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.

 

Has the 2nd ammendment been taken away in Oregon?

page: 4
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: bknapple32

This is going to get a lot of enforcement folks shot if allowed to remain on the books.




posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Is that a prediction, threat or internet tough guy talk?


originally posted by: face23785
1/3rd of all murders in the US don't involve a firearm. /quote]

Wow... was this statistic meant to support your argument?

Yeah... only 1/3rd of murders could be prevented by limiting the unnecessary ownership of guns. Idiot.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

That's a fact. Every attempt in this country to grab guns has resulted in people willing to retain their rights and their firearms through force, if needed. No different than defending your property from thieves, really.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

Pretty much a fact. People who are ordinary law abiding folks tend to react badly when people try to steal their stuff.

I know I do.

This law is, as should be obvious, even to the most staunch anti-gun advocate (notice I didn't say nut), such as yourself, unconstitutional. It'll get by the 9th circuit, but the Supreme's will not, it's to be most fervently hoped, allow it to stand.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

I'm not 100% certain this was directed at me because it looks like you screwed up the quote, so if it wasn't disregard the below:

Don't call me an idiot because you lack the intelligence to understand the point I was making. The point was that thousands of people in the US commit murder every year without a gun. The common denominator is they want to kill someone, not what weapon they use. No one decides they want to kill someone and then changes their mind if they can't get a gun. They will just do it another way. Don't be ridiculous.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: bknapple32

Before everybody blames the left for this, keep in mind this was a Republican who wrote the bill.




You beat me to it.

This bill is a piece of #, I agree. But in this case, it was a freaking Republican who pushed it.

Anyways, I disagree with the bill, because it is too open to abuse. I do not believe it should be up to a cop to call that. It should be brought before a panel of actual mental health professionals to decide.

Of course, if the person is an immidiete and clear threat, that's different. But from the sounds of this bill, a pissed off family member can get you unfairly black listed.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Agreed. And this law has gotten me to go out and purchase my first firearm. See- anythings possible for people with open minds



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Frankly, I expected a bit more outrage from ATS on this one.

Makes me wonder if people really want to discuss protecting their rights, or just repeat things they simply hear from the Trump administration...



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Yep, it was a Republican.

Which only shows just how alike the two, supposedly oh so different, parties actually are.

Matters not in the slightest which party brings forward such bills, or helps vote them into law, when the same things are accomplished... Yet another slice of the Constitution removed, granting more and more power to an already over-powered govt.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: bknapple32
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Agreed. And this law has gotten me to go out and purchase my first firearm. See- anythings possible for people with open minds


Welcome to the ranks. If you haven't already, I highly encourage you to take a NRA-sanctioned gun safety course. Some of the anti-gunners will snub their nose at that suggestion, but there's a reason why liberal states that do mandate safety courses mandate an NRA-certified one. When they're not trying to trick simpletons into easy donations and votes with their false rhetoric, they know the NRA is top-notch when it comes to gun safety.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: bknapple32

May I suggest signing up for safety courses, if you've never used firearms before? Safety before everything.

I see someone beat me to it...
edit on 8/25/2017 by seagull because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Yep, it was a Republican.

Which only shows just how alike the two, supposedly oh so different, parties actually are.

Matters not in the slightest which party brings forward such bills, or helps vote them into law, when the same things are accomplished... Yet another slice of the Constitution removed, granting more and more power to an already over-powered govt.


To you and to me, no. However, there is a huge contingent of this country so heavily polarized that the divisions in party are real enough to them, that they solely like to blame one part or the other for certain agendas. If they pulled their heads out of their asses long enough to take a look around, they would realize a whole different picture is playing out.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

The more voices for safety the better, as far as I'm concerned. The anti-gun extremists are probably confused as hell that the first 2 replies were suggestions to take a safety course instead of suggestions which militia to join.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Or some people just realize that just because someone is registered D or R doesn't mean they agree with every single position on that party's platform. Most people's politics are more complicated than that.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Im definitely taking a safety class. Thanks for the recommendation!!



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 02:31 PM
link   
well... this is one way to piss people off........

i wonder what will happen next......................................



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 02:31 PM
link   
I live in the UK and haven't really got an opinion on guns. Well I think guns are pretty dangerous and think society would be better without everyone and their dog having one, but it is basically an uninformed opinion.

That being said, in the US you guys have gun ownership protected in your bill of rights so just sneakily removing it seems like a bitch move.

Did these politicians who promoted this change campaign on this particular issue? I ask because they do this stuff all the time: Campaign on some issues then spend their time doing other stuff you absolutely would NOT have voted for if given the chance.

Politicians: They suck.




posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

There's already laws to address this. If there's enough evidence you can arrest them and charge them with conspiracy to commit murder. The real question is, if someone is absolutely determined to kill someone, and you take away his gun, is he really going to change his mind?

This is a similar mindset to the folks that think a kid hell bent on shooting up his school is gonna be scared of violating his state's law against guns in schools. If you're hell-bent on murder, no gun control law is gonna stop you.


I didn't say any law. I asked if you would take away their gun, if there were a legal way to do it.

As far as laws go, if laws were any sort of solution this country would be the safest place on earth....but it certainly is not. Conversely, our gun ownership rate and gun murder rates are pretty dang high. But there's no problem with that, right?



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

The only way there's a legal way to do it is if it's codified in a law. Otherwise you'd be violating their constitutional rights. So yeah, you are talking about a law, regardless of how you word it. Of course there's a problem with the high crime rate in this country, but access to guns isn't driving the crime. There's no data to support that, and it simply makes no sense. If you can find one case where someone committed a crime, and when they asked him why he did it he said "Because I own a gun." I'll give you a dollar.
edit on 25 8 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   
(b) A history of use, attempted use or threatened use of physical force by the respondent against another person;

The way i read this it can be used to take firearms from someone that uses a gun to protect them self from, a home invasion, assault, robbery, or a criminal trespass.
or while someone is making a lawful citizens arrests.
en.wikipedia.org...



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join