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.

 

Jeh Johnson: Gun control is now a matter of homeland security

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You are right you said Chicago which I equated in my mind with a gun free zone. I agree not all restrictions with guns work but my idea would work. What's the problem with a fingerprint gun lock?




posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: shredderofsouls

A felon already can not buy or own a weapon. Someone with known mental issues can not own or buy a weapon. These along with murder are already laws. So please oh superior one, tell me how more laws will fix this.



Well obviously the lenient laws in place are not working. Give a mandatory sentence to any criminal caught in possession of a gun is one I can think of.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls

originally posted by: atomish

How do you not see by making it more difficult for "those people" with these measures, you are making it more difficult on everyone?

Infringement is the word you are looking for. You are asking to infringe against all PEOPLE because SOME PEOPLE do bad things.


I have no criminal record, I am currently not under investigation , I have no ties to criminal activity and I have no mental health issues, so if I want a gun I can get one..even if the laws were stricter.

Now though, if I had any of those issue, I can still get a gun because people want it easy when they go for a gun and you see no issue with that.


So by your own admission you have no idea how the current law(s) already on the books work, but want to add more laws anyway?



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:14 AM
link   
a reply to: BoxFulder

How do you know your idea would work? Has the other restrictive measures worked?... Yet you want to put more, and then more, and then more, and then more restrictions on firearms?...

First of all, such a "lock" would make present weapons without such a lock illegal. So everyone would have to "get rid of their firearms probably through "gun buyback programs".

Second it would increase the price of guns a lot making it harder for cash strapped law abiding U.S. residents and citizens to be able to buy a firearm. Your idea would make guns a "privilege" that only those with more money can buy.

Firearms are already expensive, yet you want to increase their price?... What else do you want, an increase in price on bullets?... What about the 3d guns that can bypass such locks. You are going to also ban those printers? What would make it impossible for criminals to have such 3d printers and easily bypassing these "fingerprint locks" by making their own firearms?


edit on 15-6-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: BoxFulder
I turned my fingerprint reader off on my phone because I couldn't get in half the time. Now imagine a madman breaking down your door and your standing there going...wait let me try again.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Don't let them take them, America. Once they're gone you never get them back.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Okay you want nothing to change no laws period, you want wild west days. The system is broken when subhumans Like Mateen, Lanza, Roof and anyone else can get a gun like that . I'm not advocating for stricter laws and in s just one law. You are clearly not seeing any common sense approach to the problem. Are smartphone expensive? Does everyone pretty much have them? Why would such a basic technology drastically affect the price of a gun? Anyways if you don't have common sense laws at all radical real gun grabbers like Hillary Clinton will just impose her will on regular Americans.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:28 AM
link   
a reply to: BoxFulder

Making more laws on top of the many firearm laws is not common sense. Demonizing an inanimate object is not common sense. Criminals to not obey laws...that's why they are criminals. Guns don't kill people, humans do. The gun is the wrong boogeyman.

You do get an A for effort however. Looking for a solution is rarely praised as often as it should. As was stated earlier, making 99% of the firearm owning population jump through even more hoops....which they already do mind you will not keep a criminal from perpetrating criminal acts.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:30 AM
link   
There are people that make firearms, some that are machinists and they are never registered anywhere. Bottom line is France has the most restrictive laws on the planet and they smuggled in the weapons used in the terrorist attack in Paris. You will never stop a terrorist with a law or locks. They will use bombs, already illegal.

It makes no sense in a country with well over 300 million firearms already in circulation anyway. The only thing that can be done is to have a weapon to stop a terrorist. The SWAT team waited 3 HOURS to enter the club in Orlando. You are on your own without a weapon and liberals want to take you only means of self-defense away. Why do you suppose that is? What is the real motive for taking away firearms, which make no mistake is truly their end game goal.

People keep saying make it harder. Well, half the felons have guns within a short time of exiting prison. They are not allowed to own them period. And lock of any type can be defeated in a short amount of time in a shop. I suppose we should have DHS Surveillance cams in everyones shop with tools and metal lathes too huh? How do you suppose all those finger print locks are going to get installed on the 300 million+ firearms already in circulation. The number is ridiculous in itself. For so many years guns were brought back from wars, overseas, made by other than large manufacturers, diverted from the military, etc. I can't tell you how many machine guns went missing from the US Army while in it. Good luck with controlling what is already out in the world.

I will put it like this. How are all the drug laws working out for you with the war on drugs? Terrorists will get what they need. The US is surrounded by water and open borders. You can not stop them. All you can do is EQUALIZE them with allowing people to defend themselves. If one person had a .45 ACP and shot that guy MATEEN in the head as soon as he walked in and shot the first person we wouldn't have the problem of Orlando. However, no one had a gun and that is basically what liberals want. More victims. But, I believe there is a much more sinister plot behind wanting to take away guns and that is exactly why we had the 2nd amendment in the first place. It wasn't for hunting, it was for defending ourselves from tyranny and others that would harm us.


edit on 15/6/16 by spirit_horse because: typos



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

No it's no hoop to jump through than the regular background check there is a fingerprint sensor or inkpad where you stamp fingerprint on, you get approved its your gun and only your gun. You want to sell your gun to another legal gun owner just submit the new fingerprint. Ita not gonna be a hassle or impediment to the legal gun owner. Criminals in Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis etc yeah it will be a pain in the ass to them



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
Some Gun owners are disgusting, the fact that another killing spree has happened means nothing to them, just as long as they get theirs guns.

