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.

 

Lesson on "Assault weapons".

page: 3
35
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

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

originally posted by: Hazardous1408



Just sayin'.


National Firearms Act 1934

Gun Control ACT 1968

CLintons Assault weapons ban 1993

Brady Handgun Prevention Act of 1993

FeinSteins Assault Weapon Ban 2013

Operation Choke point.

Just the FACTS.




posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Good post; I knew all that stuff.

Unfortunately, there's never going to be any agreement on the gun issue in the US for the plain and simple reason that "Disarmament" isn't on the table. You can explain this stuff to the pasty faced, lily livered liberals till the cows come home and they're still going to scream........"Its the Guns, Its the Guns, ban the guns, take away the guns!"

And the "rest of us" are simply going to respond............."Disarmament isn't on the table!"



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Come on liberals, chime in.. It's only facts.....they won't bite you...

Nope just crickets because it's not about the guns, it's about removing resistance to ideologies they assume are policies which they are hoping and pushing to become law. Law which subverts the very foundations and cultures that make this country great with a force of free people to be reckoned with.
Mass shootings are isolated incidents unless you are at war. Liberals have declared war on many freedoms and quite possibly, those displaced freedoms are fighting back in ways they didn't expect.

The ideologies and policies are creating the nut jobs who carry out these terrible deeds.
Just wait until the government can't or won't give anymore free handouts. They'll be begging for the very protections they're currently trying to destroy.

Excellent thread OP... but only those with common sense will appreciate it.
edit on 13-6-2016 by EternalShadow because: a correction



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
The worst part: the people making the laws don't have this basic, rudimentary firearms knowledge.

The 30.06 is probably among the deadliest rifles in anyones arsenal. They are common, among the most common for big game in the US, and can travel halfway to the Sun. Well, thats a bit of hyperbole....but they are an enormous round with an enormous range and velocity. I've hit a 120lb hog in the head and sent him helicoptering 10 feet from 150yards.

If people really knew what was actually more dangerous, they'd be storming the sticks with pitchforks demanding our 10 gauges.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

And its true.

We have failed, as conservatives, to make our case for individual liberty if all we do is find more ways to curtail it from the people we don't like(I'm using WE very loosely here).

The gay community is one of the most at-risk groups for hate crimes and violence in general and it should have been extremely easy to convince folks under threat to support the second amendment. But because we've spent decades marginalizing gay people as an abhorrent "Other" anything seen remotely as a conservative cause gets lumped in with all the other things we would otherwise have legitimacy on.

That said, we should NOT be banning ANY guns. Even more so as a response to Islamic terrorism. We're at war and we're considering disarming ourselves...How stupid is that? The AR15 is not the problem. It's the false sense of security and normalcy bias that is a problem. We refuse to accept the reality of the war already on our shores.

My wife and I both own similar weapons. I own an AK and she owns a 7.62x39 AR. We, like the 100 million others who own guns in this country, weren't responsible for the actions of a terrorist and it really boils my blood that gun owners and the NRA are being blamed for something ISIS did. What a backwards way of thinking. An external enemy attacks us and we place the blame on the very rights they'd take from us if they could.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   
The knee-jerk defense of guns designed for warfare after instances like this always shocks me.
People keep going on about "responsible gun owners", but there doesn't seem to be many of them out there. Truly responsible gun owners wouldn't have a problem with banning a weapon which can ONLY be used to murder masses of people.

There is absolutely no defense for this attitude, absolutely none.

If you are a responsible gun owner you would responsibly admit that a weapon like an AR-15 is NOT a practical weapon of any kind of sport, or any form of self defense.

It's just not, I don't care how people want to spin it, if gun owners want to make themselves look RESPONSIBLE, start taking some responsible steps to at last try to resolve this massive problem.

Just how many innocent people need to be murdered before you guys admit that your country has a massive problem of mass shootings, and something needs to at least BE ATTEMPTED.

Ironically, most of those who preach about gun rights are also those who scream about corporate money in government, go and check out how many Republicans have been paid off by the NRA.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013




If you are a responsible gun owner you would responsibly admit that a weapon like an AR-15 is NOT a practical weapon of any kind of sport, or any form of self defense.


