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.

 

NYT: Americans With Assault Rifles Should 'Give Them Up For The Good Of Their Fellow Citizens'

page: 10
53
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: SonOfThor
Firearms have numerous uses, I use mine in IDPA competitions, hunting, target shooting, as well as if God forbid I was forced to use it in self defense.


Actually, in my country you can use guns for target shooting and shooting competitions too. Not for self defense, though we have had cases in which the judge did not impose any punishment on people that shot at robbers.


The only thing I've ever killed with my guns were wild turkeys, deer, wild boar, dove, and ducks. Here in Texas, if you're out hog hunting you will want a semi-automatic rifle with at least a 20 round magazine. Hogs can travel in groups, some of them up to a couple hundred pounds and they are mean SOBs (not to mention they destroy crops / ranch lands).


Well, we have hunters too in my country. they have simple shotguns here, we don't have groups of hogs roaming the country here, so the killings are limited to pheasants and rabbits mostly.


Point being, you can make your opinions based in emotion heard to those of us across the pond, but they will never make a difference. US Culture is based on independence, while yours is based on dependence to the State.


And the State is owned by the people here, not the other way around. You are, of course, aware of the uprising of the French people against their King? If a nations people is against the government nothing can stop them. You don't need guns - they will be acquired if the People so decide.




posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

The armed populace is partially an insurance policy. How abusive is a government going to get when the people are armed?

Also, it is an insurance against invasion. People who are armed and familiar with those arms are going to be easier to form into a civil defense than people who are afraid of the guns they need to pick up to resist because they have never held anything like them before and have been told only evil, wicked and violent people would have any desire to touch them.

Also, the American Revolution was a lot less messy in the end than the massacre the French Revolution turned into.


edit on 7-12-2015 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Ummm, and if someone wants to kill people, they will also kill people. Even if they don't have firearms readily available.

So what's the point again?


Well, it's a lot more difficult to kill say 14 people with hammers, knives or pointy bamboo sticks. You well know that firearms are meant to kill people, automatic firearms make it very easy to kill a lot of people and the sole purpose of firearms is - to kill people. I'm against killing people, so I'm against firearms.


Do you really hate guns that badly? Or are you just afraid of them?


Guns are just instruments. I don't hate instruments. I'm not afraid of them either. I'm simply doing the maths - and in my country, which has fairly strict gun laws, we have a lot less deaths by firearms per capita.







Really?
crimeresearch.org...



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Sunwolf

Yes, really. The chart in your article shows it.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96




So now Imma a 'terrorist' for merely owning a 'assault' weapon! Never mind I, and millions of other Americans haven't done anything. Why no Imma a terrorist!


Well aren't you gun totting conservatives all for insurrection of the U.S government when it turns on it's own citizen's? Are you really going to deny that guns aren't marketed in adverts to send messages to potential buyers of a product?
I believe it was Bushmaster who put out an add awhile ago for their version of the AR-15 called the "Man-Card" campaign...This isn't the first time Bushmaster has marketed firearms as a masculine tool of destruction either. They did it with the ACR when Magpul signed over licensing of production to Bushmaster.


What I don't understand is why you use the word terrorism with such a negative connotation in regards to American gun owners? For every man's terrorist is somebody else's freedom fighter. You should show your support to them in a less degrading fashion instead of sensationalizing an out of context paragraph. Your just perpetuating the mainstream partisan divide even further.Something that I thought many people like yourself refuse to be apart of.
edit on 7-12-2015 by NateTheAnimator because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: vor78

We're moving in circles. Again: death by firearm is death by firearm. My reason for posting in here was the blatant lie of one of the members here that "just" 3000 people died annualy by firearm. I believe I have sufficiently proven that that number should be tenfold. Regardless if people would (or would not) find other ways to kill themselves or others in any other way - which has to be seen first! - taking away firearms brings down the amount of kililngs by firearms to zero. That's my point.




Your point is irrelevant,your opinion is not going to change laws in the U.S..You don`t like guns?Fine don`t buy one.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: ForteanOrg

The armed populace is partially an insurance policy. How abusive is a government going to get when the people are armed?


Oh, come on. Ever since the mad Bush administrations and the 9/11 events your government has been taking away a lot of your freedoms. Nobody - gun or not - stood a chance against it. The American people are lured into a false sense of safety - "we all have guns, so we're secure" - but it has proven very, VERY easy to take away their real rights. You can now be held without a trial, they can barge into your house without a warrant and you are being spied on by your own government. Your "insurance" does not work, that's clear. But the 30.000 dead - they are real enough.


Also, it is an insurance against invasion.


Uhm.. you mean: invasion from outer space? I don't think so. Then you must mean "invasion by the Mexicans" - and we all know how well the arms you all hog have helped to solve that "problem". And I can't really imagine the Canadians trying the invade the US either. So, WHAT invasion?


Also, the American Revolution was a lot less messy in the end than the massacre the French Revolution turned into.


All in the name of freedom. Sad, but true.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sunwolf
Your point is irrelevant,your opinion is not going to change laws in the U.S..You don`t like guns?Fine don`t buy one.


