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 On San Bernardino Shooting: 'We Have A Pattern Now Of Mass Shootings'

page: 15
66
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Move to a different country then.

To me, our second amendment right must not be infringed upon. I want all of my neighbors to own firearms, preferably multiple firearms, and they shouldn't have to register them. It's not the government's business how many guns we have, but we should all have them, and many of them.


Why do you want to infringe my right to a reasonably secure existence by allowing all my mad neighbours to have guns? It takes just one loon and a gun to kill me. Take away the guns, and you have taken away the risk.

Now, don't give me the line that we can allow guns because "a hammer or an axe is also a weapon". If that was really so, we should simply take away the guns but allow everybody to own a hammer to comply with the 2nd amendmend

Nope, it's simple: guns are meant to kill. Folks that own guns want to kill others with it, or it would be quite useless to own a gun. So, gun owners are indeed sleeping murderers and believe me: if they are scared, they WILL convert into killing machines. And justify their actions afterwards, or apologize - but the man they killed will not be more alive afterwards.




posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
a reply to: ForteanOrg

What rights are being taken from you?.


The right to lead a reasonably safe life, you might say "the pursuit of happiness".

Also, your State is clearly guility of double standards. It worries about its citizens all the time - unless we're talking guns, then they're suddenly not so sure. For example, even in your own bloody car can you drive an inch without being forced to belt up, have airbags, all lights need to be working, the bloody thing needs to be checked frequently (and YOU have to pay for the check to add insult to injury). You need to have a valid drivers license - and they have an entire police force to check on you whilst you are driving to monitor you. And that's just driving a car.

So, you have to jump through hoops backwards to satisfy the States / citizens need for safety when driving a car. But it's allright for you to demand we all have weapons, and preferably a lot - which makes the world a lot less safer. And you then ask me what rights are taken away from me? Well, simple: I don't want to be shot nor be forced to have to "shoot back" - and the simplest way to assure that is NOT to allow you and your gunloving friends to have arms. Period.


It isn't anyone's fault but your own you are afraid of the reality that you simply are not safe anywhere, ever, no matter where you go or what you do or how you do it.


That's not bettered by allowing "everybody" to wear arms.


It isn't your neighbor that makes you feel threatened, it's you.


Funny thing you say that, for if that is so, why then do you think you feel you need a gun? According to your own philosophy It's not that unknown stranger that makes you feel threatened - it's you, right? So, work on yourself, have a little faith in people - and ditch the gun. Faith does not kill, guns do.


I suppose then, that it is you who are giving up your non-right to "feel" safe.


Well, Sir, if that is so, than pretty please simply start feeling safe YOURSELF and ditch the gun. You don't need it, you're only "unsafe" because it's all in your head - right?


Go get to know your neighbor better, he probably has his/her reservations about you too.


Actually, me and my neighbours get along quite well. Neither has a gun either. I'm not an American, remember. I live in The Netherlands where it is quite exceptional for people to have a gun. So, we don't have many gun related accidents here.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
If the government isn't making/staging these shootings they sure as hell don't do much to prevent them.
Same deal we got with 9/11.
They had the intel but let everything go ahead to cause maximum destruction.
Keep the level of fear up so people will go along with the destruction of our rights.
Obama wets his pants with every new shooting hoping he can further destroy the 2nd Amendment.
The real question is why is so important to him that the public is disarmed?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Asktheanimals




The real question is why is so important to him that the public is disarmed?


It makes us easier targets.

For the 'loons' and the 'terrorists'.

Once the guns are gone. That's when the real police state begins.

The Irony here is Obama is using the same tactic they used to push the Patriot Act for gun control now.

Except it was bad then, but good now.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
If the government isn't making/staging these shootings they sure as hell don't do much to prevent them.
Same deal we got with 9/11.
They had the intel but let everything go ahead to cause maximum destruction.
Keep the level of fear up so people will go along with the destruction of our rights.
Obama wets his pants with every new shooting hoping he can further destroy the 2nd Amendment.
The real question is why is so important to him that the public is disarmed?



Why is it there have been more mass shooting during this anti gun administration than any other?

Sure makes me wonder, especially when you take everything else he does into consideration.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   
FBi just called it terrorism.

So we gonna talk about that 'pattern' or we just gonna push gun control is the 'solution' to terrorism now?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

You can turn the lights out on the gun control debate, its over. From a political standpoint, this is a devastating blow for this administration and the entire Democrat party on national security. They can't afford another political lightning rod, especially not one that requires them to blame Americans and their rights for their failure, whether real or perceived, on national security. Ouch.

