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.

 

Four kids, two adults shot dead near Houston

page: 35
20
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 08:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

We the people wouldn't be allowed to. The gun caliphate would forcibly remove any gun control candidate.

That is of course if we were allowed to vote at all. Most likely a fascist regime would be implemented with the people completely taken out of the election process.


there you go again off on some fantasy world scene
that you want to argue about and discuss with us sane people,
ever heard of Walter Mitty?




posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

You are the only one wanting to take anyones anything

Im saying that if u take what is mine be prepared to defend yourself when I come for it



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 08:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
Another "law abiding gun owner" uses pre emptive self defense.



Still need less gun laws? I guess this guy thought so too.

I guess the pro gun crowd might say that he had every right to kill those children by virtue of him having a gun.

Good job pro gun crowd, chalk this up as another win for your cause.



Your first sentence is dishonest and disingenuous. He was not a "law abiding gun owner." He was a prohibited person and it was illegal for him to own a firearm already.

Had previous domestic violence arrests and restraining order

www.nydailynews.com... ged-ghastly-texas-shooting-article-1.1861414

Typical of an anti-gun leftist--lie, lie, then lie some more. This story actually shows the failure of gun control in keeping the guns out of the hands of the criminals.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: spirited75

Eliminating data sets in order to come up with a conclusion that fits your narrative is bad science.

It's like saying that knives kill more than rifles, eliminating shotguns, and pistols skews the data set

It's dishonest.


LOL. The irony of your last statement in this post.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: Another_Nut

Not a whole lot of life, liberty, and pursuits of happiness that goes on in a nation that does not allow the free elections of the people that the citizens want.

And here we are, the crux if the problem with the pro gun crowd. Its not about the freedom to be armed, its about the power to take away the freedoms of the people of this nation at the end of a gun.

It's about the dismantling of all liberty, disposing of a government by the people, and installing a regime of fascism and a rule not of the will of the people, but the rule of might and force.



This is the most skitzo few paragraphs ive ever ever laid witness to



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: Another_Nut

Not a whole lot of life, liberty, and pursuits of happiness that goes on in a nation that does not allow the free elections of the people that the citizens want.

And here we are, the crux if the problem with the pro gun crowd. Its not about the freedom to be armed, its about the power to take away the freedoms of the people of this nation at the end of a gun.

It's about the dismantling of all liberty, disposing of a government by the people, and installing a regime of fascism and a rule not of the will of the people, but the rule of might and force.



And removing the right of a citizen to keep and bear arms is exactly part of that fascism you say you are worried about. You make no sense--one hand you worry about fascism and the state taking away your rights but at the exact same time you are an advocate of the state taking away people's rights. You are a bundle of self contradictions



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 09:15 AM
link   
How can that not be the end game of the gun caliphate? The systematic deconstruction of the very constitution they are apparently advocating for?

The very argument of the gun caliphate is to forcibly remove constitutionally elected officials from office that they deem "harmful", in this way the people are disenfranchised from making their voices heard in a free election.

Only candidates that the gun caliphate deem worthy of running for office will be able to run for office, all others will be "forcibly removed" and the people that support those candidates will, then will be silenced.

What's to stop them from installing a government that removes other liberties from the people? Obviously after their coup d'état and the removal (read: public execution) of all previously constitutionally elected individuals from office that they deem "harmful" only those that follow along with the overall agenda of the gun caliphate will be allowed presence in our government.

You can't assume that after such a coup d'état of our government by the radical gun caliphate that they would allow free elections of people like the ones that they previously have forcibly removed from the government.

But that's the game isn't it? Remove all obstacles to unfettered and unrestricted gun access, allow a pro gun violence type of society to thrive till the government of the people and by the people is actually forced to crack down on the problem, then violently overthrow that government under the guise that the government is limiting the freedom of the people, then install a fascist regime bereft of actual liberty of the people.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: Daedalus
No, it's just dishonest. Those four cities whether you like it or not are part of the united states.


yes...PART of the United States...not the ENTIRE United States..

they are not representative of the whole country. they are extremes...remove the extremes, and you get an idea of what things REALLY look like...and then you note that these 4 cities were removed, and why, and that they're probably crap places to visit...



