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: 46
88
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin




You second amendment advocates have blood on your hands.


What a joke.

I'm pro 2nd and I will sleep just fine tonight.


You'll sleep well if someone blows your brains out with a SA-50.

Listen, I don't mind people owning rifles to hunt game or to use a sidearm to protect your family, that's cool. But the easy access to military grade weapons is worrying. They say this guy is mentally unhinged so how did he get his hands on the weapons?

Think very hard because those poor folk could've been your family members.

edit on 8-11-2017 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-11-2017 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie




You'll sleep well if someone blows your brains out with a SA-50.


Name ONE mass shooting where that was used.

We will be waiting.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

What did he have that was "military grade"? And what made it such?



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

What did he have that was "military grade"? And what made it such?


Because it was black and looked scary.

I think the anti gunners are closet racists.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie




They say this guy is mentally unhinged so how did he get his hands on the weapons?



The laws that would prevent him from legally buying weapons is already on the books.

Government bureaucratic negligence, failure to properly follow up on required paperwork by some clerk behind a desk, will probably be found to be the reason he was able to purchase the weapons.

We need better clerical government/military supervision!



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

What did he have that was "military grade"? And what made it such?


Because it was black and looked scary.

I think the anti gunners are closet racists.


I think many anti gun people just don't know guns. I don't know guns at all, but my husband does. We had a wooden stock (don't know if that's the right word), that he took slightly apart to change to black. Wood - not scary. Black - scarier.
The black changeover only made the gun much lighter in weight.

Never fear the gun. Just the person holding it, if they aren't right in the head.

Sad that the extent of the domestic violence and general nuttery did not get this shooter on a proper list.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: snowspirit




I think many anti gun people just don't know guns.


They truly don't.

They don't even bother to read existing laws either.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 12:35 PM
link   
A brit talking about gun control?
Rich...
As a male you don't hear me talking about gynecology do you?

Op needs a life...



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin




You second amendment advocates have blood on your hands.


What a joke.

I'm pro 2nd and I will sleep just fine tonight.

Listen, I don't mind people owning rifles to hunt game or to use a sidearm to protect your family, that's cool. But the easy access to military grade weapons is worrying. They say this guy is mentally unhinged so how did he get his hands on the weapons?

Think very hard because those poor folk could've been your family members.

Civilians don't have access to military grade weapons. Where do you get the impression that I can go down to the gun store and but a military issue fully automatic M-4?

You do realize the shooter was taken down by a law abiding citizen with a similar gun? If the citizen was restricted to a handgun and confronted this monster he would have lost and more would have died.

Why don't you all talk about the one correlating factor with these shooters? The fact they all take psychotropics. But you all use emotions to try and manipulate peoples minds to suit your own agenda...

I have family in Texas...
And I'm still pro gun...



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie




You'll sleep well if someone blows your brains out with a SA-50.


I stopped reading after this crap.

i really don't care what you or anyone has to say about my rights, I sleep very well at night.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   
what a weenie title on a thread....i must say

metro men unite....be a weeny.....looking for better than we're seeing on A T S here



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It actually saddens me to have to write "this" reply to this posting. I had thought much of what I am about to say was just normal thought to most people.

I believe the writers of the Constitution, did so with the best of intentions , in an effort to set forth the formation of a governmental body which would be answerable to the general population and citizenry of a nation, rather than one which ruled over them as had been the practice of every government up until that time. They went about dividing and outlining the different sections of the governmental body as well as their duties in a way which made it far less likely for a single person, of small group of persons, to successfully usurp the entire government and turn the nation into one which they had just thrown out. Along with the establishment of the duties of the government, they also saw fit to enumerate and publish the "rights" of the citizens of the nation so everyone could know and easily understand how the individual was to fit within the overall structure of the new country.
The first ten amendments,or the "Bill of Rights", to this Constitution are those rights which they believed every person should be granted at birth and the government could not infringe upon or take away without due process of the law. At the same time they enumerated these rights they should have spelled out the inherent responsibilities which goes along with them.
A part of the first amendment tells us we have the freedom of speech. But it does not tell us about the discord which can be generated by those who willfully abuse this freedom and/or those who will take words out of context to cast others in a bad light for their own agendas.
The second amendment, which has become such a hot button issue of late, was written to establish the idea of a defense against the very government which they had established. Again they failed to say anything about the responsibility of owning and using whatever type of "arms" a person chooses to keep.
There are other rights listed but these seem to be the ones most people are having problems with today.

I think it has been largely left out of the discussion about the responsibility which goes along with these rights as well as the underlying concept of a bit of personal responsibility which everyone of us have toward our fellow citizens. It is when these responsibilities are not addressed that the need of a "nanny state" becomes necessary. For there are those who choose to not have these rights nor the freedom which they bring.
edit on 8-11-2017 by tinymind because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Nonsense, I advocate the LEGAL use of guns. That means not using them on anyone who doesn't intend
imediate harm to yourself or others.