And don't forget, they all opened their traps and blamed Americans and their gun rights before all the facts were in and now, they've gotten burned big time by their own rush to judgement. Double ouch.
edit on 4-12-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I can tell you what happens now, this all goes away in about two weeks. It doesn't fit the narrative of evil white men with guns hurting others so it cant be allowed to gain traction in the media. We have hate crime investigations when a white (or off white) guy shoots someone of a different race, but when a gay black man executes two people on live television nobody bats an eye? Remember all that? yeah nobody else does either because two weeks later it was missing from every single news site. There is no way they will let this story go more than a week or two because it has no political value to the left, they cant possibly use this story effective to push their agenda of disarmament so they will instead make it go away as quickly as possible.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: vor78




You can turn the lights out on the gun control debate, its over. From a political standpoint, this is a devastating blow for this administration and the entire Democrat party on national security. They can't afford another political lightning rod, especially not one that requires them to blame Americans and their rights for their failure, whether real or perceived, on national security. Ouch.


I do have to agree.

Obama, and his party sure do look like chumps at the moment.

The irony of going off half cocked.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Well now that the San Bernardino is an act of terrorism political candidates are bashing Obama for jumping into the gun control agenda too soon, they claim that no gun control could have help stop a terrorist attack.

Interesting.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

They're even bigger hypocrites if they try to blame Obama alone. Its gonna be awfully hard for many of the Dem candidates to back away from that precipice, given that most of them were tripping over themselves to be the first one over the 'blame American gun rights' cliff when it happened.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: vor78

I am sure that a lot of the big mouth politicians running for next elections that jump in the gun agenda bandwagon are going to choke when people start buying more guns to become neighbor vigilantes.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

You know, its funny, but I've always said that if these bozos wanted fewer guns on the streets, they'd shut their mouths about gun control, at least for a while to let the people have a chance to simmer down. Every time they start yapping, people head to the gun store and start voting with their wallets.

We were already on pace to shatter the previous yearly NICS check record before all this happened, with each month starting with May setting a new record for that particular month. I can only imagine what the December number is going to look like when it comes in.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg




Also, your State is clearly guility of double standards. It worries about its citizens all the time - unless we're talking guns, then they're suddenly not so sure. For example, even in your own bloody car can you drive an inch without being forced to belt up, have airbags, all lights need to be working, the bloody thing needs to be checked frequently (and YOU have to pay for the check to add insult to injury). You need to have a valid drivers license - and they have an entire police force to check on you whilst you are driving to monitor you. And that's just driving a car.

See here your ignorance is showing, did you know that a car fresh off the assembly line would still have something that a ticket could be issues over? See the thing is that laws made with a agenda only fufill that agenda. For cars it's all about generating revenue for the gov't. The ticket will be the cheap part the kicker is the court fee's. Remember that most laws passed in haste have consequences that people in their rush to feel good about doing something miss.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   
It’s a scare tactic, meant to frighten those who won’t think more deeply about the issue. It’s for people who read the headlines, but not the articles.
All the mass shootings map doesn’t make me want to give my gun away, It makes me want to double up and avoid any place I’m not able to carry.
In fact, I think I’ll go throw a couple of extra magazines in my clove box



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: chr0naut


Explain to me how you managed to turn "making it harder for mentally ill people to gain access to gun" into "they are coming for your guns."



I bet it's because he fears we are all a little mentally ill in our own fashion, so nobody will get acces to guns


Peace out.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 09:47 PM
link   
We also have a pattern of jerks like Obama trying to take all of our freedoms under the predication of lies.No one ever does anything about that. What's his point?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: neo96

It is a pattern. D o you feel it is TOO SOON to call Pattern??? I am also guessing that the President may possess a few facts that you do not. In specific to this. He probably possesses a few million facts that you do not, in general.

He has not been giving anything directly. Just like Unicef, half of it ends up where it was not supposed to go.

And if the President had waited to speak, you would have complained about that too.




There is a pattern. Mainstream news channels always report mass shootings. If there's a shooting in an African-American neighborhood, all you will hear are crickets. If there's the slightest chance it's a white person shooting an African-American (aka Trayvon) person, the street will be filled with mobile broadcast vans and the sun blocked out by a swarm of eye-in-the-sky helicopters with news-anchors.



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to: hangedman13

A car that comes fresh from the assembly line might have issues that a ticket can be given for. But it will be transported to the garage or other point of sale, and they will inspect the car and ensure it has not issues. Also, as soon as it is sold to a driver, the driver is responsible for it and he will have to check if his / her car has any issues that do not allow him or her to drive with it. But let's not digress to much here: my point was that the State is peculiar in that it allows folks to buy and carry guns, which are INTENDED to kill people, hence creating a very dangerous environment for others - where it demands we belt up in our cars to prevent us from being killed. Double standards.

BTW: i'm pleased to see that the NYT - for the first time in 20 years - has an editorial on the front page in which they clearly and unambiguously speak out against the 2nd amendmend and against the weapons industry. One hopes that the majority of Americans will finally understand how totally unappropriate and dangerous it is to allow people to be judge, jury and executioner, all that in the blink of an eye. Away with those guns, I say.



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: theonenonlyone

In the last twenty years, crime rates have decreased while the number of gun owners has increased. So he is just carrying that fact to its logical conclusion.



new topics




 
66
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join