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.

 

Rove says the only way to end gun violence is to take away all guns

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2015 @ 10:17 PM
link   
anyone with half a brain can see what is happening with this new world order unfolding before our eyes and one is the not so cleverly concealed plan to get firearms away from the "general public" but not law enforcement to create safer streets for us, the problem being there are other violent alternatives to handguns and will not stop the murders which are happening today and everyday around the country




posted on Jun, 21 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Rove is right though, the only way to remove guns would be to repeal the 2nd Amendment.


Never happen as many would never turn in there guns.

As a oath keeper I would take my guns out in the desert and bury them before i would turn them in.

Even if i never recovered them the government would never know if they are still out there.



posted on Jun, 21 2015 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Fox News transcript:


So, we have come a long way. Now, maybe there's some magic law that will keep us from having more of these. I mean, basically, the only way to guarantee that we would dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough oomph to repeal the Second Amendment, that's not going to happen. I don't think it's an answer.


Society?

Not the individual?

Carl, Carl, carl. Ye have removed the guns from society already.



The department of education took riflery [ hell even this editor tried to autocorrect 'riflery' as a misspelling ] out of the schools.

Guns are not part of our society, and they haven't been for a while.

Are you really talking about taking guns away from individuals. Carl?


Mike Grouchy
edit on 21-6-2015 by mikegrouchy because: format



posted on Jun, 21 2015 @ 11:54 PM
link   
How would we defend ourselves from knife-wielding ninjas?



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 02:50 AM
link   
We live in a world where some people will want to kill you. We live in a world where the art of weaponry is seductive and lucrative. And where art is the extreme version of a tool..

Is it any wonder why poor people want what rich people have, and rich people say it's just art?

Yes we will always have crime. you idiots. or the death penalty would have worked. If someone every day used a gun to shoot themselves to get high, you'd all be singing different tunes.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 04:55 AM
link   
They tried to end gun violence in Australia by taking away certain gun types, restricting others, and making it harder in general(and expensive) to obtain a gun license and a gun.

Guess what? Gun violence has increased in Australia.

The situation at present is that honest law abiding gun owners are reamed by the government for money over their guns/license, have to have inspections by police of their guns and gun cabinets, but the criminals have all sorts of guns at their disposal and available to them.

Gun laws have not worked in the slightest, for what they were claimed to be intended for.
In Melbourne, police are now finding illegal guns in vehicle searches every two days on average. So much for gun control laws.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Just like the only way to end vehicle rage and road deaths is to take away all the vehicles....right? No vehicles, no vehicle deaths.

How about putting an end to the 3 million prescription drugs deaths every year? Take away all the pharma meds...problem solved.

The only way to put a stop to all power tool related deaths is to make DIY illegal and take away all the power tools...no more power tool deaths.

How about putting an end to all death...just make living illegal...take away everyone's right to life, exterminate everyone, then there'd be 100% fewer deaths afterwards..problem solved.

The moral is...life is dangerous, and ultimately it WILL kill each and every one of us...in the meantime, patriots would like to right to protect themselves from those who would make it their business to attempt to prematurely and violently end theirs...you do that with guns. Harsh words and the threat of a police squad car 15 minutes away don't tend to have the same stopping power as a loaded gun aimed at an intruders head does.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   
It doesn't seem particularly controversial from where I'm sitting. Unless you can magically remove all of the firearms from society, its not at all likely that 'gun control' is going to be effective as a means of stopping gun-related crime. And if gun control can't do that, then it serves no purpose and isn't the right thing to do and only burdens those who are guilty of nothing. That's something I generally agree with.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 08:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: CB328

I will state that the only way to stop drug abuse is to remove all drugs. Also, it won't be happening just like removing all guns. Let's move on.


Pretty sure that's not the point of the OP. Of course it's not going to happen - that's ridiculous. The point I take away is that Rove's hypothetical is that the *only* way of ending gun violence is by removing the guns, ie without guns, there'd be no gun violence, ie guns are the reason for gun violence. Is that not what he meant? That seems fairly controversial coming from a conservative.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
The removal of our 2nd amendment right will never happen, and if it was too, then America would quickly enter into a civil war of sorts. I would look at the removal, of our right to bear arms, as treason by our elected officials in government. The only way I see government getting guns removed is by force, and making it harder and harder to buy ammo. without ammunition the gun is worthless



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
The 2nd will NEVER be repealed, so it just wont happen, dont stress over it.
WONT EVER HAPPEN.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: FlyingFox

hand to hand combat sound familiar
survival of the fittest, weakest links go byby like the old days



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Can we stop with the bait threads? OP does this every time, posts a thread slamming the Right or trying to implicate something, then ghosts out of the thread never to be seen again.......

