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.

 

Jim Jeffires view on gun control in America.... Discuss.

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: OrphanApology

If I present an absolutely ridiculous scenario: Lone gunman kills 10k people at a single location over a period of 30 days....

And I have to explain it... seriously?

The difference between the situations in your post regarding the similarities between a long gunman, a president and a dictator is one of magnitude, one of control, one of mental stability, one of agenda amongst a host of other differences.

In most cases the lone gunman has mental issues and has no agenda other than killing followed by dying. In many cases, the lone gunman dies at his own hand. The differences are legion....

Saying a lone gunman is, in any way, similar to the actions of a violent dictator is just ludicrous to the nth degree.




posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Umm I bet he goes off the stage into his room guarded by armed bodyguards. Then gets driven to his nice house with the armed security patrols. Could be wrong, but most celibates follow this pattern.

Also we can talk about the 2nd amendment, but we would have to also talk about that 1st one too and maybe that pesky 5th one also? Be very careful tampering with this document. The group that put it together has no match in today's world and every time we change it we run the risk of screwing up.

Major screw ups:
17th -- direct election of Senators. There was a reason they set it up like that. by cutting the direct link Senators
were supposed to take care of what was good/right for the country without have to worry about the people. Congress was to hold this function and then the two would work out the compromise.

18th and 21st: Anybody remember prohibition? This one was a major cause of the criminal growth in the US.

16th: Not that I'm completely against taxes, the government does need money to run. But this one is just all over the place and very poorly put together and implemented. Would have been soo much better if they just would of said "pay x%" and then have congress be able to change this every few years as needed.

27th is really the 11th written, just not ratified for 200 years.

the first 10 where written by the same people that wrote the Constitution.
most of the rest just deal with changes to set dates, clarify succession and to deal with voting issues.



posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Responsible, law-abiding gun owners do not use their weapons to commit crimes. It's just that simple. Taking away Constitutional rights from responsible citizens because of the actions of criminals makes no sense and plays right into the hands of the people in power. An armed citizenry is the first line between the people and complete tyranny. Arms are what also keep a citizen safe when the authorities can't or won't come to him or her when needed. Power grid and phones down? Yeah, I'm good. Cops busy elsewhere and there's a riot near me? Again, I'm good. Alarm goes off at three in the morning and I hear a window smash downstairs? Yeah, I'm good. I am not obsessed with my rifles, shotguns, or handguns, but I very highly value my right to own them and I take very seriously my duty to safeguard them and use them in accordance with the law and morality. My home is safer because I am armed. My family is safer because I am armed. And before you throw any "you are more likely to be killed with your own gun" stats at me I will just say....no, I am not. I do not play around with my weapons or my home. If that alarm goes off, the 9 comes out and any strange party in my residence WILL be dropped on sight. That is why there are guns in my home and there always will be.



posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ManFromEurope

you're living in fantasy land...We don't need weapons because there ARE weapons here. We need weapons because the world is a dirty violent place and people can be violent selfish scum. Living in lala land doesn't make that any less true, living in a place where only the govt has guns doesn't make that any less true, it in fact makes it even more true.

Historically, govts have been the MOST violent against the people, which America's founding fathers knew ALL TOO WELL, which is the SOLE reason for the coining of the second amendment in the bill of RIGHTS...

Really, I don't give two #s if you want to live in fantasy land where govt is rainbows and gumdrops. I'll live in the real world where I KNOW that it is folly to beat your swords into plows...Don't even pretend to know what is best for MY country. I don't tell your country to give the people back their arms, so don't try to tell mine to attempt to steal mine...

Jaden



posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: PerfectAnomoly
Afternoon ATS.....

Jim Jeffries is my favourite comedien..... And his views on gun control in the USA are amusing... And performed to an American crowd no less...

Please watch and discuss.... Let me know your thoughts?!

www.youtube.com...

PA


I realize this thread took you a lot of time and effort to plan out. It is obvious the care and research that must have been required to so thoughtfully express your views on this subject.
I am just disappointed that after making such an effort you have not returned to experience the fruits of your labor.

Personally, I feel we have enough American laws on the books now that are not enforced. Other than that I enjoy exercising my RIGHT to own firearms.

Be thankful you do not live here and are saved from facing the horrors we Americans must face.

I do appreciate your heart felt concern for the welfare of us misguided Americans though.

I am also delighted to see people have appreciated your dedication to constructing a well thought out and studious thread by awarding you flags and stars. I am just startled that you haven't received more for your efforts.

Just to be clear, sarc/off now.

ETA: I will never understand how threads like this make the front page. Slap a couple words together with a link to a vid. Someone must like the general idea of the OP.
edit on 2 13 2015 by stosh64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Prezbo369
Yurp we need our guns! the english and injuns ara commin!


Are you afraid?


No

Fox news doesn't scare me....



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: infinityorder
a reply to: BlueJacket

I am pretty sure we Americans are the only ones left that recognise the facts of the world.



What a arrogant self centered comment.


I respect Americans right to bere arms as its your country and if that's what you want fine.

Just dont look down on other country's that decide to do things different.,


And just to add the USA is not the only country in the world to have lax gun control laws.
There are even EU countrys were gun control is nearly as lax or more lax than the USA.

So no its not a "american only" thing.


Not in the UK though.

