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.

 

Second Amendment Advocates Have Blood on Their Hands

page: 24
88
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Might as well show OP some support, GREAT THREAD, and from where we reside it certainly looks that way,

The UK suffered its last incident (not terror related) with the tragic Dunblane Massacre (prior to that it was Hungerford), gun laws were reigned in, and in general nobody was arsed, BUT the USA has gun culture ingrained into every one of its citizens, this prevents any unbiased approach, tragic events are used for political gain (by both sides). Other countries look to your movies which often use a shoot first approach ask questions later, this seems to filter down and influence certain people negatively.

If someone is spiraling out of control with their life it just seems too easy to then be armed and out of control.

We in the UK still suffer crime and terrible crime BUT the public are happy to take this balanced approach so not everyone can be easily armed, is it utopia, Hell NOOOO, should the USA at least try it.....maybe


I have often seen some response that after these events what USA needs is more guns, teachers armed, mall staff armed, apples and oranges time, if I have 1 broken toe would having more broken toes really fix any of them?



edit on 6-11-2017 by UpIsNowDown because: typo




posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Kurokage

Well, that's probably because the opening post was a condescending lecture that was both insulting and intended to shame people into agreement with his position. That's generally not a successful means of winning people over to your position.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Kryties




The liberty to go about my day, anywhere in my country, knowing that I am totally safe and that the likelihood of some nutjob with a gun coming to kill me is so low as to not worry about it.


Funny so can I.

In 47 years no one has ever shot any me acting like commancheros.


Odd, I do that every day as well. I guess I don't live in their fantasy shoot-em-up media hyped America?



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

The day an agent shows up to take my guns, is the day an agent is dead on the porch. There are tens of millions with this mindset. It's not happening. Move on.


They won’t send an agent to take your guns...

Likely, they’ll send many agents with bigger and better guns that you.


That tough macho man (come and take my gun from my cold dead hands) is a war you cant win


Because by the time they come and take your gun. You won't have any hands


edit on 6-11-2017 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Because your country seems to be going backwards with its policies and political system.
individual freedom is fine but not at the expense of everybody elses.


Curious what is "backwards"? The use of that terms insinuates that forwards is the only right way to go, and then further insinuates that not going forward is regression or something.

What if someone feels that backwards, as in "undoing damage caused by other politicians" is the appropriate direction?

See...this is a real issue. This insinuation of superiority is not going to create open dialogue. From my perspective, the UK went backwards when it outlawed firearms. After living for a thousand years under monarchs that had the populace disarmed, the UK slid back into that regime.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

That's why American politics and Hollywood have so much in common.

The land of make believe.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Kurokage


I don't know why you even bother trying to have a conversation with members from across the "pond" to be honest.


It's sad that the OP is what passes for "trying to have a conversation" in your country.

"You have blood on your hands" isn't much of a conversation starter in most civilized areas. Unless, y'know...the person being spoken to has just recently sustained a wound to the hand.


The idea behind everything I write is to make you think!

Think about it.

So long as there is a sizeable element of the voting electorate who strongly oppose any restriction on gun control there will be mass shootings. This is because you guys hold the keys to the offices of power, any politician who votes to say ban hand guns (just a example not a suggestion) is going to lose come the next election because the electorate will oppose it.

So long as this continues there will be mass shootings and nothing will change.

If however, you lot changed your minds and accepted that gun laws had to change and guns more strictly controlled then it would give your politicians the political will to start making changes.

Thats what this thread is about, not attacking me personally or me attacking you.

ohhhh and its also got sweet F.A to do with trucks or me being British.


The reason why we enjoy having that electorate power is directly because of the 2nd amendment. I do believe that we should have commonsense gun laws, I also believe we all should have the right to open carry everywhere in every state, visitor and resident alike.
edit on 6-11-2017 by starlitestarbright because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I am much more concerned of injury from drivers then from guns.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Kryties




The liberty to go about my day, anywhere in my country, knowing that I am totally safe and that the likelihood of some nutjob with a gun coming to kill me is so low as to not worry about it.


Funny so can I.

In 47 years no one has ever shot any me acting like commancheros.


Yet you still feel the need to have guns for "personal defence". If it was so safe there, why would you need them for this?



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: starlitestarbright

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Kurokage


I don't know why you even bother trying to have a conversation with members from across the "pond" to be honest.


It's sad that the OP is what passes for "trying to have a conversation" in your country.

"You have blood on your hands" isn't much of a conversation starter in most civilized areas. Unless, y'know...the person being spoken to has just recently sustained a wound to the hand.