This shows the desperation the gun crowd has in this argument. Why they are so desperate to shut down all discussion.


no..it's a completely acceptable practice....the only person here desperate to shut down all discussion, is you....with your lies, hyperbole, false accusations, ignoring of facts, detachment from reality, and all the other dirty tricks you employ...

you don't want an honest, intelligent discussion..you just want everyone to agree with you. sorry man, that ain't happening...



The other extremely worrying aspect is the plan the gun crowd has to remove constitutionally elected people from our government. We the people would be forever disenfranchised our right to choose our own representatives. It would be a puppet democracy, as we the people would be robbed at gunpoint the freedom of a free election. Any candidate who said they were against the gun caliphate would be forcibly removed from the election process, only those that pledged loyalty to the gun caliphate would be allowed to be voted for.


can you go an entire post without using hyperbole?

it's debatable whether or not the people in our government were actually constitutionally elected....elections have been tampered with since the 20's...maybe even before..you wanna get mad about something, get mad about that...the hijacking of our government by people who don't have our interests in mind at all....

"gun caliphate" ...lol...you really like using words you don't know, don't you?


CALIPHATE cal·iph·ate [kal-uh-feyt, -fit, key-luh-]

noun

the rank, jurisdiction, or government of a caliph.

Also, califate, kalifate, khalifate. Origin: 1725–35; caliph + -ate3


ok, so "what's a caliph?", you might ask.....


CALIPH [key-lif, kal-if]

noun

1. a spiritual leader of Islam, claiming succession from Muhammad.

2. any of the former Muslim rulers of Baghdad (until 1258) and of the Ottoman Empire (from 1571 until 1924).

Also, calif, kalif, kaliph, khalif.

Origin: 1350–1400; Middle English caliphe, califfe < Middle French < Medieval Latin calipha < Arabic khalīf ( a ) successor (of Muhammad), derivative of khalafa succeed


so what you said has nothing to do with anything....unless you're implying that a firearm can be a muslim extremist....hell, that sounds like an idea for a cartoon strip in the sunday paper...

stop using words you don't know...it makes you look even more foolish...



originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

We the people wouldn't be allowed to. The gun caliphate would forcibly remove any gun control candidate.

That is of course if we were allowed to vote at all. Most likely a fascist regime would be implemented with the people completely taken out of the election process.


we already HAVE a fascist regime....i take it you don't know what fascist/fascism actually means either.....you can look that one up yourself...




originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I am of course talking about Daedalus' plan to forcibly remove constitutionally elected persons in our government. Thus destroying the constitution this nation is founded on.


i have a plan to forcibly remove "constitutionally elected" persons in our government?

this is news to me....actually, it sounds a lot like libel....didn't i warn you about that before?



originally posted by: HauntWok
From this post

Saying it's the right of the gun caliphate to remove constitutionally elected people of this nation by force if they deem them "harmful" ie: don't tow the line of the gun caliphate.

And we are supposed to trust that the government that they choose would fairly represent the people?


i never said anything about muslim firearms having any rights.....i said it is the right of the people to dismantle a federal government that has gone rogue, and no longer represents the interests of the people...it's not my fault that your distorted, extremist world view gets in the way of clear thought...



originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: Another_Nut

Not a whole lot of life, liberty, and pursuits of happiness that goes on in a nation that does not allow the free elections of the people that the citizens want.


Just like now..



And here we are, the crux if the problem with the pro gun crowd. Its not about the freedom to be armed, its about the power to take away the freedoms of the people of this nation at the end of a gun.


Just like now..


It's about the dismantling of all liberty, disposing of a government by the people, and installing a regime of fascism and a rule not of the will of the people, but the rule of might and force.


