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.

 

No Scalia no 2nd

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Well it was only a matter of time till this.........
www.thegatewaypundit.com...




While campaigning for her mother recently, Chelsea Clinton admitted that the left is planning to use the Supreme Court to enact greater gun control if a Democrat wins the presidency this fall.


I guess if you can't gain a majority in congress.....




“It matters to me that my mom also recognizes the role the Supreme Court has when it comes to gun control. With Justice Scalia on the bench, one of the few areas where the Court actually had an inconsistent record relates to gun control,” Clinton said. “Sometimes the Court upheld local and state gun control measures as being compliant with the Second Amendment and sometimes the Court struck them down.”


I really don't see how that kind of issue campaigning will help Hillary. The debate around the 2nd has become one of the powerful if not the most powerful wedge issue to drive voters to the polls, and not the voters Hillary needs to get elected. We won't be able to say Hillary didn't tell us gun control was coming if she does win.




posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

What about the lefties who own guns and think the second is one of the most necessary amendments? I do not think they will be after anyone's guns.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Just in time for another "mass shooting" in Ohio as well.........

somebody has their ducks in a row



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Isn't Bernie one of those type lefty guys?
I would wager we wont hear anything like this from his campaign.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

There is an extreme dislike of the 2nd Amendment by elements on the progressive left. They abhor freedoms and personal responsibilities and feel that government is the solution to everything.

Call them closet socialists, communists, but they are the enemy of freedom.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Bernie Sanders does not strike me as a man who wants to limit the freedoms of the common man to go about their business. Given that most of his campaign has been fought on the basis of stopping corruption, preventing ridiculous oil wars, and actually providing the representation that the people are supposed to have in affairs of state, rather than bowing to the needs of the few, monied interests, I doubt he has any intention of violating any of the fundamentals of the constitution, leave alone the sacred cow that is the second amendment.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I can see them putting a ban on "assault" style weapons for a limited time. But an all out ban? No way it would spark a revolution. In my state, we are already passing legislature to make any federal gun laws void in Arizona. So they can ban high capacity mags and assault style weapons all they want. My state and many others would just give the fed the bird. We Americans take the 2nd to heart. No matter what bills and laws they pass to impede on our freedom as long as we have our guns we still have a sense of security. Kinda like a plan D. They try to take that away and watch how quickly we start shooting.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: shooterbrody

Bernie Sanders does not strike me as a man who wants to limit the freedoms of the common man to go about their business. Given that most of his campaign has been fought on the basis of stopping corruption, preventing ridiculous oil wars, and actually providing the representation that the people are supposed to have in affairs of state, rather than bowing to the needs of the few, monied interests, I doubt he has any intention of violating any of the fundamentals of the constitution, leave alone the sacred cow that is the second amendment.

Bernie has already come out and said that he doesn't have any problem with banning assault weapons. Link to ATS Thread.

This goes against the Second Amendment.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit




What about the lefties who own guns and think the second is one of the most necessary amendments? I do not think they will be after anyone's guns.


Also What about the Gun and Ammo lobbying industry with deep pockets? Obama has been their best Salesmen using fear mongering.

IMO the GOP and the DNC are in tune with the goal when it comes to Guns: SELL ,SELL ,SELL.!!!!!!



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: shooterbrody

What about the lefties who own guns and think the second is one of the most necessary amendments? I do not think they will be after anyone's guns.


They do exist, but not in a great enough number to matter to the Lefty gun grabbers.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Let me put this another way.

If a whole bunch of Americans, the majority of Americans step up, protest, and make it known that their second amendment rights are something they value more than their lives, unlike every other candidate with even the slightest bit of an anti-gun stance, he is going to listen. You know why? Because his ego is not larger than his determination to see the people become the power.

It's about mandate. Where Hillary or Obama would carry on regardless if pushed, Bernie would take note, because he is not megalomaniacal in the same way as are most politicians. He wants the people to be involved in the democratic process, he wants input, he wants to hear about what you all want, and what is more, he wants to make it possible. If vast numbers of people tell Bernie "Listen, we all want to have a certain sense of security, but we would rather it was provided by way of better mental healthcare for those suffering mental malfunction, and more effective policing and justice systems that keep career offenders off the streets. Take the crazies away from the guns, not the guns away from the people." I have no doubt that he would get the message and do as he is asked. Why?

Because he believes in governance which represents the people, not unaccountable executive overreach.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit
I think he would sacrifice rights delineated in the Constitution for his socialist agenda.
As far as the argument that his socialism is 'democratic socialism', and somehow different, I am not buying it.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Mark my words, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that after this farcical election when Hilary is installed as President, the Leftists will work ceaselessly to seriously abridge the 2nd Amendment. They'll do it by banning ownership of weapons that can accomodate a magazine that holds more than 9 rounds; that will make ownership of 95% of the semi-automatic weapons illegal and no, there won't be any buy back.....turn them in or you get stiff federal prison sentences. They'll do it with a $1.00 a round tax on ammo and they'll do it by removing the protections of the gun manufacturers from lawsuits.

