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.
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: vor78
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!
Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...
If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.
But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.
So if a woman died of a heroin overdose and her father came out wanting to ban marijuana because "all drugs are exactly the same, the technical details don't matter", you'd support that?
That's essentially what you're saying.
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: vor78
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!
Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...
If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.
But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.
So if a woman died of a heroin overdose and her father came out wanting to ban marijuana because "all drugs are exactly the same, the technical details don't matter", you'd support that?
That's essentially what you're saying.
No, that's a completely different argument, because his daughter would have died because its already illegal and had no way of determining the dose she was taking. So he would essentially be advocating the exact law that killed his daughter.
Plus all guns kill, but cannabis doesn't kill.... so its a oranges & apples argument.
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: vor78
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!
Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...
If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.
But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.
So if a woman died of a heroin overdose and her father came out wanting to ban marijuana because "all drugs are exactly the same, the technical details don't matter", you'd support that?
That's essentially what you're saying.
No, that's a completely different argument, because his daughter would have died because its already illegal and had no way of determining the dose she was taking. So he would essentially be advocating the exact law that killed his daughter.
Plus all guns kill, but cannabis doesn't kill.... so its a oranges & apples argument.
originally posted by: butcherguy
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: vor78
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!
Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...
If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.
But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.
So if a woman died of a heroin overdose and her father came out wanting to ban marijuana because "all drugs are exactly the same, the technical details don't matter", you'd support that?
That's essentially what you're saying.
No, that's a completely different argument, because his daughter would have died because its already illegal and had no way of determining the dose she was taking. So he would essentially be advocating the exact law that killed his daughter.
Plus all guns kill, but cannabis doesn't kill.... so its a oranges & apples argument.
It is already illegal to murder people.
to your point in the other thread: i don't need to know how to get ahold of something on the black market. Everyone has that one cousin (or old high school friend) that is a little shady.
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
to your point in the other thread: i don't need to know how to get ahold of something on the black market. Everyone has that one cousin (or old high school friend) that is a little shady.
Yeah, even I know old high school friends that could work something out in anti-gun nazi Australia.Though, I imagine they'd be a lot more dodgy now than they even where back then. I can also basically guarantee you that if a fool like James Holmes approached them with $1200 looking for a gun, he would most certainly be relieved of his money and wouldn't get anything in return, lol.
btw, why do pro gun advocates always talk like any regulation would be making guns illegal? I can't think of one single country in the entire world where guns are illegal, just more efficiently regulated.
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
btw, why do pro gun advocates always talk like any regulation would be making guns illegal? I can't think of one single country in the entire world where guns are illegal, just more efficiently regulated.
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: vor78
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!
Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...
If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.
But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.
So if a woman died of a heroin overdose and her father came out wanting to ban marijuana because "all drugs are exactly the same, the technical details don't matter", you'd support that?
That's essentially what you're saying.
No, that's a completely different argument, because his daughter would have died because its already illegal and had no way of determining the dose she was taking. So he would essentially be advocating the exact law that killed his daughter.
Plus all guns kill, but cannabis doesn't kill.... so its a oranges & apples argument.
I continue to be amazed that the ATS members most-concerned about gun laws in America do not live in America.
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
The majority of ATS members who are prepared to say something about it anyway.
Besides, my concern is with humanity as a whole. We will always be just a bunch of really smart primates, as long as carrying around tools that sole purpose is to kill is considered normal. I want humanity to evolve into a higher form of being and guns are a product of primitive man, imo.
“The number of privately owned guns in the U.S. is at an all-time high, upwards of 300 million, and now rises by about 10 million per year,” said the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action in a firearms safety fact sheet released Jan. 17, 2013.
A November 2012 report titled “Gun Control Legislation” from the Congressional Research Service also supports that number, though ranks it a bit higher.
As of 2009, the report states, “the estimated total number of firearms available to civilians in the United States had increased to approximately 310 million: 114 million handguns, 110 million rifles, and 86 million shotguns.”
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: Answer
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: vor78
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!
Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...
If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.
But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.
So if a woman died of a heroin overdose and her father came out wanting to ban marijuana because "all drugs are exactly the same, the technical details don't matter", you'd support that?
That's essentially what you're saying.
No, that's a completely different argument, because his daughter would have died because its already illegal and had no way of determining the dose she was taking. So he would essentially be advocating the exact law that killed his daughter.
Plus all guns kill, but cannabis doesn't kill.... so its a oranges & apples argument.
I continue to be amazed that the ATS members most-concerned about gun laws in America do not live in America.
The majority of ATS members who are prepared to say something about it anyway.
Besides, my concern is with humanity as a whole. We will always be just a bunch of really smart primates, as long as carrying around tools that sole purpose is to kill is considered normal. I want humanity to evolve into a higher form of being and guns are a product of primitive man, imo.
Our culture is different and we tend to put up more of a fight against subjugation.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
That's a cute cartoon and all, except:
“The number of privately owned guns in the U.S. is at an all-time high, upwards of 300 million, and now rises by about 10 million per year,” said the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action in a firearms safety fact sheet released Jan. 17, 2013.
A November 2012 report titled “Gun Control Legislation” from the Congressional Research Service also supports that number, though ranks it a bit higher.
As of 2009, the report states, “the estimated total number of firearms available to civilians in the United States had increased to approximately 310 million: 114 million handguns, 110 million rifles, and 86 million shotguns.”
www.gunfaq.org...
That's not exactly what I would call crumbs.
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Answer
Our culture is different and we tend to put up more of a fight against subjugation.
Is that why every time I watch an American cop show there arresting and taking people to jail for outstanding traffic fines. Why don't the citizens just get there precious guns and stand up to the government against such draconian treatment?
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Answer
Our culture is different and we tend to put up more of a fight against subjugation.
Is that why every time I watch an American cop show there arresting and taking people to jail for outstanding traffic fines. Why don't the citizens just get there precious guns and stand up to the government against such draconian treatment?
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Answer
Our culture is different and we tend to put up more of a fight against subjugation.
Is that why every time I watch an American cop show there arresting and taking people to jail for outstanding traffic fines. Why don't the citizens just get there precious guns and stand up to the government against such draconian treatment?