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.

 

Bloomberg's Anti-Gun Group Pushes Obama to Take Executive Action on Gun Control

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: crazyewok
Obama cant.

I dont see how he can. Such a executive order would be illegal and the states could just ignore it am I correct?


He's done it 23 times already so he can.

According to the 14th amendment EVERY state can ignore EO's that abridge our civil liberties if they wanted to.



Well he can make a EO but as you point out that EO means nothing and is a waste of ink if it contradicts the constitution.




posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: crazyewok
Obama cant.

I dont see how he can. Such a executive order would be illegal and the states could just ignore it am I correct?


He's done it 23 times already so he can.

According to the 14th amendment EVERY state can ignore EO's that abridge our civil liberties if they wanted to.



Well he can make a EO but as you point out that EO means nothing and is a waste of ink if it contradicts the constitution.



THAT RIGHT THERE? Is the proof of the left/right paradigm being pure BS!!

You being across the pond? You don't have the Constitution, yet explain how what you have happening in your country and the division is any different than the division in the US?

Find a difference other than the 2nd! Then think about why the 2nd is such a HUGE issue!



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: n00bUK
To own a gun it should need a gun license that takes age, criminal record, financial background, mental health records. Registration to your council/local authority. Liability insurance on every gun owned. 14 day waiting period after purchase. Universal comprehensive background checks. No private transfer of firearms. Every sale or gift goes through a licensed firearms dealer along with registration change and liability insurance will be checked before transfer.

Police are more dangerous than the American public. Police should have their weapons taken off them and only given to a special force in the Police which deal with gun crimes.


Substitute the word "pen" for gun.

And don't say a pen or words can't kill. Under certain circumstances they certainly can.

I just simply have no words concerning your second paragraph.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Well presidents makes the EO and throw them to the wall like crap to see if they stick or if they get challenged by congress, more often than not they do stick and congress do nothing, but then when they are infringing in constitutional rights the Supreme court comes out and slap the president in the hand.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: crazyewok
Obama cant.

I dont see how he can. Such a executive order would be illegal and the states could just ignore it am I correct?


He's done it 23 times already so he can.

According to the 14th amendment EVERY state can ignore EO's that abridge our civil liberties if they wanted to.



Well he can make a EO but as you point out that EO means nothing and is a waste of ink if it contradicts the constitution.



THAT RIGHT THERE? Is the proof of the left/right paradigm being pure BS!!

You being across the pond? You don't have the Constitution, yet explain how what you have happening in your country and the division is any different than the division in the US?

Find a difference other than the 2nd! Then think about why the 2nd is such a HUGE issue!


Well we have cerain rights. Though its through a bill not a constitution.


So I guess the nearest argument we have is the fight over our right to free speech.

Certain elements are trying to restrict so not to offend minoritys and we have huge fights and debates over it.

So in that way its a similar fight but diffrent issue.

Is that what you mean?



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Here is a revolutionary idea. How about spending money on law enforcement in high crime areas.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: crazyewok
Obama cant.

I dont see how he can. Such a executive order would be illegal and the states could just ignore it am I correct?


He's done it 23 times already so he can.

According to the 14th amendment EVERY state can ignore EO's that abridge our civil liberties if they wanted to.



Well he can make a EO but as you point out that EO means nothing and is a waste of ink if it contradicts the constitution.



THAT RIGHT THERE? Is the proof of the left/right paradigm being pure BS!!

You being across the pond? You don't have the Constitution, yet explain how what you have happening in your country and the division is any different than the division in the US?

Find a difference other than the 2nd! Then think about why the 2nd is such a HUGE issue!


Well we have cerain rights. Though its through a bill not a constitution.


So I guess the nearest argument we have is the fight over our right to free speech.

Certain elements are trying to restrict so not to offend minoritys and we have huge fights and debates over it.

So in that way its a similar fight but diffrent issue.

Is that what you mean?



