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.

 

First Good Example for an Assault Rifle Ban???

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox


I was at work and my rifles in their safe.

So we're the rifles of millions of other Americans.

Why is it that we immediately jump to watering down the second amendment every time something like this happens.
Every right in our constitution is under attack and people regularly feel the need to help the rulers remove even more.




posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   
....AND it's ALSO the only way to COUNTER superior fire since I can't legally OWN an automatic rifle.
BUT only those WHO can USE one, get it.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Because politicians are so well known for doing exactly what they say they'll do, right? The people can vote all the politicians into office that claim they're for "common sense" gun control but it's still up to them to do it.

Initially you blamed people for not recognizing a problem with gun violence. That's not really true, so we'll disagree.

Then you blamed gun owners for not supporting restrictions on gun sales and ownership. That's definitively not true, so we'll disagree there as well.

Now you're blaming "the 85%" for not voting politicians into office that'll do something about gun violence that people can agree with. I don't claim to know how "the 85%" vote for every election, so I guess we'll have to put a pin in that point for now. But hey, at least we can agree that politicians aren't doing much to help.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: Edumakated

Semi or fully don't need that on the streets, and no!! I'm not afraid of guns,haven't had ma quals renewed since I left the Navy and that's on me, but we need smart thinking about this instead of this anything goes crap which the NRA is promoting now, they used to be good at this, before being a mouth piece for small arm manufacturers.


FYI, the NRA doesn't sell guns. I'm sure you can document some money trail between manufacturers and the NRA though, right?

Do you even know what a semi-auto is?

The NRA is an acknowledged authority on gun-safety. That's why some liberal states require NRA-certified gun safety courses before you can get your concealed carry permit. They know their rhetoric about the NRA is false when they're making laws, but when they're just fishing for votes they'll tell you anything.
edit on 2 10 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Reread what I said, nowhere did I mentioned they manufactured guns, but they seemed to be their spoke ppl at times, this was not always thus.
And yes I do know the difference.. Thank u.
edit on 2-10-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Gun debates simply do not work on ATS.

For most of the world looking in on this it is utter madness that gun laws are so lax in some states, 273 mass shootings in America this year.

Thats crazy, the number of gun deaths is way out of proportion, to the rest of the developed world looking in we can all see the problem.

ATS however attracts mostly right leaning individuals who are strongly of the view that they cannot protect the first amendment without the second amendment. Pro-Gun members also don't seem to always get that its not "gun-grabbing". we want its just sensible gun laws and stronger background checks, but the attitude a lot of the time is that more guns would actually mean less violence...... yeah.

But it is always important I think to remember that ATS really does not represent a fair segment of the population, we represent a very small group who mostly lean politically right and as such debates like gun-control never end very well.

Actually I would go as far as to say that trying to have a debate on guns is like going onto a Catholic forum and trying to debate the existence of god, you are not going to change any minds, all you are going to do is upset a bunch of people.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

I'm aware of what you said, and I addressed that. Can you cite any information that shows why the NRA would shill to help out gun manufacturers? Surely there must be some, if you're so sure about it.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Don't ALL you guys get tired of arguing the same thing, with the same words, all the time? What does it accomplish? I'd go nuts.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Every right in our constitution is under attack and people regularly feel the need to help the rulers remove even more.



True statement.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

All of this ignores other factors and assumes that availability of guns is the driver of gun violence. The statistics actually show no correlation between them.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Some of this discussion drives me nuts!

Define an "assault rifle"???

You can't. There is no such thing as a firearm which is deemed solely an 'assault rifle'. There is no one characteristic which defines an assault rifle over any other rifle. An assault rifle is any rifle used in an 'assault'. Nothing more, nothing less. A BB gun can be an assault rifle, as can a .600 Nitro Express...and everything in between.

The term "assault rifle" is a term invented by the anti-gun lobby in an attempt to ban firearms they deem to be dangerous (which is all of them). It is nothing more than an attempt to incrementally encroach on, and ban, firearms ownership in this country.

