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: 4
43
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun




Do you honestly believe that "Teh evil gubments" would deem 99% of the U.S. Population mentally as some flimsy premise to seize their weapons?


I sure do.

Before there were 'terrorists'.

There were gun owners.

Before that there were the evil rich.

'Guberments' has no problem labeling entire groups of people.

Especially so when it comes to American politic's.




posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:33 PM
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.


Your being purposefully obtuse....

Your argument to the mental health and guns on that issue falls flat on its face because HE DIDNT PURCHASE THE GUNS....

He KILLED his mother and acquired them...

To that point again....WHO is going to assess who is mentally Ill? We have already seen the gov classify 85 percent of the US populace as having extremist views....

Do you trust that system?



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Really most of the older people or families I know tend towards the conservative side......People tend to get more conservative values because that is what is needed to have good life. I was a liberal myself.....When I was young and idealistic.




Now I am a realist and that is conservative in nature.......



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

And yet despite all this "branding" and "labelling" your average U.S. citizen still has just as much right to own a firearm as he did 30 years ago.

How is that, I wonder? If the government is slowly eroding away your 2nd amendment right, who took YOUR guns away?



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   
from the article

"Aside from these issues, some gun rights advocates have also raised concerns about upcoming ATF rules that would require gun dealers to report gun thefts, provide gun storage and safety devices, and place restrictions on high-powered pistols, among other things."

do you see what they did there? i imagine the definition would only be set in stone once they had the power to call a .22 or even a bb gun a "high-powered pistol"

scary..



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

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.


Your being purposefully obtuse....


I'm thinking the same. He said progressive don't deal in reality. I pointed dead people ARE reality. You can argue semantics all day but refusing to see victims as such is EXACTLY what I'm pointing out. We ALL know that when it come down to dead people vs. guns logic no longer applies to some.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: neo96

And yet despite all this "branding" and "labelling" your average U.S. citizen still has just as much right to own a firearm as he did 30 years ago.

How is that, I wonder? If the government is slowly eroding away your 2nd amendment right, who took YOUR guns away?


No one yet, and they won't if we stay vigilant.

But you having been paying attention if you missed the times they've tried.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

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.


Your being purposefully obtuse....

Your argument to the mental health and guns on that issue falls flat on its face because HE DIDNT PURCHASE THE GUNS....

He KILLED his mother and acquired them...

To that point again....WHO is going to assess who is mentally Ill? We have already seen the gov classify 85 percent of the US populace as having extremist views....

Do you trust that system?
A person, sufficiently deranged, will acquire weapons one way or another. This is the whole "Bad people will get guns anyway so why bother at all" argument that infuriates me. Why shouldn't there be some common sense measures in place to put road blocks on the path of that deranged person getting a gun? Every obstacle on that path is another opportunity to rethink your motives and change your mind.

Yes, truly deranged people will find a weapon SOMEHOW, but shouldn't we make that process as difficult as possible rather than just throwing our collective hands in the air and saying "F**K IT, Why bother"?



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

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.


Your being purposefully obtuse....


I'm thinking the same. He said progressive don't deal in reality. I pointed dead people ARE reality. You can argue semantics all day but refusing to see victims as such is EXACTLY what I'm pointing out. We ALL know that when it come down to dead people vs. guns logic no longer applies to some.


Its not semantics when its truth.......

the "Semantics" on how someone acquired a firearm when the gov is trying to push legislation on who can have a fire arm is PRECISELY the issue......

So no I wouldnt call it "semantics" on how he got his hands on them.....

I would call it key to a well informed decision


Still waiting on an answer on who is going to deem people "mentally unstable" enough not to have a fire arm...

Again weve already had the gov once, put out a notice on those they considered extremist or have extremist tendencies...

You think they wont apply that same thing to this?

They havent done anything YET, but then again, the laws isnt on the books yet so they can retro activate and enforce those assessments...

