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.

 

Australian Comedian Jim Jefferies on Guns

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn
I got about 2/3 of the way through the first video, and that's all I could take.


Watch the rest of the 2 videos. He refutes everything you say in the rest of your post.




posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: butcherguy

come on BG, that's uncalled for.

You think the poster seems like a nice person?
What have I done to them?



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

I think you should rethink calling someone a mass murderer on ATS because you disagree on a point, it's pixels on a screen, chill out both of you lads.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties



Your "examples" are easily refuted when considering the purpose of them. None of them were designed with the specific purpose of killing. In fact they shouldn't even be called "guns" - more like non-lethal launchers.

My point was that there are guns that are not designed to kill.
What do you expect me to post, examples of guns that do???

Are you nuts, or what?
MY ORIGINAL POST.... FOR THOSE THAT CAN'T REMEMBER:



This statement is false. There are guns used to do things other than destroy. If you need me to do so, I will post references to guns that do not destroy.



edit on b000000302016-06-16T10:32:59-05:0010America/ChicagoThu, 16 Jun 2016 10:32:59 -05001000000016 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

You think the poster seems like a nice person?
What have I done to them?


You called me a mass murderer for simply asking you to post the proof you offered to post.

That's all I did to you. Ask for proof.

Wow. Just.......wow.


edit on 16/6/2016 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   


In Australia, we had the biggest massacre on earth, and the Australian government went: "That's it! NO MORE GUNS." And we all went, "Yeah, all right then, that seems fair enough, really."


I think this sums up the difference in the USA quite nicely.




Gun possession is seen, wrongly in my view and historically erroneously, as being some kind of fundamental right of the individual. The original intention was the right to maintain state militias. That's quite different, there was still this feeling growing out of the American Revolution that the naughty central government or some force would come and take away our rights

Thats John Howard in this interview:www.abc.net.au...

The men who wrote the Constitution of the USA fundamentally disagreed with John Howard. They stated that citizens of the USA do have an individual fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

The history and cultures of the USA and Australia are so different I would not expect Australians to understand.
The 2nd is no more or less important than the 1st or any of the other amendments. We would not let out government or any other take any of those rights.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: butcherguy

I think you should rethink calling someone a mass murderer on ATS because you disagree on a point, it's pixels on a screen, chill out both of you lads.

Maybe you can post some proof the I called the member a mass murderer.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: butcherguy

You think the poster seems like a nice person?
What have I done to them?


You called me a mass murderer for simply asking you to post the proof you offered to post.

That's all I did to you. Ask for proof.

Wow. Just.......wow.


Please post evidence that i called you a mass murderer.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

The history and cultures of the USA and Australia are so different I would not expect Australians to understand.
The 2nd is no more or less important than the 1st or any of the other amendments. We would not let out government or any other take any of those rights.



It's called an "Amendment" for a reason. It can be changed. Slavery used to part of your Constitution until common sense prevailed. As did Prohibition. They were removed.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Sigh~~~
Backpedaling and semantics, you meant it. Mass violence/mass murderer, No YYuge difference in your intent.

I'll leave you to it, no point in trying to save someone from themselves.
edit on 16-6-2016 by zazzafrazz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

Please post evidence that i called you a mass murderer.


Are you kidding? You HAVE to be kidding, no-one is that dense.


originally posted by: butcherguy

I am glad that they won't let you have a gun.
You seem like the type that would commit mass violence... like you are a mean person that likes to hurt others.



edit on 16/6/2016 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: butcherguy

Please post evidence that i called you a mass murderer.


Are you kidding? You HAVE to be kidding, no-one is that dense.


originally posted by: butcherguy

I am glad that they won't let you have a gun.
You seem like the type that would commit mass violence... like you are a mean person that likes to hurt others.


It was only on the last page mate. Nice try.

Would you like to highlight where I even typed the word 'MURDERER'?
Nice try.
Would you like to post evidence that I called you a mass murderer?
That is what you blamed me for doing.
You have yet to show where I did.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: butcherguy

Sigh~~~

I'll leave you to it, no point in trying to save someone from themselves.

Oh please, save me....

They are only pixels on a page... remember?



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

Would you like to highlight where I even typed the word 'MURDERER'?
Nice try.
Would you like to post evidence that I called you a mass murderer?
That is what you blamed me for doing.
You have yet to show where I did.


Now you're just trolling. Poor form.

I asked for proof, you stalled and stalled and stalled then when I again asked for proof you called me "the type that would commit mass violence... like you are a mean person that likes to hurt others." Simply for asking for proof.

Then when you DID finally post some examples, none of them are relevant to the topic as they are all non-lethal and not actually guns.

Then you accuse me of "making up" the fact you called me "the type that would commit mass violence... like you are a mean person that likes to hurt others.".

You really are a piece of work mate. Quit your ridiculous trolling.


edit on 16/6/2016 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: butcherguy

Sigh~~~

I'll leave you to it, no point in trying to save someone from themselves.

Since you bothered to edit.
Semantics work in court cases.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties



Then when you DID finally post some examples, none of them are relevant to the topic as they are all non-lethal and not actually guns.

I will post my original post about it... where I said not all guns are made to destroy.




This statement is false. There are guns used to do things other than destroy. If you need me to do so, I will post references to guns that do not destroy.

My point is to post examples of non lethal guns.
Are you drunk?



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Yes it can be changed.
The difference is the change in the USA would come from the citizens and not forced by the government.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn
I got about 2/3 of the way through the first video, and that's all I could take.


Watch the rest of the 2 videos. He refutes everything you say in the rest of your post.

I've watched all the anti-gun videos I can take. I've seen and read all of the arguments the anti-gun crowd has to offer. I've spent my time in these threads over the years. Seriously, I've tried to look at both sides of this debate with an open mind. After much thought, I respectfully disagree with those who think this is a step forward in social evolution.

But it really doesn't matter what I think. Disarming the U.S. citizenry IS going to happen. You folks will get what you want, and you'll find it doesn't stop there. Giving up rights is easy. Getting them back seldom happens.



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Kryties

I will post my original post about it... where I said not all guns are made to destroy.


Post some examples that ARE actually guns then, not glorified non-lethal launchers that somehow get called "guns".




My point is to post examples of non lethal guns.
Are you drunk?


Please do so then. None of those you have posted so far have anything to do with the kind we are talking about restricting. Again, they are glorified launchers of things like rope and nets. By all means, keep those. They aren't used to kill 50 people in a nightclub, or kill schoolchildren or Batman fans.

So, again. Some real examples please.

And no, I am not the apparent drunk one here. I didn't accuse others of being the type to commit mass violence simply because they asked for proof.



edit on 16/6/2016 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2016 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified

I've watched all the anti-gun videos I can take. I've seen and read all of the arguments the anti-gun crowd has to offer.


The topic of this thread is the 2 videos and any specific points you agree or disagree with - and why. If you refuse to watch the videos then we cannot have a discussion on any of those points.


I've spent my time in these threads over the years. Seriously, I've tried to look at both sides of this debate with an open mind. After much thought, I respectfully disagree with those who think this is a step forward in social evolution.

But it really doesn't matter what I think. Disarming the U.S. citizenry IS going to happen. You folks will get what you want, and you'll find it doesn't stop there. Giving up rights is easy. Getting them back seldom happens.


Yep. OK. Whatever. What does that have to do with the content of the 2 videos specifically?


edit on 16/6/2016 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join