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.

 

Another mass shooting - Here's the stance most people seem to have.

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 10:56 PM
link   
So here's how it is. Most people's stance that talk about this seem to be about the same.

They either lean back really far, or lean forward really far, and shove their head right up their ass.

They keep this stance for a while and it's quite frustrating for everyone. Nothing gets done because everyone has their head up their ass.

Yup.

Keep real ATS.

Deadlyhope




posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

now i know why it smells like # in here.



posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 11:05 PM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope




posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: imsoconfused

I suppose this might happen as well! Thank you for the accurate picture.


+5 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

My biggest concern is that this hideous attack will also be used to further more laws, less freedom and rampant spying by the Government. I can't believe some of the things I hear from both the right and the left about how they are going to deal with this issue. The only thing I am sure is going to happen is we will become less free and for that reason the terrorists have already won.



posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 11:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

This is partisan.

No grieving for the dead, or the families that experienced loss, nope.

This needs to be political. This needs to be about some agenda, some conversative or liberal or progressive stance.

And the media and politicians know this, and play people like fiddles.

Hence my OP.

Cheers, Metallicus.



posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

The 'we' shouldn't have to suffer because of the 'them' that want to take over our countries for their beliefs. Most arrive with zilch to contribute except often dodgy paperwork and from experience over here certainly dodgy qualifications. Yet our politicians turn a blind eye.

Its actually the 'them' only and they need to be told if you don't police yourselves and stop this you will all be told to leave because your presence threatens our society and lifestyles.

That would certainly work and it needs honesty and people who value our cultures to enact this into law. Irritatingly in the UK the government seems to think that new estates for these immigrants should be provided in some places, so they all collect together rather than split them up and integrate them immediately. This only provides ghettos and protection for the people who radicalise idiots and also ensures these areas are ruled by sharia instead of the law of the land. Far harder to police and a nasty breeding ground for future trouble.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Pulling this one , too raw
Peace
edit on 6/13/16 by Gothmog because: second thoughts



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

Well #uck me for leaning forward and then leaning back and then standing up then walking around to ponder a question. I don't really see a question or answer or really a statement proposed by your OP. People have their own mannerisms I guess, some people shy away fro subjects and some dive into the deep end to express their views. You have done neither and called attention to yourself and yet take no stance besides saying that all people besides yourself have their head up their ass, and yet you do not elaborate as to why your head is not up your own ass.

Look at everything that is prohibited by law, drugs, crime, murder, etc. Are any of those things still prevalent today? Yes, in every country. So if there was a ban on guns, guns will still exist and still be produced and sold, just for more money and under the table, just like any other forbidden asset. There is already a large deterant from carrying an illegal weapon and yet people still do, because they have their own f'd up mission and they will see it through if they are deranged enough to do so. That is regarding killing people. You have the right to kill people, every person is capable of it, but there is a punishment of your own life or imprisoned forever for doing so. That is the detractor. So if a person does not care about their own life, what is to stop them from ruining other's lives as well, even if a firearm was outlawed? Guns would still exist and it would a very large lucrative illegal market just the same as drug cartels and sex trafficking. Those still exist and yet to think that guns would disappear if they were banned...That is ludicrous.

I don;t really know your stance because you didn't provide it, you just called people blind/dumb ass hats and gave no reason why. So think about the problem and submit your solution in order for us to judge if you are one of that same group as well.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: deadlyhope

My biggest concern is that this hideous attack will also be used to further more laws, less freedom and rampant spying by the Government. I can't believe some of the things I hear from both the right and the left about how they are going to deal with this issue. The only thing I am sure is going to happen is we will become less free and for that reason the terrorists have already won.


No law would have stopped this from happening. The only thing I could have imagined stopping it is if there was an 8 pm curfew and public spaces could only hold 5 people at a time or something ridiculous. It's not going to happen. The Orlando shooter was supposedly on the FBI watch list and was still able to buy firearms, 3 just a few days before the crime. If it was illegal to go to a store and purchase them, then there would be a hundred million other guns he could scrounge up and pay top dollar for if they were illegal. And thinking about guns being illegal is hilarious, because I know police would still carry guns and secret service as well. So who is actually breaking the law and wearing a badge at the same time? Nazi's made it illegal for Jews to own guns and knives and bludgeoning objects several years before WW2, see where that got them? Just saying, outlawing something that can protect us for our own safety is idiotic. Would they ban a car and fireworks if I loaded the underside of my vehicle with explosive powder and filled the vehicle with ball bearings and then lit a cloth hanging from the gas tank in a populated area?

Car bombs are just as dangerous to a populace as guns, in America however they are not as common, and yet it could still happen, so when a car bomb kills 50 in another country, do people want to outlaw cars or gasoline? It is ridiculous. #hit happens and there is noo way to preven 1 looney from killing a bunch of people if that is what he intends on doing. However, if someone armed noticed that looney walking into a place with several firearms, they could have shot him a few times in his calves or shoulder or some non life threatening form and prevented it as well.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: deadlyhope

My biggest concern is that this hideous attack will also be used to further more laws, less freedom and rampant spying by the Government. I can't believe some of the things I hear from both the right and the left about how they are going to deal with this issue. The only thing I am sure is going to happen is we will become less free and for that reason the terrorists have already won.


Yes.. the terrorists have won because they made it harder for nut jobs to buy huns and kill scores of people. Tell christina Grimmie's parents that please. And the loved ones of the 50 from yesterday .