Just like now..

we already have a fascist regime in place, posing as a puppet democracy...

we were not founded as a democracy, or a fascist state...we were founded as a republic...some of us would like the republic restored.
edit on 7-22-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

you should write a novel....you have a fantastic imagination....i see a bright future for you in the "political fiction" section..
edit on 7-22-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus

It's obvious you don't want the republic restored, as you would forcibly remove those constitutionally elected people from office for having the audacity to represent people that have a different view of what this country should be than you. You want to completely dismantle this nation and rebuild it into a fascist regime that only those of YOUR brand of liberty are allowed a voice in that government.

Please don't try and give me fascism and tell me it's freedom.

It's simply old Prescott Bush's old plan to forcibly take over the government and destroy all liberty.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

ahh yes, the bank plot...Major General Buttler is a personal hero of mine, for having broken up that nasty little piece of business..

and once again, you're improperly using the terms "fascist", and "fascism"..i'd strongly suggest you look them up, as you look a fool every time you misuse them...



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
How can that not be the end game of the gun caliphate? The systematic deconstruction of the very constitution they are apparently advocating for?

The very argument of the gun caliphate is to forcibly remove constitutionally elected officials from office that they deem "harmful", in this way the people are disenfranchised from making their voices heard in a free election.

Only candidates that the gun caliphate deem worthy of running for office will be able to run for office, all others will be "forcibly removed" and the people that support those candidates will, then will be silenced.

What's to stop them from installing a government that removes other liberties from the people? Obviously after their coup d'état and the removal (read: public execution) of all previously constitutionally elected individuals from office that they deem "harmful" only those that follow along with the overall agenda of the gun caliphate will be allowed presence in our government.

You can't assume that after such a coup d'état of our government by the radical gun caliphate that they would allow free elections of people like the ones that they previously have forcibly removed from the government.

But that's the game isn't it? Remove all obstacles to unfettered and unrestricted gun access, allow a pro gun violence type of society to thrive till the government of the people and by the people is actually forced to crack down on the problem, then violently overthrow that government under the guise that the government is limiting the freedom of the people, then install a fascist regime bereft of actual liberty of the people.


That's completely silly. The entire point of the democratic process is to work to elect people you like and work against politicians you don't like. Promoting your ideals in a candidate and working against those candidates who do not support your ideals is the WHOLE FRIGGING POINT of the democratic process. Your anti-gun side does it too and HCI and anti-gun groups and Bloomburg work very hard and spend a lot of money to get anti-gun candidates elected and pro-gun candidates unelected.

Heck, if you want to look at fascism, you have a single man, a billionaire, working to take away your right to keep and bear arms. If that is not a prime example of the force and loss of freedom you are bitching about, nothing is.

It makes no sense to "protect" civil liberties by removing them. That is insane.

And here's a clue for you. Since you use the term "republic" you might want to read up what one actually is. In our republic, the law of the land, the Constitution, is partially designed to protect the rights of the minority from the will of the majority. The majority should not be able to vote away the rights of the minority. Jim Crow and segregation in the south was EXACTLY what you want--that the majority mob gets to vote away the rights of the minority. Sorry, that's wrong and against our republic for of government and against the law of the land.
edit on 22-7-2014 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

I've seen through this charade for a long time now, that's why I don't support the right wing at all.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who either have said outright or believe that Americans have the right to execute people they suspect of being in this country illegally.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who want to ban gay people from marrying with a constitutional amendment

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think that the 13th Amendment is fake. (yes, there are people on these boards that actually believe this hunk of malarkey)

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think the declaration of independence is their own personal license to kill their fellow countrymen.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who believe that Obama was born in Kenya and is the Anti-Christ.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

Just to show how wrong you are please take the time to find my introduction thread

Maybe yiu will see how wrong yiu have been and come to a new conclusion

Seriously. Find it. Read it . Please
edit on am720143111America/ChicagoTue, 22 Jul 2014 11:47:51 -0500_7000000 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: NavyDoc

I've seen through this charade for a long time now, that's why I don't support the right wing at all.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who either have said outright or believe that Americans have the right to execute people they suspect of being in this country illegally.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who want to ban gay people from marrying with a constitutional amendment

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think that the 13th Amendment is fake. (yes, there are people on these boards that actually believe this hunk of malarkey)

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think the declaration of independence is their own personal license to kill their fellow countrymen.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who believe that Obama was born in Kenya and is the Anti-Christ.


