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.

 

Obama: Mass shootings are 'something we should politicize'

page: 22
53
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Fact: In 1982, Kennesaw, GA passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate dropped 89% the following year. 14

Fact: A survey of felons revealed the following: 15
•74% of felons agreed that, “one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime.”
•57% of felons polled agreed, “criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police.” www.gunfacts.info...



Evil IS an illness. No if's and's or but's about it. Why it's prevalent among us.......???????




posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: neOrevolutionist
a reply to: luciddream

My thoughts exactly...they keep complaining that he will take their guns and their right to bear arms...they still have their bear arms
and their guns too!! I still have mine...I'm not worried!


You must really not understand what is going on, or what this thread is about...

First, read what Obama wants to do, which includes banning all semi-rifles, and making it illegal to have any weapon with a clip that has more than 10 bullets. So, yes, he, and the other gun grabbers do want to take American's rights to own firearms. One step at a time. It has been happening slowly but surely for years now.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96


Nice memes and all.

And yeah, I mean I'm more likely to be shot by my neighbor with his gun that has 30 rounds than be killed by a nuclear blast.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
...
And yeah, I mean I'm more likely to be shot by my neighbor with his gun that has 30 rounds than be killed by a nuclear blast.


Why would your neighbor shoot you?... Has he shot anybody that wasn't trying to kill him or rob him ever?



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




Nice memes and all. And yeah, I mean I'm more likely to be shot by my neighbor with his gun that has 30 rounds than be killed by a nuclear blast.


And here I am more likely to be shot by the police.

Everyone gots problems.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Rudy Giuliani, once the pro-gun control mayor of New York City, appeared to pull a 180 on Friday in the wake of the Oregon mass murder.

Not only did Giuliani slam President Obama for lashing out against the gun lobby, the ex-mayor trashed policies for dealing with the plague of violence that he once advocated.

I think the President has very little knowledge of what causes crime or how to reduce crime," Giuliani said on the "Fox & Friends" show.

The reality is gun control laws control the behavior of legitimate people,” he said. “People who rob stores, people who rob banks and people who are insane and want to go ahead and murder people don't follow the gun control laws.
...

www.nydailynews.com...

You think there is hope for other gun grabbers to wake up to the reality of what causes these sorts of atrocities?



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 12:32 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 04:51 AM
link   
Caught up with this thread over breakfast.

All I'm seeing here is denial of a problem (and denial that there may even be an issue) by pro-gun people.

But, if you're happy with the status quo, then so be it.

In that respect, its your own bed, you made it and you'll live with it.

I sincerely hope a similar tragedy never touches you.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 05:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
...
In that respect, its your own bed, you made it and you'll live with it.

I sincerely hope a similar tragedy never touches you.


Again, this was a tragedy but it is made even worse by the constant attempts of the anti-gun camp to use tragedies such as this for their agenda, and to impose their views on everyone else.

You don't have to like it, but tragedies like this one happen because some people are "deranged"... It is not because of the second amendment giving Americans the right to own and bear arms.

It does even a worse injustice for you to even imply that because people have a different view than you on firearms, that they/we are somehow to blame for the atrocities committed by insane people...

The media reported the shooter was "supposedly a Republican, yet he was against all established religions, and shot people after asking them if they were religious or not. That makes no sense whatsoever.

I am sure that if these poor souls would have been killed by this deranged murderer burning them, you would not be demanding for all, and any source of flammable materials to be banned... You only bother with this, because like always the deaths of good people are used as a political tool by people like you.

And of course, people like you never even bother to find out that more people are saved because of firearms, including kids who have defended themselves, or their families against criminals with those very same weapons you want to ban.



louderwithcrowder.com...


That's just a couple of cases. Do you care about those cases at all? When hundreds of thousands of Americans, including women and children have been able to save themselves or their family members from criminals with firearms?... Of course you don't... But you sure love to criticize those of us who believe the Second Amendment is a right that shall not be infringed, much less by using the deaths of innocents at the hands of deranged murderers...






edit on 3-10-2015 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I can cite you billions of examples every day where people with access to flammable materials don't set fires that kill people.

Not that it would be relevant to this issue.

Do people get saved by having firearms? In some cases - Yes.

