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.

 

Here we go again. More circumventing the 2nd by the Admin

page: 22
43
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert


First of all there is not such thing as a military-style assault rifle.

AR-15 stands for Armalite Rifle model 15 not "Assault Rifle" and it uses the same operation presentable as a Mini-14 and most other "automatic" rifles.

Mini-14's are almost ALWAYS exempted from these law because they are "sporting" rifles or "ranch" rifle. In reality they operator in the SAME exact manor as an AR-15. The ONLY difference? The AR is black and scary and has a pistol grip (which,by the way, you can buy on a mini-14.)

Each of them fire ONE shot when the trigger is pulled.
Each has a detachable magazine that holds 5-100 rounds. (Depending on what you want.)

Automatic means that it cycles automatically without having to do anything but pull the trigger and does not mean they are "machine" guns.

This is what we need to get most people to understand.




posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: macman

So, basically, this would require the ATF to have everybody's medical records, right?

Does everybody still like the forced and irreversible collection of their medical records by the federal government?

This is just one of many possible abuses we can expect to endure before we come to our senses.


They just have to ask the IRS for them. Remember Obama care and who is in charge of it? Yep the IRS.

So the IRS already gets your medical records and just has to share with the ATF.

Makes it easy:

they tax you
then declare you mentally ill after all the taxes
pass it to the ATF who confiscates your guns
IRS authorizes health care
They cure you
ATF lets you buy new guns
Start process over.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy


The Pakistanis and Afghans have been making copies of guns for many years with no power tools.

Those are gun smiths, not just "Pakistanis and Afghans".



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: butcherguy


The Pakistanis and Afghans have been making copies of guns for many years with no power tools.

Those are gun smiths, not just "Pakistanis and Afghans".

Google home made guns.
You can build an smg at home without power tools.
eta: not every meth lab operator is a pharmaceutical chemist.... but they are making meth every day across the US.

edit on b000000302015-06-02T08:49:32-05:0008America/ChicagoTue, 02 Jun 2015 08:49:32 -0500800000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy


Heck soon you'll be able to 3D Print a gun.

So there's that.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   
As a former Smith,you should know better:How to make an AK out of a shovel.


www.northeastshooters.com...!?p=2695046&viewfull=1#post2695046



Could I do it?Yes.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

All are avoidable. If you fell, you could have avoided falling if you either paid attention or went another route.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: thishereguy
a reply to: macman

You never see them coming up with plans to take guns away from gangs, why is that?


Because the gangs are criminals and will shoot back and don't care about what the laws says anyway.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: introvert

Do you back a law that requires an ID card to vote?



No, I do not for a variety of reasons, but I already see what you're trying to do. The two, voting and gun ownership, are not even in the same ballpark. A vote cannot directly cause harm or death, nor is voter fraud even statistically significant enough to even consider burdening the system with more requirements. That would be like reinventing the wheel when there is no need to do so.

On the other hand, a gun can, obviously, kill someone in the hands of a person that doesn't need to have one, is mentally ill or has a history of violence.

While I would invite all people, mentally ill and wife-beaters alike, to vote on election day, I do not want mentally ill people or violent people to have firearms.


Tell that to the millions that have died after a bad government was voted in.

Hitler springs to mind. You know he was voted in legally right?



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert


It's the truth. I want you to know that I'm not some gun-grabber that is afraid of a firearm or have never discharged a weapon. That is important context within the conversation.

Says the person wanting restriction of our 2nd Amendment Rights.
What's funny, is that every single Anti-2nd person goes on and on with that same spiel. "I'm a gun owner just like you",
. "I am all for gun rights and respecting the 2nd, but we really need to restrict people from certain guns, ammo, magazines, body armor........"


originally posted by: introvert
If you want to know about those cities, go find the stats. What's important to know is that even though those cities may have high crime rates, the states in which they reside are still very low on the mortality rate vs the number of laws they have.


So, the State as a whole has low crime rate, the Cities given as examples have astronomical rates and you someone contort this as what again exactly????
edit on 2-6-2015 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Why are you so discriminatory??? Why do you hate people with mental illness?