Well, since you explained it well, and other than the 2nd yea! PC is the enemy whether you see it used by the political party that represents you OR the political party you oppose! Bottom line? PC is fascism! Free speech would not even exist if it only supported popular speech? But yea, when I say Political Correctness on ATS? It isn't just directed towards those I consider Progressives. It is towards everyone regardless of their beliefs who think it is trendy to tell others they don't have a right to say what they mean.......



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: crazyewok
Obama cant.

I dont see how he can. Such a executive order would be illegal and the states could just ignore it am I correct?


He's done it 23 times already so he can.

According to the 14th amendment EVERY state can ignore EO's that abridge our civil liberties if they wanted to.



Well he can make a EO but as you point out that EO means nothing and is a waste of ink if it contradicts the constitution.



Problem there is guns aren't like gay marriage.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




So I guess the nearest argument we have is the fight over our right to free speech.


Would you stand for a federal background check to practice your right to free speech ?

Further more would you stand for the STATE limiting how many words that can you can say at one time ?

Going the distance would you stand for the STATE limiting how many words you put in a sentence ?

Would you stand for that ?

A right is a RIGHT.

It's not conditional.
edit on 5-10-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

I might think gun culture is silly and alien.

But it does not change the fact it is a black and white right in your constitution.

And I know that if you chip away one right then nothing really stops those chiping away at other rights too.
It starts a slippery slope.

By that logic it to me seems best if you leave the bill of rights alone.
edit on 5-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: seeker1963

I might think gun culture is silly and alien.

But it does not change the fact it is a black and white right in your constitution.

And I know that if you chip away one right then nothing really stops those chiping away at other rights too.
It starts a slippery slope.

By that logic it to me seems best if you leave the bill of rights alone.


You and I have had words in the past, and I always respect your honesty! As have I grown, so have I seen you!


I am not your enemy!



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

I think we agree here on the point of a right is a right is a right.


Just because you or I might think it silly or wrong or offensive does not change the fact its a right.

Your bill of rights is a extremely important document and one that should be respected and not eroded by politicians. It it spells out a right then it should not be touched.
edit on 5-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




I might think gun culture is silly and alien.


It's called the freedom culture.

And it is alien to some.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: crazyewok




I might think gun culture is silly and alien.


It's called the freedom culture.

And it is alien to some.


O quit your bollocks.

Im actually agreeing your points, stop your rar rar bull #.

So dont take one line I said and take it out of context just to create a fight.

Not everyone has a gun culture and not everyone equates freedom with guns.

You do cool. And its your right in the USA.

edit on 5-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

And yet in every so called civilized country.

'Good' guys with guns are called for emergencies to deal with the 'bad' guys with guns.

PS. giving grief is a two way street.

It's another RIGHT.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Ok you got me there.

I deserve it I guess


I wont argue that right too.


But this is a more serious thread unlike the other that was a joke from the beginning post. So i am trying to be on my best behaviour here

edit on 5-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
Obama cant.

I dont see how he can. Such a executive order would be illegal and the states could just ignore it am I correct?


That's is right, but then the federal government can use the persuasion method to accomplish this, you know briberies or withholding of federal funds to states that do not comply, that is what he wanted to do with the obamacare expansion of Medicaid and the supreme court slapped Obama for that.
edit on 5-10-2015 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   



O quit your bollocks.



That's bull nuts for those of you in Rio Linda.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




But how would they confiscate the ILLEGALLY purchased guns?


They'll know the illegal guns 'cause they'll be black or shiny, made of metal and/or polymer, have a magazine that holds more than 1 bullet, actually hold bullets, a person has them on their property or person. The ones that hold water or shoot plastic pellets are to be considered as dangerous as all the rest, as they can be converted. All pastry products shall be confiscated on the grounds they may be bitten to create a shape resembling a gun.
edit on 5-10-2015 by DAVID64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: DAVID64
Or a pop tart that has been bitten in to the shape of a gun.


You conveniently omitted the amazingly lethal index finger/thumb suppressed full-auto machine gun.

*pew pew pew pew*

You die now!!!







 
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join