People often refer to an AR-15 as an assault rifle. They will even go as far as saying the "AR" is an abbreviation for "Assault Rifle" which is wholly incorrect. The "AR" actually stands for "Amalite Rifle", named after one of the namesakes of the original AR rifle.

Oh, and BTW...fully automatic firearms are not illegal. They are heavily regulated, but not illegal. They are regulated by the national firearms act put into place in 1986 under Reagan. No fully automatic firearm manufactured after 1986 is legal for a private citizen to possess. However, any fully automatic firearm produced prior to the NFA of '86 can be legally purchased (IF you can afford one). This is why they are so expensive, because there aren't many of them in circulation (anymore), and the laws of supply and demand weigh heavily in their market value today.

The events in Las Vegas last night are a horror and a tragedy. My heart goes out to all the victims. This heinous act was perpetrated by a sick and twisted piece of S#, not by a gun. A gun is just a tool. In the absence of a firearm, sick and twisted pieces of S# like Paddock will just find another tool to carry out their sinful acts.

So no...this is not a good example for an "assault rifle" ban, or any other kind of a ban. There is no such thing as an assault rifle. If people want to ban something, perhaps they should consider banning sick and twisted pieces of S# like Paddock and all others like him!




edit on 10/2/2017 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

Then you blamed gun owners for not supporting restrictions on gun sales and ownership. That's definitively not true, so we'll disagree there as well.



Your first point is valid, I will concede that from the article you linked.

However, no matter how you dress up the concept of the great majority of American's supporting gun restrictions, the fact remains that there is an ultimate limit to the restrictions that will be enacted. Sure, we can add background checks, limit sales, etc. That would have had no effect in this case though, since the shooter had no priors. As I said before, the net effect of everyone's concern is a feckless response that will not stem the tide of bloodshed. I imagine you can argue subjectively that the limiters are having some effect, but considering that we've been perpetually witnessing greater and greater carnage via these mass shootings (pulse nightclub, now this) and it has no indication its lessening, it would seem that the effects of regulation or restriction are not enough to reverse or even slow the trend. At this rate we should expect the record to be broken again within the next 12 months.

It find it remarkably telling that post '96 after Australia banned guns, they seemed to have stopped the mass shootings, which doesn't really jive with gun supporters argument that if you ban guns, only bad guys will have them. The guy that just broke the record was only a 'bad' guy because of this event.


edit on 40pm17fpmMon, 02 Oct 2017 12:41:40 -0500America/ChicagoMon, 02 Oct 2017 12:41:40 -0500 by Wayfarer because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Since AMERICA never really had a national mental heath system clearly defined, I wonder why you can't tell, we already are?



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

All of this ignores other factors and assumes that availability of guns is the driver of gun violence. The statistics actually show no correlation between them.


Dude like I said above, just like I am not about to walk on "Christianity.net" and start a posting about how the Bible is just a 6ht century Harry Potter book I am not going to debate that the 15,000 annual gun deaths might have something to do with the most relaxed gun laws in the developed world.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody


I situation where an assault rifle was specifically able to cause more damage than a conventional weapon.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox




A car doesn't kill 50 people and wounding 500..



On the evening of 14 July 2016, a 19 tonne cargo truck was deliberately driven into crowds of people celebrating Bastille Day on the Promenade des Anglais in Nice, France, resulting in the deaths of 86 people[2] and the injury of 458 others.[4]


2016 Nice Attack



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: netwarrior

Maybe try reading the OP before replying...



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

You shouldn't try to wade into that conversation since you seem unprepared to look at factors that might conflict with your pre-drawn conclusions. I encourage you to open your mind, don't just walk in and make oversimplified posts and then try to claim some false high ground like you don't want to discuss it.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

It was obviously full auto.. weather a flat out illegal gun or a legal one modified for full auto is the question.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: MisterSpock

Short answer..

Read the OP...



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join