The idea behind everything I write is to make you think!

Think about it.

So long as there is a sizeable element of the voting electorate who strongly oppose any restriction on gun control there will be mass shootings. This is because you guys hold the keys to the offices of power, any politician who votes to say ban hand guns (just a example not a suggestion) is going to lose come the next election because the electorate will oppose it.

So long as this continues there will be mass shootings and nothing will change.

If however, you lot changed your minds and accepted that gun laws had to change and guns more strictly controlled then it would give your politicians the political will to start making changes.

Thats what this thread is about, not attacking me personally or me attacking you.

ohhhh and its also got sweet F.A to do with trucks or me being British.


The reason why we enjoy having that electorate power is directly because of the 2nd amendment. I do believe that we should have commonsense gun laws, I also believe we all should have the right to open carry in every state, visitor or resident.


Its amazing how you seem to think that owning a gun makes you free.

I don't own a gun, I would never really want to or need to own a gun yet I am just as free as you.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Lol, there are at least three hundred armed people in my neighborhood. We'll take those goons with ease. You think they'll RPG our neighborhood? Waco only worked because it was one family. This would be the US declaring war on part of the US. And yes, we've got together and strategized just how we would do it if the day ever comes. The neighborhoods around ours have done similar things. Good luck feds. GOOD LUCK.

ETA: it would only take one neighborhood to stand up and the civil war would begin.
edit on 6-11-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: starlitestarbright

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Kurokage


I don't know why you even bother trying to have a conversation with members from across the "pond" to be honest.


It's sad that the OP is what passes for "trying to have a conversation" in your country.

"You have blood on your hands" isn't much of a conversation starter in most civilized areas. Unless, y'know...the person being spoken to has just recently sustained a wound to the hand.


The idea behind everything I write is to make you think!

Think about it.

So long as there is a sizeable element of the voting electorate who strongly oppose any restriction on gun control there will be mass shootings. This is because you guys hold the keys to the offices of power, any politician who votes to say ban hand guns (just a example not a suggestion) is going to lose come the next election because the electorate will oppose it.

So long as this continues there will be mass shootings and nothing will change.

If however, you lot changed your minds and accepted that gun laws had to change and guns more strictly controlled then it would give your politicians the political will to start making changes.

Thats what this thread is about, not attacking me personally or me attacking you.

ohhhh and its also got sweet F.A to do with trucks or me being British.


The reason why we enjoy having that electorate power is directly because of the 2nd amendment. I do believe that we should have commonsense gun laws, I also believe we all should have the right to open carry in every state, visitor or resident.


Its amazing how you seem to think that owning a gun makes you free.

I don't own a gun, I would never really want to or need to own a gun yet I am just as free as you.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

You don't have fire extinguishers in your home because you expect a fire.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   

edit on 6-11-2017 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Kryties




The liberty to go about my day, anywhere in my country, knowing that I am totally safe and that the likelihood of some nutjob with a gun coming to kill me is so low as to not worry about it.


Funny so can I.

In 47 years no one has ever shot any me acting like commancheros.


Yet you still feel the need to have guns for "personal defence". If it was so safe there, why would you need them for this?


Well I really don't have to explain a damn thing.

It's my right as well as every other American citizen.

End of story.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Actually, you're not. I could show up at your house with a gun and do terrible things to your family and there's nothing you can do about it but die. Now, if you had a gun, you would be free.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Kryties




The liberty to go about my day, anywhere in my country, knowing that I am totally safe and that the likelihood of some nutjob with a gun coming to kill me is so low as to not worry about it.


Funny so can I.

In 47 years no one has ever shot any me acting like commancheros.


Yet you still feel the need to have guns for "personal defence". If it was so safe there, why would you need them for this?




Wild animals.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Some people feel the need to defend Roe V Wade.

That has been responsible for the slaughter of MILLIONS of people.

Why isn't it banned ?

Why isn't their mental health screening ?

Since they have more blood on their hands than defenders of the second.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

From my perspective, the UK went backwards when it outlawed firearms. After living for a thousand years under monarchs that had the populace disarmed, the UK slid back into that regime.


What exactly do Americans think their guns are going to do against the US governments jets, tanks, bombs, missiles, laser weapons, sonic weapons, etc etc?

It's a genuine question, one that I've asked many Americans and can never seem to get a straight answer. If the whole "right to bear arms" is based on fighting "government tyranny" then exactly how do you defend against that kind of firepower with what comparatively amounts to peashooters?



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.




top topics



 
88
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join