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 Town Hall: Obama Rips Gun Control Fiction

page: 7
15
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Watch this ABC report, around 1:07 mark. There you will see a press conference and then you will see that YES THEY DID TAKE THEM.

www.youtube.com...

So do you wish to tell me it did not happen and that everyone refused to follow those orders?


edit on 8-1-2016 by TheSemiSkeptic because: Typos




posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: TheSemiSkeptic

Reread what I wrote because you are only seeing what you want and ignoring the rest. I never said it didnt happen. I said officers refused the order while you implied they all took part when they didnt.
edit on 8-1-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I read what you wrote, no need to re-read it. The Courts may have said that what was done was illegal, and the Courts mandated that the guns be given back. This was not done until 2008. This is neither here nor there, The seizing of guns HAPPENED. Why else would the court rule that the 2nd and 4th amendments were violated, and the guns MUST be returned.
The seizures were done by National Guard members, and LEOs. Don't believe me? Then how about a blog from someone who was there.....

www.thebangswitch.com...

So once again I state that I do not have the same faith in these people as you seem to have. When the order comes they will do as they are told, as their past actions have shown.



edit on 8-1-2016 by TheSemiSkeptic because: typos



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: TheSemiSkeptic

and the courts said no to confiscation in September. The final court action in 2008 involved the NRA.

You implied that all officers from those state agencies took part in confiscation which they didnt and you had officers / military refuse to follow the confiscation order and the shoot looters order..

What I am saying, because you seem to be missing the point the second time around, is while gun confiscation occurred you still had people refusing to follow those orders. I am not sure why you are not understanding that fact. By extension it goes back to my position on officers / military refusing illegal orders.

Because the order was refused your comment about following orders is based on a fallacy.

The irony about this argument -
The Governor of Louisiana and Mayor of New Orleans, when the gun grab occurred, were both Democrats.
edit on 8-1-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Yes the 2008 court decision was brought about because the NRA got involved. They had too. The City of New Orleans placed totally unreasonable demands on the gun owners to get them back. It was the belief of the gun owners and the NRA that these demands were put there to ensure the guns would never go back to the people. The gun owners could not afford the long drawn out court case to get them back. The NRA stepped in to help them.
Let me say it this way. Not enough refused the order. There were too many who willfully followed an unlawful order. Military Officer or Enlisted, Law Enforcement, or Sheriff's Deputies all should have refused. They didn't, so I have no faith that in the future they will.
I don't say that happily. I served this country for seven years in the U.S. Army. I was proud of that service, and I remember all the training and discussions on following lawful orders and not following unlawful orders. What constitutes lawful orders and what does not. Then I watch people who took the same oath I did, just take a giant dump on that oath. I have lost all faith in American Service Members, and others to be able to know the difference or too even care.


edit on 8-1-2016 by TheSemiSkeptic because: Surprise this time it was grammer



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TheSemiSkeptic

I think there is a difference between a natural disaster and gun control laws that are being pushed. I agree to many officers followed the illegal orders.

A question -
How many officers participated / how many guns were confiscated?

I still have faith that if Obama tries a gun grab he wont have the military / FLEE / State county municipal support. Further more with the court rulings on Katrina any attempts would be unlawful and I would arrest if its attempted by government officials.


ETA -
Also Katrina is another example of how gun control fails. The law abiding citizens were disarmed while the criminal element was not, which in turn placed law abiding citizens at the mercy of the criminals.
edit on 8-1-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I think he'd have a hard time getting a lot of rural jurisdictions to comply.



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I do not agree with the premise that constitutional rights are somehow trumped by natural disasters.

About 700 guns were confiscated, hard to get accurate numbers as the City of New Orleans would not/will not say.

Your question as to how many Officers followed that order is one I can not answer. Those types of records, if they were even kept, would not be part of the public record.
Reminds me of the old joke where three Priests are standing at the Pearly Gates of Heaven. St. Peter appears before them and says 'You must answer one question before you may be admitted to Heaven.'. St. Peter asks the First Priest 'Name the worst ocean disaster?'. The First Priest answers 'The Titanic.'. The Pearly Gates open the First Priest goes in. St. Peter asks the second Priest 'How many people died in that disaster?'. The Second Priest answers '1500 poor souls.'. The Pearly Gates open and the Second priest walks in. St. Peter turns to the Third Priest, who St. Peter dislikes and says 'Name them.'

I hope your faith is well placed. I do not have such faith.



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheSemiSkeptic
I do not agree with the premise that constitutional rights are somehow trumped by natural disasters.


I don't either and Katrina affirmed that disasters dont trump constitutional rights.



originally posted by: TheSemiSkeptic
I hope your faith is well placed. I do not have such faith.


Given the popularity of this president and the number of guns bought because of this president... I think we are safe.


ETA -
It just dawned on me I was using the term FLEE without explaining it -
FLEE = Federal Law Enforcement Establishment for those not familiar.
edit on 8-1-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   


Given the popularity of this president and the number of guns bought because of this president... I think we are safe.


Well President Obama has been granted the title of "Gun Salesman of the Year" a few times.
I hope you are correct.

And thank you for the explanation, I was guessing by the context it was some form of Law Enforcement acronym.



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ANNED

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: AmericanRealist

a rifle, yes. No problems. Self defense is fair game..

But an automatic machine gun similar to what the army uses?

no.

Also, he's not taking away guns or stopping you from getting guns, he's closing loop holes on background checks.

You'd think (by the reaction of some) that he was going door to door demanding you turn in your guns or you will have your house bulldozed. A completely disproportionate response to reality!