You know here in the states Lee Rigby could have legally carried a concealed handgun since he was off-base.

So many of you Brits really don't get it, but I refuse to be left DEFENSELESS against random nutjobs with knives.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Prezbo369
Yurp we need our guns! the english and injuns ara commin!


Are you afraid?


No

Fox news doesn't scare me....

Not what I was talking about, but the bluster and false bravado would indicate that you are afraid of them too.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Needing a gun to feel safe while living in a western country.......the west has been won, you killed all the Indians.....



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Prezbo369
Yurp we need our guns! the english and injuns ara commin!


Are you afraid?


No

Fox news doesn't scare me....

Not what I was talking about, but the bluster and false bravado would indicate that you are afraid of them too.


Lol I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 08:27 AM
link   
Ive not really got anything else to add to whats already come up from the responses so far.

I will say that Jeff has it right in many places, esp the one about fighting back the government - bringing guns to a drone fight.

Also liked the assault rifle vs. protection rifle.


I like guns, i wouldnt buy one for home defense, id buy one for pest control, hunting and target shooting in a sporting way.

Just need more control over the guns and who has them, yes you are entitled to them - as Jeff says, the only reason you cant drive at 100mph is because too many idiots kill people and themselves at 100mph and not at 30mph - so you all have to drive at 30mph. Can you ever make sure that only not rage fulled, sane people have them? The answer is no which is why it DOES make more sense to get rid of them, but as stated, i like guns when they are bought and used to sport or serve a purpose out side shooting people with them.

Knives arnt banned, they kill a lot too but there other uses far outweigh the loss of life or injury. So they stay.

If you need a fully automatic assault rifle to defend your house - some things already gone very very wrong and you are likely screwed either way.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Biigs

Knives arnt banned, they kill a lot too but there other uses far outweigh the loss of life or injury. So they stay.

If you need a fully automatic assault rifle to defend your house - some things already gone very very wrong and you are likely screwed either way.


Fully automatic weapons have been banned since 1986. Grandfathered ones can still be purchased legally with lots of paperwork and they cost so much money that they sit in climate controlled safes and rarely see use. They are collector pieces.

Secondly, even though fully auto fire sounds scary in movies, single shots or 3round-burst are what kill over 99% on battlefields. Full auto is used as 'cover fire' to make the other guys duck and hide while your team crosses an open space. Most people can't put more than a few rounds on target at 20yards in full-auto. That's the whole reason 3round-burst was invented.

Only an idiot would want full auto for a home defense weapon because in 1second (literally) you will clear a 30rd magazine and leave yourself wide open. The best home defense weapon will always be a pump-action or mag-fed shotgun.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: 8675309jenny

I was aware that fully auto got banned, my point was that if they were available people would buy them regardless.

You still have bump fire stocks and semi automatic's that will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. Theres the other thing about rifles like this, being the range of use is FAR greater than any home anyone lives in, unless perhaps if you live in a football stadium or a bowling ally.

Yes robbers or home invading murders have guns, if you restrict guns, potential home intruding villains would not need their own guns, and vice versa - a vicious cycle the gun manufacturers enjoy the spoils of.



edit on b2727658 by Biigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Biigs
a reply to: 8675309jenny

I was aware that fully auto got banned, my point was that if they were available people would buy them regardless.

You still have bump fire stocks and semi automatic's that will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. Theres the other thing about rifles like this, being the range of use is FAR greater than any home anyone lives in, unless perhaps if you live in a football stadium or a bowling ally.

Yes robbers or home invading murders have guns, if you restrict guns, potential home intruding villains would not need their own guns, and vice versa - a vicious cycle the gun manufacturers enjoy the spoils of.




So remove the rights of the innocent, to protect their safety eh?



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

Agreed..

this thread
was a troll from go...


originally posted by: Biigs
Ive not really got anything else to add to whats already come up from the responses so far.

I will say that Jeff has it right in many places, esp the one about fighting back the government - bringing guns to a drone fight.

Also liked the assault rifle vs. protection rifle.
.


Drone fight Huh...

With all the Tech
we've deployed
over the past 15 years
in Multiple country's

Bearded Bums with Light Arms
are still giving us Fits


Jeff = wrong



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Masterjaden

That was a libertarian's wet dream, if I may say so...
I will not comment on Ad Hominem, but let me just say that I am not convinced that every government wants to hunt its population down.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Biigs

Yes robbers or home invading murders have guns, if you restrict guns, potential home intruding villains would not need their own guns, and vice versa - a vicious cycle the gun manufacturers enjoy the spoils of.




I am not sure I am awake at the moment. Quite sure it's a dream. Please tell me this isn't a real post.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Biigs
a reply to: 8675309jenny

I was aware that fully auto got banned, my point was that if they were available people would buy them regardless.

You still have bump fire stocks and semi automatic's that will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. Theres the other thing about rifles like this, being the range of use is FAR greater than any home anyone lives in, unless perhaps if you live in a football stadium or a bowling ally.

Yes robbers or home invading murders have guns, if you restrict guns, potential home intruding villains would not need their own guns, and vice versa - a vicious cycle the gun manufacturers enjoy the spoils of.




So a woman or an old person or a person with a physical defect should just be tossed aside without means of self defense from a bigger, stronger, attacker? That is not logical.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join