You know. ..we also have crazy nut jobs in the UK. but they don't go around shooting starlets and innocent people in clubs or cinemas. Why is that you think? After all, hand guns are available if you want to go look for them.. i guess them not being readily available is a good enough deterrent.

Crazy how it works huh?


I know you like your toys but people are dying. Please stop pretending this is about anything other than you guys like shooting guns.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Double post


edit on 13-6-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 01:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sometimes


Car bombs are just as dangerous to a populace as guns, in America however they are not as common, and yet it could still happen, so when a car bomb kills 50 in another country, do people want to outlaw cars or gasoline? It is ridiculous. #hit happens and there is noo way to preven 1 looney from killing a bunch of people if that is what he intends on doing. However, if someone armed noticed that looney walking into a place with several firearms, they could have shot him a few times in his calves or shoulder or some non life threatening form and prevented it as well.


Love this argument. It's so juvenile as to be embarrassing. Let me give you a hint why they don't ban some other things that can kill people, like cars.

The world relies on them. For transportation, commerce etc... the world's economy would grind to a halt.

Do you think banning guns would have the same effect? People need cars. Very few people need guns.


edit on 13-6-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Sorry. Posted wrong thread.
edit on 13-6-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 02:34 AM
link   
As Obama said in his speech about the matter, there will continue to be mass shootings, loss of many lives until extensive firearms restrictions come into place.
I do believe that these restrictions will occur next year when Hillary Clinton is in power.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 02:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: Sometimes


Car bombs are just as dangerous to a populace as guns, in America however they are not as common, and yet it could still happen, so when a car bomb kills 50 in another country, do people want to outlaw cars or gasoline? It is ridiculous. #hit happens and there is noo way to preven 1 looney from killing a bunch of people if that is what he intends on doing. However, if someone armed noticed that looney walking into a place with several firearms, they could have shot him a few times in his calves or shoulder or some non life threatening form and prevented it as well.


Love this argument. It's so juvenile as to be embarrassing. Let me give you a hint why they don't ban some other things that can kill people, like cars.

The world relies on them. For transportation, commerce etc... the world's economy would grind to a halt.

Do you think banning guns would have the same effect? People need cars. Very few people need guns.



The world relies on guns as well. How many countries have a military? How many countries are at war with one another? How much money do corporations profit from by being at war? How much does media profit about talking about violence? It goes on and on. What is a country that bans citizens from owning guns but allows its officials to carry guns?

You can ban guns all you want but that technology to make them won't go away and guns won't go away.

People driving cars kill more innocent civilians each year than people holding guns. People actually don't need cars to get from place to place, it is the oil industry and auto manufactorers that lead you to believe that. Ever sense automobiles were commonplace obesity and heart disease has also risen, any causation to that? Less walking and more sitting may be a factor. Then again electric street cars were common in the early 1900's and the oil companies made sure that those would be obsolete by buying out those businesses and trashing them, forcing people to buy cars if they wanted transportation.

All I am trying to say is that cars and guns do not kill people, it is the person that kills people by choice or by accident. If someone is driving a snowpow or semi truck through a crowd of 100's of people at 70 mph in front of a stadium or auditorium, is the snowplow/semi blamed? No, it is the person. If someone kills a bunch of people with a gun, is the gun blamed? Yes.

Can't wait for your retort. Neither should be banned as owning a gun and operating a vehicle are both privledges allowed by the state. Yet even if the state says that you can not operate a vehicle or own a gun, it is still easily available to do both.
edit on 13-6-2016 by Sometimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 02:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Iamnotadoctor
As Obama said in his speech about the matter, there will continue to be mass shootings, loss of many lives until extensive firearms restrictions come into place.
I do believe that these restrictions will occur next year when Hillary Clinton is in power.



What happens when you restict something? What happened during the prohibiton, was booze just eradicated and forgotten about? What drug is not commonplace event hough they are illegal? What crime is not common place even though it is illegal? If Obama couldn;t do it, I damn sure am positve Hillary won't as well. There are more guns than people in America, and once a restriction or banning occurs, 2/3 of people owning guns knows their value just increased by a multitude. So are you in favor of sending armed police to every house or property to search for guns? Or are you just hoping people will hand them over?



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

According to the shooter, the people he killed were not innocent in his viewpoint. Homosexuals are criminals according to Islam, that is why there are 11 countires that execute homosexuals in public space to prove a point. So why not question those countries for spreading a belief rather than condemn guns?



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 03:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: deadlyhope

My biggest concern is that this hideous attack will also be used to further more laws, less freedom and rampant spying by the Government. I can't believe some of the things I hear from both the right and the left about how they are going to deal with this issue. The only thing I am sure is going to happen is we will become less free and for that reason the terrorists have already won.


Yep. The whole thing with mass shootings still seems very fishy to me. Will never think anything else. Maybe it's my imagination and maybe it isn't but it's awfully damn convenient for certain people.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 04:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: Metallicus

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

This is partisan.

No grieving for the dead, or the families that experienced loss, nope.

This needs to be political. This needs to be about some agenda, some conversative or liberal or progressive stance.

And the media and politicians know this, and play people like fiddles.

Hence my OP.

Cheers, Metallicus.


Here on a discussion board we are civil. Even when we aren't civil, it's a civil discussion.

Obama already commented on further gun control issues.

This guy was going to be able to get the same guns he had no matter what.

The 14th amendment is the issue. Not gun laws.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join