I have a far more powerful weapon here



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   
The founding fathers of America were Brilliant when designing the Constitution and knew what it would take, to ensure that Tyranny didn't conquer and control a people of lesser power and control. So they put the control into the hands of the many, Standing militias and a right to bear arms. Whether that be a musket ball, or an AR-15, Ak47, it doesnt matter. What matters is that common people with not a lot of power, can still put up a fight, without being trampled on and turned into a slave. Not saying everything is perfect, but the people of America are still in control of their own lives, and the choices they choose to live by. Being able to ensure ones ability to fight back against Tyranny, Terrorism, Risk of life or Others, is just a very small example of why Guns are a Given right to every American. If you have never experienced this kind of Freedom, and Right, then you will never Understand. If you are from a European Country, and you just cant wrap your heads around why Americans are given such rights, you merely have to look back, at the fall of France, and the occupation by Germany during WW2. Germany would of had a much much harder time crossing through Europe if the Civilians had there own Guns and standing militias.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: Sunwolf
Your point is irrelevant,your opinion is not going to change laws in the U.S..You don`t like guns?Fine don`t buy one.


I have a far more powerful weapon here



You're correct

drunk drivers kill a lot more people than guns !



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg


Uhm.. you mean: invasion from outer space? I don't think so. Then you must mean "invasion by the Mexicans" - and we all know how well the arms you all hog have helped to solve that "problem". And I can't really imagine the Canadians trying the invade the US either. So, WHAT invasion?


An invasion.

Try to paint it as a racial thing all you like, but you cannot take away the fact that invasion is one of the reasons the 2nd Amendment is there. You might look up the War of 1812 for one example of an armed invasion where the ability of the populace to take of the arms they kept was helpful.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: NateTheAnimator




Well aren't you gun totting conservatives all for insurrection of the U.S government when it turns on it's own citizen's?


Basically because us 'gun totting conservatives' don't like to shoot first, and ask question later.

Ya know it's the responsible thing to do.

Arms are a weapon of LAST resort.

Not the first.
edit on 7-12-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Correct me if I am wrong but what other use does an automatic rifle have away from a war zone?... The idea of these things is to kill a lot of people.....so how do you argue that you need one for protection?


An AR-15 is not an automatic rifle......

That is the dumbest thing gun grabbers always say.

You obviously know nothing about guns.

Since you know nothing about them, how can you even have anything but a emotional stance on them?

There is no such thing as an assault rifle, an AR-15 is nothing more than a high powered 22 bullet that can shoot just as fast as any semiautomatic 22 even those without a pistol grip or removeable magazine.

An AR-15 just looks scary to people that know nothing about guns.

1 trigger pull, 1 bullet period, just like every other gun including revolvers.

If it were a car, it would be a regular car with go fast stickers on it.

It looks cool, but it is only looks, it doesn't make it go faster.

Now that you have been informed what an AR-15 is I assume your ignorance on the subject has been cured, correct?



Nice.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 10:57 AM
link   
So you can just kill people with a hand gun then instead.

Stupid statement.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

We keep such WARZONES from happening HERE because evidently our incompetenat government cannot.
There will be burst of violence but they won't take any towns and they won't be able to assemble in force inside one as a result.
The answers are obvious if we have to explain it you better learn MORE about history.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Gun nut - The armed forces and police would never take our guns, they'd be on our side...

Anti Gun nut - Then why do you need guns...

Gun nut - I need guns because the government want to take my guns...

Anti gun nut - Wait... What?



^^^^^^^^^
That's why you all sound like raving lunatics.


Brought to you by the US education system. Simplified to the point that it only actually makes sense to a bot # out of it.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

I find your avatar interesting considering the views that you have. I still remember watching the video where that unarmed French cop gets blown away by a fully automatic AK-47. In the US shootings with fully automatic weapons are extremely rare , in Europe they are the standard.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Civilians owning weapons of war?
Why could that possibly be important?
If the government has not only those but better, more efficient weapons then "assault rifles" are the least they can allow the citizenry to protect themselves from government overreach and corruption.
It's not like governments can do no wrong or fall in to the hands of a select few who are not elected, right?

When push comes to shove the people are very, very slow to react in violence. Gun owners are the least of anyone's worries.
edit on 7-12-2015 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

All of your snippy comments arguing with all of us folks across the pond is getting tedious. The problem with the legislation of fire arms in the US by our officials can be found in how they handle pistol permits. With getting a pistol in a Democrat controlled area you are held to no set standard other than how the local judge feels about guns in the first place. Not the law but a changing roster of personal opinion. A right spelled out for us by the Bill of rights gets to be "granted" by a appointed political figure. So even after the party in question gets voted out their flunkies get to still be part of the system and in this case allowing their personal views determine who gets to exercise their rights. Once you start allowing the politicians to influence who gets to actually exercise their rights in one case you start a precedent that will be used for other rights. And considering how the little sad College students here have been treating free speech it's easy to see how easy it will be in the future to erode the right to free speech just because a bunch of people feel "threatened" by certain types of speech. The fear and ignorance is just a time tested and proven way to get away with making laws that take away rights and make the masses think thats what they needed.



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
When the government tells you that you don't need a gun, that is when you know for sure - you need a gun.

NYT wants rifle owners to turn in their rifles for the good of the community. I didn't see anything about asking terrorists to stop killing innocent people for the good of the community...

All these people keep saying getting rid of guns will stop these crimes. But no one has ever said how they intend to take guns away from criminals. They only show how they will take guns away from law abiding citizens.

No guns were used in Oklahoma City. Since there is no mean looking weapon to vilify we just shrug and walk away. It was fertilizer. Nothing mean about it. But it killed 168 people. You can buy it with no background checks, no waiting period, no age restrictions, nothing. It is a proven weapon with mass killing capabilities. Where is the outrage? Oh yeah, it was directed at the person who did it - not the tools he used. Like it should be every time something like this happens.

That is why we will never solve this problem. There is always a way to harm people. You cant rid society of everything that can be used a as a weapon. You need to address the people who do this, not the tools they use.




top topics



 
53
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join