First of all. Point out where I said a single one of those things. With a quote. If you can't, it's rather stupid to reply to me with those things as a reason.

Your position of wanting to remove more civil rights from people because you don't want to see rights removed from people is illogical and self contradictory. You don't save people from fascism by creating more fascism.

Thirdly, you completely blew off my point, which I know you would. Jim Crow was the will of the people and their democratically elected representatives. I assume you would agree with Jim Crow then, yes?



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   
here you go again, making things up, to demonize anyone who doesn't agree with you, so you can justify, in your own mind, your sick, sick beliefs...


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: NavyDoc
I've seen through this charade for a long time now, that's why I don't support the right wing at all.


so then, do you support the "left wing", or neither of them?



The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who either have said outright or believe that Americans have the right to execute people they suspect of being in this country illegally.


who's said this?



The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who want to ban gay people from marrying with a constitutional amendment


really? which of us has expressed this desire?



The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think that the 13th Amendment is fake. (yes, there are people on these boards that actually believe this hunk of malarkey)


the 13th amendment abolished slavery....who here doesn't believe slavery was abolished?



The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think the declaration of independence is their own personal license to kill their fellow countrymen.


who of us has expressed this belief?



The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who believe that Obama was born in Kenya and is the Anti-Christ.


Who of us has expressed this belief?


that's the problem with painting in broad strokes...you always end up painting things you didn't intend to....

try being less simplistic...the world isn't so black and white as you seem to think it is..



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: NavyDoc

I've seen through this charade for a long time now, that's why I don't support the right wing at all.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who either have said outright or believe that Americans have the right to execute people they suspect of being in this country illegally.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who want to ban gay people from marrying with a constitutional amendment

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think that the 13th Amendment is fake. (yes, there are people on these boards that actually believe this hunk of malarkey)

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who think the declaration of independence is their own personal license to kill their fellow countrymen.

The same people you see in threads like this on the pro gun side are the same people who believe that Obama was born in Kenya and is the Anti-Christ.


I haven't seen a single person on this thread mention any of those platitudes except for one. You.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

I thought you were saying that the "Gun Caliphate" didn't allow people to be constitutionality elected.


DO you actually think these things through at all?

It has been pointed out many many times, You try to work both sides, poorly I may add. You omit truths and portions of what ever you don't like, in statutes, laws, situations and anything else you can come up with.

Dude. You fail. Your Progressive stance fails. Get over it.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
So, after the gun caliphate forcibly removes constitutionally elected members of our government that they deem "harmful" why do you think that they would allow free elections that might put those same "harmful" people back in office?


The Framers understood that the entire government could require ouster if it became tyrannical, not select politicians. Removal of individual politicians is the purview of the election cycle.


At that point, they already destroyed the democratic process and removed the voice of the people. And you think they would stop there?


If the People need to overthrow a tyrannical government, then by default, the democratic process was destroyed by the government.


Instead of just installing a fascist regime of gun caliphate loyalists to dictate to the people the agenda they will have already forced on the populous.


I frankly think you are being purposefully obtuse as you ignored the comments regarding Jefferson, Mason, Monroe and Henry. Are they fascist as well? Their sentiment regarding a tyrannical government is armed insurrection. Explain to us the method you feel would function better than what the Framers promoted.



edit on 22-7-2014 by AugustusMasonicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No, a small number of malcontents want to overthrow the government, and just want to get rid of the liberals.

And they just want to do this so they can have a real life first person shooter game without the consequences if those "unconstitutional murder laws"




top topics



 
20
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join