Where can you buy a automatic machine gun similar to what the army uses.
I was in the military and have NEVER seen one sold to the general public.



Oh, that's an easy question to answer. All you have to do is join ISIS and Obama will airlift you crates of guns and ammo.

that's how ISIS got all those weapons. Or, you could just join a Mexican Drug Cartel.
edit on 8-1-2016 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

originally posted by: ANNED

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: AmericanRealist

a rifle, yes. No problems. Self defense is fair game..

But an automatic machine gun similar to what the army uses?

no.

Also, he's not taking away guns or stopping you from getting guns, he's closing loop holes on background checks.

You'd think (by the reaction of some) that he was going door to door demanding you turn in your guns or you will have your house bulldozed. A completely disproportionate response to reality!


Where can you buy a automatic machine gun similar to what the army uses.
I was in the military and have NEVER seen one sold to the general public.



Oh, that's an easy question to answer. All you have to do is join ISIS and Obama will airlift you crates of guns and ammo.

that's how ISIS got all those weapons. Or, you could just join a Mexican Drug Cartel.

Oh really??? I thought the Bush invasion of Iraq and subsequent mismanagement by both the interim government and the succeeding Al Maliki government that striped the Shea of all power and hoarding all the goodies to themselves is what created ISIS who then overran the cowardly or demoralized troops ,who dropped their weapons uniforms and dignity in the face of 800 ISIS fighters while they numbered 30,000.

Iraqi officials told the Guardian that two divisions of Iraqi soldiers – roughly 30,000 men – simply turned and ran in the face of the assault by an insurgent force of just 800 fighters.
www.theguardian.com...


edit on 8-1-2016 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I copied this from another post I replayed to Still fits here:

"Wiping back tears" of joy as he side steps the guide lines set in place to keep the POTUSA from being a dictator

The bigger picture is not gun control That is just King [snip] Obama's excuse to strip the Constitution apart line by line.
And HILLARY is following in his foot steps.
Keep in mind the freedoms you are willing to give up (and will never get back)is only a step let to The POTUSA
void the Constitution as he wishes
Executive actions are he's way of showing us he can and will do what fits his agenda and not what is wanted by the people.
Time and time again Obama reminds us its no longer WE THE PEOPLE
edit on 8-1-2016 by deadcatsrule because: (no reason given)

edit on Sat Jan 9 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)



posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 01:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: AmericanRealist

a rifle, yes. No problems. Self defense is fair game..

But an automatic machine gun similar to what the army uses?

no.

Also, he's not taking away guns or stopping you from getting guns, he's closing loop holes on background checks.

You'd think (by the reaction of some) that he was going door to door demanding you turn in your guns or you will have your house bulldozed. A completely disproportionate response to reality!



What the reality is is people just like you who are co.pletely ignorant of how gun aww work. Your average Joe isn't capable of possessing a machine gun. It takes months of background checks by the ATF, hundreds of dollars in fees and I don't know, around 30,000 dollars to come into possession of these automatic machine guns you are talking about. And that's if you can even get someone who owns one to sell the damn thing to you.



posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 01:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: muse7
You can't reason with them, if you do they'll start screaming about the second amendment, even if they just understand half of it.

I've said it before.

Gun nuts are amongst the most selfish people in the US. To them, their fantasy of someday stopping a mass shooting is more important to them than preventing lunatics with histories of mental illness from easily buying rifles and handguns


Lunatics with histories of mental illnesses are already barred from buying guns by law. The loophole isn't one that can be stopped by more laws, since anyone can get a gun regardless of laws. Only law abiding citizens are hurt by Obama's pipe dream of an unarmed America.
And Obama the king lunatic who has hundreds of guns guarding him would never give his up, and remember when he sheds a fake tear for a child victim of gun crimes, he has already taken hundreds of lives of children by using drones on them and he didn't cry any tears then.
That you support a child serial killer like president Obama is a lot more scary than some old guy with PTSD running around. Obama has all the psychos beat by a long shot in mass murders, and yet here you are defending that walking douche water.



posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: muse7

I think you're missing the point that lunatics with mental illness will always find a way to get their hands on firearms. Restrictive laws only serve to prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves from said lunatics.



posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra
If we didn't have criminals, we wouldn't need laws.





posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

Amen, I did the same, fell for the hope and change back in 2008, what a fiasco, right after he got elected I knew he was a good for nothing.



posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   

a reply to: reldra

Obama Town Hall: Obama Rips Gun Control Fiction


...and creates a dozen new fictions.




posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: darkwingduck
a reply to: reldra He came right out and called for gun control, and would not call it what it was. And you have never seen him "not like" the NRA? What planet have you been living on?


Wait a second, you're against gun control? I think every sane person in the world is against at least some form of gun ownership.

Or should every convicted felon or legally suspected terrorist be allowed to legally buy unlimited guns & types of guns? Or what about shoulder fire rockets and bazookas?


Anyone, ESPECIALLY terrorists and felons can get anything they wish to get, and no law can stop them. Yes, including bazookas and even a stinger. If you gots the bucks!
And I say especially terrorists and (career) felons, because they will know someone who can get those things for them. See how that works?
No law can stop that.
To answer your question "should every convict or terrorist be allowed to buy any weapon" They already ARE NOT allowed! Did that stop one? NO No NO! DUH...

And why would you think a felon or a terrorist require legality before they would do something? I can see you don't understand how the world works yet, but hang in there little one, you will reach it someday (maybe)..



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join