Speaking of logic, this seems pretty obvious to me and apparently many others
edit on 6/1/2015 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: thenewguy1987
a reply to: thishereguy

My apologies for misunderstanding. Could you restate your question?




there is no restating , it's pretty much straight forward.

you always see them coming up with little ideas that no sane person would argue against, and by the time they say we have to pass it to see what's in it, they've done changed the whole thing so that it's an umbrella meaning and everyone falls under it.

but, you never see them saying, we've come up with a plan to take guns away from gangs because we're tired of having neighborhoods shot up and little kids and grandmas killed nearly everyday.


and yes, i already know the answer to my question.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: thishereguy

Because gangs for the most part are not white people. And that would make it racist.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: thenewguy1987

NOPE.....

All that has to happen in most states is for a spouse/EX is to make a claim, file an order of protection and that kicks off the removal of firearms.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: butcherguy

Not all felons completely lose their right to vote. Depending on the state in which they committed a crime, many will regain their right to vote once they have served their time or over a certain period.

Again, the two examples are not very comparable. You're continuing to conflate the issue.

Do you support citizens going in to multiple precincts on election day and voting multiple times?
Since you have already stated that you do not support ID requirement for voting I will take that answer to mean , YES, you do support people voting in multiple precincts.

In that case, we don't need to hear anything more from you about what laws are valid.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: SubTruth

If you earnestly believe only the young and stupid are "progressives" then you're part of the problem in the United States. This whole "Us vs. Them" mentality has got you by the dangly bits and you're buying it hook line and sinker. Broaden your thinking. Not everyone on the left is stupid and young, just as not everyone on the right is old, white, or christian. Abandon your stereotypes and you might might see some validity in the arugments rather than thinking "The progressives want it, so it must be awful" crap.





If you can not see this simple truth that is fine............All of the successful families I know trend towards conservative values.


I will add some more context we need liberals......Not progressive liberals. Liberals are the safety valve that should have kept this country from becoming a corporate run Oligarchy but because progressives now run the show it was welcomed. And I also think the right has sold out to the progressive masters in many ways and this is the reason Ron Paul was attacked by his own party.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun




And yet despite all this "branding" and "labelling" your average U.S. citizen still has just as much right to own a firearm as he did 30 years ago.


No they do not.

Since 1934 gun rights in this country have been whittled away.

Not only on the Federal but state levels.

As the second amendment was intended gun rights in the country are a shell of what it was suppose to mean.

Then taking the rest of the bill of rights people being tried in the kangaroo courts of public opinion.

Denied trials in courts of law for the crimes only .01% of the population does.

Never satisfied gun owners are continually retried for the same offense.

Even though 99.9% NEVER so anything wrong.

Of course all the good weapons are reserved to the state.

You know guns that fire more than one round with the squeeze of the trigger.

'High' capacity 'Clips' for the politico's. People who handle firearms call them what they are magazines.

Anyone trying to make gun ownership a mental issue is trying to skirt around the bill of rights.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

No, once they define it its not too late. It is then up to us, as citizens, to accept or oppose it. Whether they listen is another thing, but that is our role.

a reply to: joemoe

Yes! we should be weary of this type of legislation, but that doesn't mean it is inherently a bad thing.

We SHOULD be paying attention to this particular law more than others, but that doesn't mean we should automatically oppose it. Making it hard for violent and mentally ill people to get weapons is a good thing.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I disagree with you. Firearms, in the hands of citizens, is what protects the representative constitutional republic. Without guns, the Government could change the system to a Dictatorship, and we would be helpless to stop it.

Voting is the ultimate expression of freedom, and firearms are tools we have to protect that freedom.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

NO NO NO.

Both are governed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

There is nothing, not a damn single thing anywhere about providing an ID for a firearm.

Your selective stance on one, and not the other is moronic and why nations go down the toilet.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: jimmyx

Who needs a vote or a gun, when you can issue Executive Orders and drone strike people.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Because the roadblocks won't be designed just to make it difficult for the mentally impaired. They'll be designed to keep the law-abiding from ownership too. That's the real goal, and you know it. If the rules were only going to be there to stop bad people from owning guns, fine.

But after six years of this administration, do you really and truly trust ANYTHING they tell you? I don't, and I don't trust this either. The intent will not be the effect. The effect will be to keep otherwise normal, sane, law-abiding people from arming themselves which they have every right to do.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join