Does that address this issue?

No.

The reason why that isn't discussed is that its not relevant to the fact that it is, apparently, easy for mentally ill or disturbed individuals with a history of violence to get guns

That is the matter that needs addressing.

Now, you can spew all the crappy rhetoric you want, and while you are clinging on to your second amendment rights like an infant at the breast, stoically stating that the issue has nothing to do with gun ownership and/or availability and steadfastly refusing to even consider that their may be a problem - in the same manner that a toddler pretends that he/she had nothing to do with something being broken while they were the only person in the room - another set of individuals is likely to get murdered by a violent idiot, or mentally ill person with a gun.

Now its obvious that you are so far down the rhetoric road here that you are missing the point.

I'm sure you are a responsible gun owner.

I'm sure that when the state comes after you with tanks, drones , attack helicopters equipped with FLIR, smart bombs, guided missiles and nukes that your militia will repel them with a couple of handguns, or maybe even an assault rifle or two.

I have confidence in the fact that you can protect your family from the packs of wolves and bears and lions and murderous marauding savages that routinely sweep through major US cities killing people on a daily basis.

I am fairly confident that, unless the world changes significantly, the British aren't coming to take the US back for the crown.

I don't doubt any of those things at all.

But they aren't going to stop this from happening again. Are they?

"People like you" apparently just think selfishly about their gun rights and not about the casualties caused.

"People like me" would prefer not to be having this conversation on a regular basis over and over again, and reading the news items when 5/10/15/20 people have been killed in a shooting, or where people are murdered individually.

And sorting that out has nothing to do with taking your second amendment rights away necessarily.

It does, however, require conversation, intelligent debate, thought and less caveman rhetoric.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: neformore

Is not about denial Neformore is about the solutions that the government has implemented already but they are not working, is about the more solutions that the government is going to push behind what we already know has become an agenda, that is what we all need to be very watchful and very worry about it.

The problem with guns like with any other death related issues where many innocent people die is that the government makes many laws but never the laws are enforced, so what they do? they make more useless laws and keep perpetuating the problem.

In Americas society our own freedoms has been used to protect from criminals to the mentally ill because without a reason to make more laws politicians in Washington will have no reason exist.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
The reason why that isn't discussed is that its not relevant to the fact that it is, apparently, easy for mentally ill or disturbed individuals with a history of violence to get guns

That is the matter that needs addressing.


OK, then what, specifically, does neformore propose we do about that? I may have missed it, but I don't think you've managed to fit that in yet.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
I'm sure that when the state comes after you with tanks, drones , attack helicopters equipped with FLIR, smart bombs, guided missiles and nukes that your militia will repel them with a couple of handguns, or maybe even an assault rifle or two.


Yeah! The government has bigger guns and more of them, so hand yours over right now!



I have confidence in the fact that you can protect your family from the packs of wolves and bears and lions and murderous marauding savages that routinely sweep through major US cities killing people on a daily basis.


Apparently you've never read about the mountain lions that still roam through cities like mine in Missouri.

Plus, just showing my concealed pistol in-holster stopped a roving group of teenage punks that were threatening to beat me up and take my property



I am fairly confident that, unless the world changes significantly, the British aren't coming to take the US back for the crown.


It's a good thing the Second Amendment doesn't say '...the right of every person to defend themselves against an invading army...' then, doesn't it?



"People like you" apparently just think selfishly about their gun rights and not about the casualties caused.


People like you think I'm supposed to wait 10-20 minutes for the police to come help me, when seconds matter.



"People like me" would prefer not to be having this conversation on a regular basis over and over again, and reading the news items when 5/10/15/20 people have been killed in a shooting, or where people are murdered individually.


People like you think this mass shootings an increasing problem, when the statistics say the opposite.

nymag.com...#



And sorting that out has nothing to do with taking your second amendment rights away necessarily.


I love the additiona of the word 'necessarily.'



It does, however, require conversation, intelligent debate, thought and less caveman rhetoric.


Then please stop using ad hominem and address the issue.

I'm all for conversation and debate. I'd love to see mentally disturbed people have less access to firearms. How is that accomplished without restricting access to mentally sound, law-abiding citizens and their right to defend themselves?



