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.

 

JV and Alan Colmes on Gun Control, Taking Money Out of Politics and the 2016 Elections

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2015 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Fox News radio host Alan Colmes goes head-to-head with me for a no-holds-barred discussion on gun control and Second Amendment rights. Plus, Colmes sounds off on the 2016 Elections and why he feels Hillary is the clear frontrunner for the presidency. Do you agree or disagree?




posted on Oct, 26 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Liability insurance? More money for an industry that got handed billions when Obamacare came out? And, my home owners insurance covers accidents that occur on my property, so why would I need a separate policy? Again, more money for the scam artists. Rule, regulate and tax the average gun owner in to becoming a non gun owner.
The assault weapons ban didn't work then and it's not going to work now. Rifles are not usually used in the majority of shootings. A few mass shooters used one, so now the anti gunners are against them and using fear to push their agenda. "Oh, it's black and scary!! Ban It!!"
If Hilary is elected.....We're screwed and that's putting it kindly. She has proven herself a liar and unfit to hold any office, much less the Oval Office.



posted on Oct, 26 2015 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64

Indeed. Also, don't forget if insurance becomes a requirement of owning a firearm that creates a gun ownership registry. Depending on what side of the fence you are on that means it could be easier for them to confiscate guns.

Insurance policies, as you state should already cover accidents, including gun accidents.

Never mind the majority of gun deaths are suicides - meaning most insurance companies are going to try to avoid paying out life insurance policies, depending on the policy clauses. Then carve out gun deaths from illegal gun owners, who don't have insurance.

But the insurance idea isn't about suicides and illegal gun deaths. It is genuinely about creating a database of legal gun owners.



posted on Oct, 26 2015 @ 10:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: WCmutant
a reply to: DAVID64

But the insurance idea isn't about suicides and illegal gun deaths. It is genuinely about creating a database of legal gun owners.


Which won't do much good with Pawn shops like this: www.nydailynews.com...

Legal gun ownership isn't the issue anymore when you have stores that sell to people who are obvious straw buyers.

I can't find the story right now, but a very interesting legal precedent was recently set. In short, a gun store was held liable for the shooting of a police officer by a gun that was sold at that store. The jury agreed that the store owner should have known that it was a straw buyer he was dealing with. The most damning evidence in regards to that was store surveillance showing the gun shop owner telling the buyer exactly how to fill out the application. He even told the buyer about mistakes he was making and told him how to correct them.

If anyone thinks that is an acceptable selling practice....think again. It may ave been in the past, but with this multi-million dollar settlement coming to pass........it's not so acceptable anymore. And this wasn't the Government handing down judgement.....or an insurance company......this was a jury of peers. Something else guaranteed by the constitution.

Regardless of what the pro gun crowd says, regardless of their constitution based arguments, the general public is getting tired of all these shootings with only the shooter being held accountable. Sometimes. The general public is starting to realize there is more going on behind the scenes that make these crimes possible.

We don't need tighter gun laws or databases. We need a tighter grip over who can sell the guns. The right to bear arms and the right to SELL them are 2 different animals.



posted on Oct, 27 2015 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: JesseVentura

I love it.. ban guns because a kid MAY hurt themselves, what about the kids that eat poison? Or the one's that drown? Or the ones that fall down steps. Or any other number of things that kill kids MORE then guns?

Why not blame the parents that let these kids die? I had guns, pools, stairs, animals and many other "dangerous" things around me growing up. My parents taught me to be careful and not to mess with things I was not suppose to. That included paddling my butt when I didn't listen. Trying to keep dangerous thing away from kids is WORST thing you can do. Teach your kids, don't hide the world from them. Let little johnny burn his finger on the stove then he will learn to be careful.


I think we need to rewrite the 1st amendment. Things have changes so much. Then never knew about computers and digital media and the 1st was never written to cover that. They also never expected these D*** Christians to actually pray in public. (Of course it is fine for Muslims to ask for special rooms and time.)

Don't think most Liberals would like us messing with the 1st, so why don't then leave the 2nd alone.

And people that bring up cars. Driving a car is a privilege, own a gun is a RIGHT.

We should also force every one to have insurance for their 1st Amendment right. You could say something that hurts me and makes it too painful to work anymore. Then you would have to use that insurance to help me live thought the pain of your hurtful words.


OK I let off some steam and thanks for reading my rant. But I do think I made a couple of points in there some where



posted on Oct, 27 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: dismanrc

I worked at one of top 15 largest banks in the US. While I was there they had special Bible study lunches and several people sent around Bible verses in mass Emails without you requesting it. At the bottom of those mass Emails was the disclaimer - "I apologize if you received this Email in error, but I do not apologize for the word of God." I had a friend (prior to me working there) join their Management Development Program. There was a special dinner for everyone in the program. At that dinner they requested everyone pray before eating. She backed out of the program after that.

I'm also assuming your rant was rather sarcastic in nature?

The real problem we have in this country is we incorrectly use the word "freedom" while advocating banning the rights and freedoms of the opposite side.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   
You already have homeowners insurance that'll cover anything that'll happen on your property, why then would you have to carry gun insurance? I don't necessarily like insurance companies because they love to take your money and tell you when you're check's late, but when it's time for them to pay up, they fight you generally every step of the way.


originally posted by: DAVID64
Liability insurance? More money for an industry that got handed billions when Obamacare came out? And, my home owners insurance covers accidents that occur on my property, so why would I need a separate policy? Again, more money for the scam artists. Rule, regulate and tax the average gun owner in to becoming a non gun owner.
The assault weapons ban didn't work then and it's not going to work now. Rifles are not usually used in the majority of shootings. A few mass shooters used one, so now the anti gunners are against them and using fear to push their agenda. "Oh, it's black and scary!! Ban It!!"
If Hilary is elected.....We're screwed and that's putting it kindly. She has proven herself a liar and unfit to hold any office, much less the Oval Office.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:49 AM
link   
a reply to: WCmutant

Question.

Did they force you to read the e-mails?

I get tons of e-mails at work. If I see the title does not apply for me, or I don't wish to read it I just delete it.

Doen't cause me any pain what so ever. Just like freedom of speech. If I don't like what they are saying I walk on or change the station. No pain or suffering on my part at all.

Was the orginizatin she joined voluntary? If so what was the issue. She does not like it she quits. No pain what so ever.


What about gay marriage? We are FORCED to hear about it and agree to it by law. This is a DIRECT violation of 1st Amendment right of freedom of religion. Personally I don't agree with it, but have no issue if someone does it. What about Muslim prayer and restrictions? Just last week their was the case of the truck driver getting all that money for being forced to deliver beer. So it OK to use it for your advantage?

Yes you have the RIGHT to pray ANYWHERE ANYTIME you want too (To any God also.) IF people wish to join you they also have that right. If people don't wish to they have that right.

I have NEVER seen anything that says you have to pray during one of these time. You can do whatever you like. It would be respectful for you to be quite during the period, but then again you don't have too.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join