What's your expertise in gun fights that you can make this statement and present it as fact?

How much do you know about the AR15 that wasn't fed to you by the liberal media?


edit on 13 6 16 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 05:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
The worst part: the people making the laws don't have this basic, rudimentary firearms knowledge.

The 30.06 is probably among the deadliest rifles in anyones arsenal. They are common, among the most common for big game in the US, and can travel halfway to the Sun. Well, thats a bit of hyperbole....but they are an enormous round with an enormous range and velocity. I've hit a 120lb hog in the head and sent him helicoptering 10 feet from 150yards.

If people really knew what was actually more dangerous, they'd be storming the sticks with pitchforks demanding our 10 gauges.


It is deadly, but even the smaller caliber are deadly when used properly.

I think the problem with people that want to control dangerous guns lies in the fact that if you know how to use a gun efficiently then any gun is a mass-killer.

If the gun control crowd ever realizes that I can do as much damage with a .22 as any of these terrorists do with an "assault" weapon. They will just jump to total gun restriction.

Ignorance breeds contempt.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
This argument about banning guns and gun phobia could just as easily be applied to Islamophobia and banning Muslims. I agree banning these guns is not the answer, just like banning an entire people based on religion is not the answer.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

I've learned to hate the word "Ban".

Banning people and things has NEVER solved a problem.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




We have failed, as conservatives, to make our case for individual liberty if all we do is find more ways to curtail it from the people we don't like(I'm using WE very loosely here).


No we haven't.

I seem to recall a guy named Cheney and his cohort that were elected to two terms, and having a daughter that was lesbian.

I won't disagree there being bad apples in the cart.

But hell the Orlando shooter was a registered democrat.

With 'friends' like those who needs enemies.

The LGBT community needs to re evaluate who their 'friends' are, and their 'enemies'.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

that is true. without recoil, acquiring a new target becomes far easier.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   
the velocity of the round is all that matters. High velocity rounds are not "civilian" rounds



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest



My old 'battle buddy' isn't black OR high velocity, but technically is an assault rifle. Sort of.
edit on 13-6-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest

What?



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I see it a bit differently neo.

From DADT to passing laws banning gay people from doing one thing or another.

It's amazing to me that some don't see why that would force the LGBT community over to the blue side of the isle.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: syrinx high priest

What?



LOL.

Essentially 'speed kills' not the caliber.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




I see it a bit differently neo.


I know, and that's fine.




From DADT to passing laws banning gay people from doing one thing or another.


They way I see it conservatives have over a century to make up before they get to the flip side of that coin.

Between 80 years of gun control. Over 100 years of financial regulations to keep them evil rich, and bankers in their place.




It's amazing to me that some don't see why that would force the LGBT community over to the blue side of the isle.


Everyone sees why.

They actually believe the propaganda.

edit on 13-6-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
It's amazing to me that some don't see why that would force the LGBT community over to the blue side of the isle.


"Hey, there's one of our new voting blocs that thinks you are an affront to their God, and they want to mercifully kill you. So our answer is, we're going to disarm you so you can't fight back." doesn't seem to be a lot more attractive to me. But then, I'm sort of having to interpolate, maybe an LGBT person would be delighted to be even more of a helpless target and I'm just projecting.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013
The knee-jerk defense of guns designed for warfare after instances like this always shocks me.
People keep going on about "responsible gun owners", but there doesn't seem to be many of them out there. Truly responsible gun owners wouldn't have a problem with banning a weapon which can ONLY be used to murder masses of people.

There is absolutely no defense for this attitude, absolutely none.

If you are a responsible gun owner you would responsibly admit that a weapon like an AR-15 is NOT a practical weapon of any kind of sport, or any form of self defense.

It's just not, I don't care how people want to spin it, if gun owners want to make themselves look RESPONSIBLE, start taking some responsible steps to at last try to resolve this massive problem.

Just how many innocent people need to be murdered before you guys admit that your country has a massive problem of mass shootings, and something needs to at least BE ATTEMPTED.

Ironically, most of those who preach about gun rights are also those who scream about corporate money in government, go and check out how many Republicans have been paid off by the NRA.


It's a shame all that typing was wasted. At least some were cleaver enough to see through the veil of secrecy in my OP.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join