We know that both Salon and Addicting Info are HORRIBLE sources......in a world where journalism is a forgotten term, these two places make it seem like a lost language.......

I despise Rove, but even I can clearly see what his statement meant.......

OP at least have the courage of your convictions and stay around to debate your position or discuss your topics......



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Isn't that, um, kind of just using LOGIC?

If there are no guns (hypothetically), there is no gun violence (but this must also include police guns, and guns in the world). As long as there is a gun, there is potential for its violent use (regardless of who has it).



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: CB328

This is Rove and the Right's tactic to try to downplay the importance of gun control/regulation.

They start with a false premise that we should only do something if it ends ALL gun violence. Then they say the only way that can be down is to ban all guns...hence it is impossible to do so why even talk about it.

However, the goal of gun control/regulation isn't to eliminate all gun violence...it is to reduce it.

Should be not have laws against murder unless it ends all murder?



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: redtic

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: CB328

I will state that the only way to stop drug abuse is to remove all drugs. Also, it won't be happening just like removing all guns. Let's move on.


Pretty sure that's not the point of the OP. Of course it's not going to happen - that's ridiculous. The point I take away is that Rove's hypothetical is that the *only* way of ending gun violence is by removing the guns, ie without guns, there'd be no gun violence, ie guns are the reason for gun violence. Is that not what he meant? That seems fairly controversial coming from a conservative.


I think he's merely arguing the ineffectiveness of further gun control laws and that as long as there is public gun ownership, this type of thing is unavoidable. I definitely didn't take it as a support of more gun restrictions.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: CB328

This is Rove and the Right's tactic to try to downplay the importance of gun control/regulation.

They start with a false premise that we should only do something if it ends ALL gun violence. Then they say the only way that can be down is to ban all guns...hence it is impossible to do so why even talk about it.

However, the goal of gun control/regulation isn't to eliminate all gun violence...it is to reduce it.

Should be not have laws against murder unless it ends all murder?



And yet you put forth a false premise in return?

Do we not already have laws against murder?

Has it stopped murder?

Making more laws does nothing, we dont even implement the ones we have....

Gun control advocates have this circular argument in their heads that never computes out.......yet they continue to repeat it....

We have a 2nd amendment, and no amount of anything should infringe on that, and yet so much already does.......

Want to know how to fix the country?

Stop trying to pick and choose what amendments you want to enforce .......

if youre for the constitution then stand on your principles and let every amendment stand, not just ones you like WHEN you like them....



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
They start with a false premise that we should only do something if it ends ALL gun violence. Then they say the only way that can be down is to ban all guns...hence it is impossible to do so why even talk about it.

However, the goal of gun control/regulation isn't to eliminate all gun violence...it is to reduce it.


Personally, as an evil conservative 2nd Amendment supporter, I have absolutely no problems with the basic premise of gun control legislation. But I need two things from your side. One, I need a reasonable argument that your proposal will actually work in a significant, measurable way. Second, your proposal needs to recognize and respect the fact that the overwhelming majority of gun owners are and always will be law-abiding citizens and that they should not be punished for the acts of others by having their rights removed or curtailed.

Your side's proposals generally fail on both counts, but almost always on the latter. But without those, I don't think there's much common ground or room to compromise to be found.
edit on 22-6-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   
How do we stop all the gun violence? STOP MK ULTRA!



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
it wasnt more than a year or two ago our goverment started buying up ammo, was a bit of c.t. at the time.
if guns are around but no ammo, that also solves some of the gun control problems/issues.

today there is a lot more money to be made in medical care/ drug operations, handguns arent profitable like they used to be

using extreme situations between whites and blacks and church killings, people are happy to turn in their guns , very well planned
edit on 22-6-2015 by blacktie because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join