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: poncho1982

Exactly the point.

And in one of my last posts, it was responding to someone just stating "Well, go get a second opinion".

I guess that shopping for a mental diagnoses is okay then. And with that, which would the Govt go with? Or would I have to use my newly minted 0bamacare to visit 10 doctors and take an average of what was said.

I can just imagine the commercials now, **TV announcer voice**, "4 out of 10 mental health doctors think that posting on ATS makes you unstable".



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: SubTruth

originally posted by: MoreBeer
And the bootlickers will be along to praise King Obama for taking their rights simply because he is a progressive and doing "whats right".




Progressives value idealism over reality and this is why they float in the air like a paper bag. It is also the reason many progressives are young and or sketchy older people. Young people have not lived long enough to gain the wisdom that only comes with age and the older people make the same mistakes over and over again.


Really? Do a Google image search of "Sandy Hook funerals" and tell me if that isn't reality.


who stole his guns from his dead mother.........

So I guess that pretty much nullifies that example.....


So the dead at SH aren't "reality" then. Logic, applying it makes one look less ignorant.


The issue is these new laws, and all the old ones also, have no baring on SH.
He did not get the gun legally, in fact he committed a crime to get the guns.

ALL laws are only as good as the people that obey them.

I could outlaw crime and war. Think it would help any?



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

The only people calling the Constitution a "living document" are Progressives and those that want to change things without actually working the correct process laid out very clearly in that document.

You have the worst and most contorted view of that document than anyone here.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: thefallenone

Good hell.

And what is the process to change said Amendment??????



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:12 AM
link   
The right to keep and to carry guns is there to protect the people from an over reaching and tyrannical government that "could" arise out of a free nation who's government is founded on, by, and for the people. No tyrant has ever taken over a nation without first dis-arming the people.

Like the press who's real job is to disclose what ever the government is doing to the people, guns are the insurance policy that a would be tyrant would lose much in the pursuit to take a nation by force, and ensure the people a confidence to protect and defend freedom.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: dismanrc
a reply to: introvert


First of all there is not such thing as a military-style assault rifle.

AR-15 stands for Armalite Rifle model 15 not "Assault Rifle" and it uses the same operation presentable as a Mini-14 and most other "automatic" rifles.

Mini-14's are almost ALWAYS exempted from these law because they are "sporting" rifles or "ranch" rifle. In reality they operator in the SAME exact manor as an AR-15. The ONLY difference? The AR is black and scary and has a pistol grip (which,by the way, you can buy on a mini-14.)

Each of them fire ONE shot when the trigger is pulled.
Each has a detachable magazine that holds 5-100 rounds. (Depending on what you want.)

Automatic means that it cycles automatically without having to do anything but pull the trigger and does not mean they are "machine" guns.

This is what we need to get most people to understand.







The technical specifics don't matter. They don't want to hear that. All they care about is "it goes bang and babies die."

Explaining the technical differences will not win them over because they'll just move the goal posts and continue with the "but the children!" type of arguments.

Focusing on the technical differences and trying to get anti-gunners to understand the facts about firearms is a lost cause. You're much better off focusing on victim statistics and other numbers that they try to use in their arguments.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: thefallenone

Wait.................what freedom is it that you are speaking of? This freedom/right of the non-gun owner to not have gun owners own guns??



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy


You can build an smg at home without power tools.


"You" can build a lawn mower, too. Whats your point?



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: butcherguy


You can build an smg at home without power tools.


"You" can build a lawn mower, too. Whats your point?




Trying to take it full circle, eh?

At the beginning of this exchange, I stated that guns could be built in a home workshop.
You came back with a reply (speaking as a 'smith') telling me how very wrong that I was.

Now you are admitting that a submachine gun can be built at home without power tools and asking ME what my point is.....
that's the point.

edit on b000000302015-06-02T09:21:54-05:0009America/ChicagoTue, 02 Jun 2015 09:21:54 -0500900000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
43
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join