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.

 

In the United States, Knives, Fists, and Feet are More Dangerous Than Rifles

page: 10
28
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
require gun owners to attend periodic "musters," in which they learn not only how to care for their weapons and how to aim and fire them, but when to use them, when not to use them, and how to apply military tactics in a crisis situation... in other words, to act as a civilian militia.


Well, there is some bit of logic I can semi-agree with. Except for the fact that you leave out the only way this is possible is with a gun registry of all law abiding gun owners. A registry that will exist solely for confiscation at a future date.

Sometimes society just has to accept a certain risk, especially small risks that hardly even register in statistics. 500 kills in 25 years which average out to only 20 deaths from mass shootings annualized just is not even a threat AT ALL.

Certainly not a number that can justify redefining or castrating or violating our second amendment. Perception.




posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
require gun owners to attend periodic "musters," in which they learn not only how to care for their weapons and how to aim and fire them, but when to use them, when not to use them, and how to apply military tactics in a crisis situation... in other words, to act as a civilian militia.


Well, there is some bit of logic I can semi-agree with. Except for the fact that you leave out the only way this is possible is with a gun registry of all law abiding gun owners. A registry that will exist solely for confiscation at a future date.

Sometimes society just has to accept a certain risk, especially small risks that hardly even register in statistics. 500 kills in 25 years which average out to only 20 deaths from mass shootings annualized just is not even a threat AT ALL.

Certainly not a number that can justify redefining or castrating or violating our second amendment. Perception.



posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist


Well, there is some bit of logic I can semi-agree with. Except for the fact that you leave out the only way this is possible is with a gun registry of all law abiding gun owners. A registry that will exist solely for confiscation at a future date.


And that is one of the NRA's poisonous lies. There are over 300,000,000 guns in the United States. If the federal government could act with unprecedented efficiency and confiscate one gun every second,twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, it would take nearly ten years to confiscate them all. Furthermore, the militias would be organized locally and not be obliged to co-operate with the central government if it would negatively impact the citizenry. That is one of the reasons why the Founders opted for a "well organized militia" rather than a standing professional army.


Sometimes society just has to accept a certain risk, especially small risks that hardly even register in statistics. 500 kills in 25 years which average out to only 20 deaths from mass shootings annualized just is not even a threat AT ALL.


I agree. Only a couple of thousand Americans have been killed by terrorism, and yet now Americans have to take their shoes off if they want to board a plane. Shameful.


Certainly not a number that can justify redefining or castrating or violating our second amendment. Perception.


You have been brainwashed by the NRA to believe that any attempt to create a well organized militia, or to limit the ability of criminals and madmen to obtain military grade weapons is a personal assault on your rights. Are you starting to see my point?
edit on 23-6-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

You parroted your script perfectly.


SM2

posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

A no fly /no buy list, while sounds good in theory, in practice violates the Constituion. There is no due process. The AG (loretta lynch) can just decide, oh, well I dont like that guy, lets put him on the list. and you dont even know you are on the list until you try to buy one, then boom, now you have to go thru the long drawn out expensive process to "prove yourself innocent" as Diane Feinstein has said . So that proposal is out, it violates the 2nd, 4th(depending on the particulars) and the 5th at the very least, possibly the first as well, again depending on the particulars of what landed you on the list.



posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SM2

I agree: a "no fly list" reeks of Chekism. We should eliminate it. On the other hand, if the Republicans refuse to abolish the "no fly" list, then it needs to be extended to gun sales as well.
edit on 23-6-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)


SM2

posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

i am not sure I agree with that. I do to a point, but the no fly list is not denying any constitutional right. It's just keeping you off an airplane.


edit to add....

I thought about that statement, and you are right, the no fly list should be done away with as well for American citizens, it does violate the 5th amendment.
edit on 31062 by SM2 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join