And so fair ATS'ers, the day is nigh when you'll find yourselves having to live in this country with no protections whatsoever from crime and violence.

Think about that when you turn on the evening news and hear the reports of home invasions.
And reports of drive by shootings.
And reports of violent rapes and murders.
And random assaults at the city park on the 4th of July celebration.

And if I were a cop, I'd be laughing up my sleeve at every call for help; I'd finish that last 6 donuts and add 15 minutes to the response time and I'd be thinking, "Yes America, you finally got what you deserved!"



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: PraetorianAZ

I wish you could provide a link to that legislation; Texas needs to adopt that as well..........before the whiny liberal creeps turn this state blue.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Well it was only a matter of time till this.........
www.thegatewaypundit.com...




While campaigning for her mother recently, Chelsea Clinton admitted that the left is planning to use the Supreme Court to enact greater gun control if a Democrat wins the presidency this fall.


I guess if you can't gain a majority in congress.....




“It matters to me that my mom also recognizes the role the Supreme Court has when it comes to gun control. With Justice Scalia on the bench, one of the few areas where the Court actually had an inconsistent record relates to gun control,” Clinton said. “Sometimes the Court upheld local and state gun control measures as being compliant with the Second Amendment and sometimes the Court struck them down.”


I really don't see how that kind of issue campaigning will help Hillary. The debate around the 2nd has become one of the powerful if not the most powerful wedge issue to drive voters to the polls, and not the voters Hillary needs to get elected. We won't be able to say Hillary didn't tell us gun control was coming if she does win.





No one is ever going to ban guns in America. It would be political suicide...exactly like if someone said they were going to abolish term limits and be president for life...

It's all scare tactics.

Who would even enforce a gun ban?

The army wouldn't do it.

Countless cops and sherrifs have said they won't...

There is literally no "police" body that would be willing to do the house to house fighting required to ban and remove guns from Americans...

The GOP has just been using this totally unrealistic scare tactic to talk poor white people into voting against their best intrests. Since they are who will need welfare, foodstamps and higher wages, from an increased min wage.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: shooterbrody

There is an extreme dislike of the 2nd Amendment by elements on the progressive left. They abhor freedoms and personal responsibilities and feel that government is the solution to everything.

Call them closet socialists, communists, but they are the enemy of freedom.



Republicans cheer for small government yet want to be involved in further geopolitical conflicts - and, as always, they want someone else to do it. Never do they buy their own plane ticket and pick up arms to fight IS/terrorism, they want the government to do it for them.

Republicans also want the government (POTUS) to force a sovereign nation to pay for a wall to keep said sovereign nation out.

For # sake, Donald Trump himself was in COMPLETE support of getting involved in Libya... how well did that work out?

As if it solely the fault of the left for these issues. Man - if Americans could go a single day - one 24-hour period - without treating politics like a hockey game in which one must rally behind a side/cause, and instead attempted to transcend partisan politics - imagine what could be accomplished.

Lol - but nah, "it's the damn Libcons fault!!!1!"



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: PraetorianAZ

I wish you could provide a link to that legislation; Texas needs to adopt that as well..........before the whiny liberal creeps turn this state blue.


Here is some info on it. Its called SB 1330

www.azleg.gov...

www.westernjournalism.com...

edit on 22-4-2016 by PraetorianAZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 12:15 PM
link   
This is ridiculous. Nobody wants to ban guns because they hate freedom, that's just asinine. They want guns banned because they have an extreme dislike watching children get gunned down in school shootings day after day.

On one extreme end of the spectrum you could argue the 2nd amendment gives us the right to bear arms (even a home made nuclear bomb lets say), which gives 1 person the ability to kill hundreds of thousands with the push of a button. If nuclear home-made bombs are against the 2nd, then where does the distinction lie? Is your freedom worth the death of children, and if so, how many children can die so that you can have guns?



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

They won't. Hillary's goal is to increase background checks and making gun manufacturers and sellers responsible for injuries. They are the only manufacturer in the US that cannot be sued.
There are tougher laws pertaining to water guns in the U.S..

www.hillaryclinton.com...
edit on 4222016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

There is an extreme dislike of people who kill children in this country too.
You can have your guns. We just don't want the crazy to have them.
You can own an arsenal (why I don't know but that's another thread).
When sellers and manufacturers fail to keep their product out of the hands of crazy then they need to be held responsible too.
Just like the bartender who serves an already drunk person another drink. If the drunk kills someone on the way home the bartender can be held liable.
business-law.lawyers.com...
edit on 4222016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join