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.

 

Trump Gets NRA Endorsement, Says He'll Ban Gun-Free Zones

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


originally posted by: Phage
Yea!

Visitors can take guns into the White House!

Theres plenty of people in government offices who are already armed...

There was a time when we "were allowed" to exercise our rights everywhere, even around our pubic servants.





posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

When did I say "Public"?

"An act to enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States of America to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the Attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes."

en.m.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
That is not the same. That was a fine from the justice department for discrimination. You want to compare 'gun free zones' to that?


It's an issue of Constitutionally guaranteed rights. Personally, I think the gay wedding case was far weaker and required massive manipulation of the law to ever carry water in the first place...



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: ketsuko

But they are not discriminating, it is any and everyone.

Isn't it the businesses right to decide what happens with their business?


You'd think that, but the die was cast recently to indicate that isn't the case.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: eisegesis




Trump’s new found love for the Second Amendment


Hasn't he carried for a very long time? He has a gun over his desk.

I believe what is necessary can be split in two here.

What is necessary for his protection and what is necessary for him to secure a rather large voter base. An individual is always their last line of defense and with Trump's assets, he would be foolish not to carry one. One of those "how do I work this thing", but "I'm better off with it than without it" kind of guys.

edit on 20-5-2016 by eisegesis because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

Everything about that speech was geared toward appealing to authoritarian personalities.

"we'll ban gun free zones."

In other words, "I'll make the people you don't like do what you want by taking away THEIR rights — for no reason other than the fact that you want me (because they're not harming you at all)."

Bunch of "so we don't have to be frightened" crap and even some "so you'll know whats going on in the schools and everywhere." Which is more dog-whistle triggering of authoritarian personalities. If that appeals to you, then you my friend are an authoritarian.

Of course, as President, he couldn't eradicate gun free zones either. It's overt pandering to anyone who isn't enthralled by his rhetoric.
edit on 2016-5-20 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: EternalShadow

Yes, and the majority of private businesses accommodate the public; therefore, they cannot *legally* discriminate.

Again, see the Civil Rights Act.

edit on 20-5-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Great idea! Start with the GOP convention. I dare ya, Mr. Trump.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Well good thing that wasn't my point. Just go point out how that line gets used all the time in other issues.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 07:28 PM
link   
everybody realizes (except for trump) there is a congress and a supreme court that's not going to take his crap. maybe trump will get rid of those too!......so he can make this country great again. yippee kai yea, Mf'er



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

So if you want them to be to able to dictate what they do, why do you want the gov go force them to do something?



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Liquesence

Well good thing that wasn't my point. Just go point out how that line gets used all the time in other issues.


That was part of my point.

I know *some* people here would be eager to jump all over it.


In essence, I was trying to prevent a derailing.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Sounds like another shill to me. You'd have to be mentally challenged to vote for Trump or Clinton. God damn what a waste of a vote. Guy makes $550 mil last year, you got 6 companies in the US holding a third of all the cash, and people are wondering why they don't have any money in their pockets. You're literally being slapped in the face and wallet daily and the guy who's pocketing the money is going to save you? The companies taking all the money need a break? You can't make this stuff up. It's retardation beyond retardation. Then they throw these bills at you about taxing business and all it does is f over the small businesses and keep the retards arguing. How about voting all these people out of office? That's real change. We don't need them.

They even set their own salaries and allow them to have jobs for life hahahaha. We let them do that. Come on people. Enough is enough.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Making gun ownership illegal will turn me into a criminal.

Nobody wants me on the wrong side of the law.

The words "shall not be infringed" are not very difficult to understand. Anything negatively affecting "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" is simply an infringement. Sounds like a violation of the Constitution to me.





edit on 2052016 by Snarl because: Added image



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Being tough on crime and supporting police is not mutually exclusive with gun rights.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   
the "outsider" is a fraud



Donald J. Trump Verified account
‏@realDonaldTrump

President Obama spoke for me and every American in his remarks in #Newtown Connecticut.

Retweets
2,427
Likes
1,200

11:21 AM - 17 Dec 2012


he's playing all of you

wake up



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 09:04 PM
link   



It's an issue of Constitutionally guaranteed rights. Personally, I think the gay wedding case was far weaker and required massive manipulation of the law to ever carry water in the first place...



I second this.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
Gimme guns, guns and nothing but guns and I'll show you the most peaceful place on Earth.


Dropping 100 nukes on every continent will net you the same peace. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 09:19 PM
link   
He can't ban private property owners from declaring their properties gun-free zones.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 09:42 PM
link   
I'll approve of the right to bear arms when it extends to all arms, not just guns. I refuse to support hypocrisy.

It's completely silly that carrying an AK-47 should be legal, while a sword is not.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join