Taking rights away from those responsible enough to maintain the legality for those who can't is a more dangerous mentality than those who want to keep what they have earned in good faith.

The same government that people want us to hand over any miniscule rights we still obtain to, their ineptitude is what allowed this to happen.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 07:32 PM
link   
americanmilitarynews.com... &utm_medium=facebook

A second amendment advocate (obviously) responsible for shooting the killer. He has some good blood on his hands.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: 00018GE
I could care less what someone from England thinks about our gun laws. That was settled between 1775 and 1783.


And settled again for good in 1812 with a swift kick in the ass in 1813 from Old Hickory in New Orleans. Himself a youth abused by the British, Gen Andrew Jackson had it right, keep the bastards out of the Mississippi river and teach them how to run home or suffer the consequences.


edit on 8-11-2017 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Thecakeisalie




You'll sleep well if someone blows your brains out with a SA-50.


Name ONE mass shooting where that was used.

We will be waiting.


Paris France cause the Jihadi's can get ANY weapon, maybe idk?



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: tinymind
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It actually saddens me to have to write "this" reply to this posting. I had thought much of what I am about to say was just normal thought to most people.

I believe the writers of the Constitution, did so with the best of intentions , in an effort to set forth the formation of a governmental body which would be answerable to the general population and citizenry of a nation, rather than one which ruled over them as had been the practice of every government up until that time. They went about dividing and outlining the different sections of the governmental body as well as their duties in a way which made it far less likely for a single person, of small group of persons, to successfully usurp the entire government and turn the nation into one which they had just thrown out. Along with the establishment of the duties of the government, they also saw fit to enumerate and publish the "rights" of the citizens of the nation so everyone could know and easily understand how the individual was to fit within the overall structure of the new country.
The first ten amendments,or the "Bill of Rights", to this Constitution are those rights which they believed every person should be granted at birth and the government could not infringe upon or take away without due process of the law. At the same time they enumerated these rights they should have spelled out the inherent responsibilities which goes along with them.
A part of the first amendment tells us we have the freedom of speech. But it does not tell us about the discord which can be generated by those who willfully abuse this freedom and/or those who will take words out of context to cast others in a bad light for their own agendas.
The second amendment, which has become such a hot button issue of late, was written to establish the idea of a defense against the very government which they had established. Again they failed to say anything about the responsibility of owning and using whatever type of "arms" a person chooses to keep.
There are other rights listed but these seem to be the ones most people are having problems with today.

I think it has been largely left out of the discussion about the responsibility which goes along with these rights as well as the underlying concept of a bit of personal responsibility which everyone of us have toward our fellow citizens. It is when these responsibilities are not addressed that the need of a "nanny state" becomes necessary. For there are those who choose to not have these rights nor the freedom which they bring.


Wow, well stated.

The fact of the matter is 'without due process' part is covered when the guy is a certifiable nut case who beats women. He forfeited his right for a little 'pressure release'. We have found that there are idiots in the military, and God forbid that never happened (sarc), who need to be reprimanded. That normally is a superior directly over the grunt who made the blunder and the one blundering but not the General over the Division. Never the top guy unless it was his subordinate. That is what I observed while serving.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 08:09 PM
link   

edit on 8-11-2017 by jacquesdarippa because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: jacquesdarippa

Here's a #ty argument:

We're not Japan and we have a 2nd Amendment.

Their culture is completely different from ours.

It is an ancient warrior culture where discipline is valued.

It is, in fact, the most law abiding nation on Earth.

With the highest suicide rate too.

It's apples to basketballs.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin




You second amendment advocates have blood on your hands.


What a joke.

I'm pro 2nd and I will sleep just fine tonight.


Yup and thats exactly the kind of views I am talking about.

Your inability to see past your own selfish desire to own a gun means that nothing will change, these mass shootings will just continue.

Is your "right" to own a gun really so important that you would defend it over preventing a man with a gun walking into a school and killing kids?

AMENDMENTS ELIMINATED BY THE PATRIOT ACT

1st.Freedom of religion, assembly, and the press.

4th.Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures.

5th.No person to be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.

6th.Right to a speedy public trial by an impartial jury, right to be informed of the facts of the accusation, right to confront witnesses and have the assistance of counsel.

8th.No excessive bail or cruel and unusual punishment shall be imposed.

14th.All persons (citizens and non citizens) within the US are entitled to due process and the equal protection of the laws.
40-50 million citizens would view such a law as treason.
Ten percent of those, 40-50 million, would support a rebellion in some way, and maybe 40,000-100,000 Americans would form small independently-functioning active resistance cells, or become lone-wolves.

"Your inability to see past your own selfish desire" will be the blood on your hands when they try try to confiscate the guns of tens of millions of law-abiding, freedom-loving citizens. I just hope you’ve seriously considered the consequences.



new topics

top topics



 
88
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join