public.

You are absolutely right, it is entirely unfair.

This is exactly my opnion, big babies playing army. Get rid of the age limit in the military and let them enlist or re-enlist. No reason for them to dress in Camo, carry modified illegal M4's, and drive those types of Vehicles.

They should not have anything that the general public cannot have and abide by the exact same firearm laws.

originally posted by: NonsensicalUserName
a reply to: Fylgje

hmm...

So what if we don't ban guns, rather just enforce actually existing laws, along with closing up some of the loopholes in the current system for background checks.

you know; something that could screen-out the irresponsible gun-owners.

guns already purchased would be grandfathered in, and only new gun-sales would be required to oblige by these laws.

That is already the case. All new gun sales have to undergo a background check and a federally licensed dealer.

originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: Sunwolf

Yes, there is. When an idiot with an assault rifle goes nuts, we need the police to be equally armed in order to stop the nut with a machine gun. You seem to think that all assault rifle owners are Fred McMurray types who never do anything but help out. In reality a lot people with assault rifles shouldn't have them. The ability to complete an application form is not the same as being qualified to own a high powered killing machine. Our 2nd Ammendmant rights have nothing to do with a non-existant right to own an AR-15.

Less people were killed by "assault rifles" last year than fists and feet, so I don't understand the hysteria. With millions of so called "assault rifles" in private hands and a few hundred deaths of ALL long arms per year, your point of "a lot of people shouldn't have them is false" as for every one that is miss-used, hundreds of thousands are not.

"High powered killing machine?" Hyperbole much? An AR shoots a round that is actually lower powered than most hunting rounds.

The second Amendment was intended that all citizens have arms equal to the average infantry soldier, as explained in the Militia Act of 1791. Thus, the intent was actually that we have true assault rifles, not neutered semi-autos.