If your all legit and there is no reason to think your violent than what is the big deal if the government wants to make it harder for the insane and criminals to get guns?

I have no issue with people owning guns just as long they have had the training, have had a thorough background check and hopefully are mentally fit to own one.

Saw these on a meme and it is correct...



"gun don't kill people"

Well no sh*t

We want...mandatory safety courses for...PEOPLE, not guns.

We want...more thorough background checks of...PEOPLE, not guns.

We want...stricter negligence penalties imposed on...PEOPLE, guns.

If you're stupid enough to think activists are pi**ed at guns, you're too stupid to own one!


No thanks, I'll just stick to the 2nd Amendment which protects the rest. It's worked for 228 years. Your "modern" problems are yours to figure out....yeah, several other Amendments afford you that benefit. Without the 2nd, your free speech, for instance, would be obstructed by a barrel in your mouth. I don't know what pie in the sky world you think you live in, but you are so very wrong if you think because people are "connected", there isn't a "disconnect" for many around you. Remember that as you go skipping through the tulips without a care in the world.
edit on 15-6-2016 by EternalShadow because: add



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: BoxFulder
a reply to: JinMI

No it's no hoop to jump through than the regular background check there is a fingerprint sensor or inkpad where you stamp fingerprint on, you get approved its your gun and only your gun. You want to sell your gun to another legal gun owner just submit the new fingerprint. Ita not gonna be a hassle or impediment to the legal gun owner. Criminals in Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis etc yeah it will be a pain in the ass to them


Yeah, because criminals will convert over to your dumb a## system and be stopped in their endeavours...are you f#king mental or what?



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka
Don't let them take them, America. Once they're gone you never get them back.

They're not going anywhere.. It's all just wishful thinking of those that are out of touch with reality.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:58 AM
link   
a reply to: BoxFulder

You do realize a firearm is a very simple machanical device when you think of it and for good reason. The simplicity makes it reliable. Adding electronic device to firearms will only make them more prone to failure. But since they are pretty simple technology, anything electronic will be simple to defeat.
edit on 15-6-2016 by joemoe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: joemoe
a reply to: BoxFulder

You do realize a firearm is a very simple machanical device when you think of it and for good reason. The simplicity makes it reliable. Adding electronic device to firearms will only make them more prone to failure. But since they are pretty simple technology, anything electronic will be simple to defeat.


Bottom line, there isn't a leftist or liberal that will ever get a good nights sleep.
Honestly,... and I mean HONESTLY... do you think law abiding gun owners are going to upgrade as if it were Windows 10!!!???
When confronted by liberal BS just laugh and walk in the opposite direction. Best remedy I've found..
edit on 15-6-2016 by EternalShadow because: a correction



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 08:29 AM
link   
What else is new? The Obama administration has filled the government with left wing radicals and it is blatantly obvious that they're just openly abusing all this power. This is why the left did basically nothing to stop Bush from setting all this stuff up after 9/11. They knew they'd have a field day when they got a Democrat in there.

Most likely if there was any opposition at all to left wing ideology when Obama took over they have all but neutralized it. Look for the Democrats to win this election.
edit on 15-6-2016 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Americans are attacked, and the first thing the government does, is to disarm Americans.

Makes you wonder what side our government is on.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: BoxFulder
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
You are missing my point didn't say anything about gun free zones. That to me doesn't make sense either. Its a 2nd amendment right.....except for these areas exactly right dumb. Criminals will get guns anyways. That's why with fingerprint identifiers it will stop the black market trade of guns, put guns into rightful gun owners hands and make crime solving easier.


you sound like your heart is in the right place, but you head is not. How on Earth are all the guns that already exist going to be modified as you suggest? Here is a hint for you. Only the gun owners who are also law abiding citizens will be the ones bringing in their weapons to have your fingerprint attachment installed. And they aren't the ones that are going around killing people. The criminals will keep their weapons free of any add on's like that. So in effect, you would have harassed the wrong crowd, cost the taxpayers millions-billions, and done ZERO to help the situation as it is. I am sorry to be this blunt, but you need to rethink your idea.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
went off while I was cleaning it.
edit on 15-6-2016 by network dude because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: BoxFulder

There are at least 5 million AR type rifles in private ownership in this country. In 2014 for example, only 248 rifles were used to commit a homicide. That means 99.995% of these rifles were never used to murder someone. Are you saying you support criminalizing millions of law abiding citizens with an 'assault weapons' ban?

As far as background checks, Mateen was cleared to be an armed security guard working for a Government contractor. How much more stringent can you get for a background check?

I find it more problematic that the FBI was not able to get people like the Tsarnaevs, the Farooks, and Mateen, despite them being on their or intelligence agencies' radars.

I also find it sad that people like you advocate diminishing liberty and freedom as a response to terrorism.




top topics



 
24
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join