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Banning "assaults style rifles" is not going to solve the problem, more so when more people are killed with non firearms than with rifles or shotguns. So it is obvious that banning assault weapons is simply an excuse by the Obama administration to ban a type of weapon they simply don't want Americans to have, and not because more people are killed with them.


Agreed, and its obvious to anyone who's ever bothered to take so much as a cursory look at the statistics you posted. The whole 'assault rifle' issue began mostly as a temper tantrum of the anti-gun left in the late 80s and 90s as public opinion on their long-sought handgun ban shifted firmly against them. They went after 'assault rifles' because they were a low-hanging fruit, a niche product in use only by a fringe segment of gun owners. It had little to do with 'safety', in spite of all the bleating to the contrary. They were never more than a small single digit percentage of the homicides, so small that you'd probably never be able to tell if it made a difference whatsoever over the background noise of year to year variance in the statistics.

Well, times have changed and so has the firearms market. A much, MUCH larger portion of gun owners today own an AR-15 pattern rifle or some other 'assault weapon', including handguns with 15+ round capacities. Don't believe me? Go to most any gun shop and see what sells. Go to a pawn shop and take a look at what's sitting on the racks collecting dust that people are dumping so they can upgrade. While its not entirely surprising, the anti-gun lobby has not figured this out yet. Its plainly obvious in Obama's speeches, where he praises Australian/British style strict gun control and asks gun owners if the NRA really represents them on this. Well, yeah, increasingly, they do.

Obama doesn't get it. Most of the Democrats don't get it. The anti-gun lobby doesn't get it. Their views of the average gun owner, the types of firearms they own, and the opinions that the average firearms owner have on this issue overall are outdated by at least twenty years.
edit on 3-10-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
OK, then what, specifically, does neformore propose we do about that? I may have missed it, but I don't think you've managed to fit that in yet.


Its pointless me answering that question because I don't have the interest in firearms, and anything I come out with will just get shouted down with "Don't mess with the second amendment" and "You can't take my guns"

The people that need to come up with that answer are the ones who are pro-second amendment and who can get their heads out of the rhetoric long enough to develop a viable answer. They would be able to strike the balance.

Projectvxn touched on some issues earlier in thread that could possibly help, but - as can be seen above - people don't want to have that conversation.

They just want to shout people down.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: neformore

If you're going to push for more gun regulations, then you need to tell us what you want. The pro-gun side is not going to do this for you, because they generally do not see those pushing for more regulations as honest brokers. If you don't give details, it just adds to that perception and makes people more unwilling to move from their positions (and understand, I'm not talking about you personally here, so much as at the political level).

Let me just add, this is also one of the key mistakes that Obama is making in this debate. Every time he goes after gun owners for resisting his 'common sense' gun regulations, aside from being arrogant and condescending on its face, he often does not mention specifics and that just fuels the concerns that he's 'wants to ban all the guns'.

edit on 3-10-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
The pro-gun side is not going to do this for you, because they generally do not see those pushing for more regulations as honest brokers.


You're right.

They aren't.

They are so wrapped up in their intrinsic paranoia that all they are going to do is shout "you can't mess with my 2nd Amendment rights", put that above other peoples lives and nothing will ever happen.

Its polarised.

Therefore, it is a pointless discussion.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Well Trump says .....



Donald Trump hit the nail on the head.

The real cause of mass shootings isn’t the availability of guns – or any laws designed to reduce their number – it’s the “mentally ill” people in this country who are determined to do harm.

Trump’s Right: ‘Guns, No Guns – It Doesn’t Matter’ It’s The ‘Mentally Ill’


Hmmm.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: neformore

You're half right, but you want to blame gun owners entirely for the polarization. Its everyone's fault. The side advocating gun control has no interest in hearing the concerns or respecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners, either. It certainly doesn't help to start trying to indirectly blame gun owners for the acts committed by people in cases such as this one. Its a cheap shot and does nothing but dig the credibility hole deeper and deeper and serve to create further polarization and division.

As I said earlier, the overwhelming majority of us do not want crazies and criminals having access to firearms. Unfortunately, the common ground ends when you start talk of policies actually intended to do just that.
edit on 3-10-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-10-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
53
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join