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.

 

Challenge to those in favor of more gun control.

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 09:58 AM
link   




posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo

Doesn't make it right.



All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


www.law.cornell.edu...

That GD piece of paper makes it clear it's not.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo

Doesn't make it right.



All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


www.law.cornell.edu...

That GD piece of paper makes it clear it's not.



PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!!!!

Start a thread stating you want gun stores to start selling grenades, RPGs, fully armed tanks, fully kitted fighter jets, etc...

Please do it!

After you do that, write your Congressman and tell him to allow you access to these weapons, state that he/she is infringing on your 2nd amendment rights.

Tell us how many people laugh at you by trying to prove that point.

The way YOU interpret it, your 2nd amendment rights have already been infringed upon. Why don't you do something useful and go get your rights back. Seriously, I'd pay $100 to watch a mini-documentary as Neo96 goes to his state house and tries to petition his/her representatives for his right to possess a grenade. The comedy really writes itself.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo


Any idea why mass causality shootings just happened to drop during the ban?


I didn't say there was zero fluctuation, I said there was little to no statistical impact. If you look at the years leading up to the ban, there weren't that many incidents to begin with, and there weren't that many casualties to begin with.

In the 12 years leading up to the ban, there were two years with zero incidents. There were seven years that totaled more than 20 casualties. In the ten years the ban was in place, there were zero years with no incidents at all, and the biggest school shooting aside from one 20 years before this dataset (until VT, which was done with two handguns and thus wouldn't have been stopped by the AWB anyway) took place squarely in the middle of the ban. That was in the year following the second biggest school shooting within this dataset up to that point.

So...yes, there was a small, statistically insignificant change in incidents, but the ban sure as hell wasn't the cure people try to make it out to be.
edit on 16-2-2018 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo




Start a thread stating you want gun stores to start selling grenades, RPGs, fully armed tanks, fully kitted fighter jets, etc...


Sure thing.

It will be located next to the weed stores.

I only accept cryptocurrency.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo

So you openly admit you want to ban guns except for the ones you'd allow us to have.




posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo


Any idea why mass causality shootings just happened to drop during the ban?


I didn't say there was zero fluctuation, I said there was little to no statistical impact. If you look at the years leading up to the ban, there weren't that many incidents to begin with, and there weren't that many casualties to begin with.

In the 12 years leading up to the ban, there were two years with zero incidents. There were seven years that totaled more than 20 casualties. In the ten years the ban was in place, there were zero years with no incidents at all, and the biggest school shooting in history (until VT, which was done with two handguns and thus wouldn't have been stopped by the AWB anyway) took place squarely in the middle of the ban. That was in the year following the second biggest school shooting up to that point.

So...yes, there was a small, statistically insignificant change in incidents, but the ban sure as hell wasn't the cure people try to make it out to be.


I'm not making it out to be a cure-all. Was the UT Tower shooting not a greater (casualty) event then Columbine.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo

So you openly admit you want to ban guns except for the ones you'd allow us to have.





And you openly admit you're okay with SOME banned weapons, just not the ones you deem unnecessary to ban.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo




Start a thread stating you want gun stores to start selling grenades, RPGs, fully armed tanks, fully kitted fighter jets, etc...


Sure thing.

It will be located next to the weed stores.

I only accept cryptocurrency.


This would have been funny if you were a funny person.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

No no no, you misunderstand.

Nobody is saying ban guns. They're saying ban guns.

Totally different.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo


Any idea why mass causality shootings just happened to drop during the ban?


I didn't say there was zero fluctuation, I said there was little to no statistical impact. If you look at the years leading up to the ban, there weren't that many incidents to begin with, and there weren't that many casualties to begin with.

In the 12 years leading up to the ban, there were two years with zero incidents. There were seven years that totaled more than 20 casualties. In the ten years the ban was in place, there were zero years with no incidents at all, and the biggest school shooting in history (until VT, which was done with two handguns and thus wouldn't have been stopped by the AWB anyway) took place squarely in the middle of the ban. That was in the year following the second biggest school shooting up to that point.

So...yes, there was a small, statistically insignificant change in incidents, but the ban sure as hell wasn't the cure people try to make it out to be.


I'm not making it out to be a cure-all. Was the UT Tower shooting not a greater (casualty) event then Columbine.


I'm not the best at math, but I'm pretty positive 1966 isn't in the "twelve years leading up to the ban."



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: DrChandra
Just say "you have a point there" or debate it rather than attacking. For example, where in the article did it delve into the issue of a government being able to restrict YOUR constitutional rights without due process? Do we really want to get in a position where the government, regardless of who is in charge, can create "rules" that allow themselves to decide? Isn't that a dictatorship? Today its guns tomorrow its the 1st Amendment, the 4th Amendment, etc.. Its a slippery slope when you ask the government to solve a societal problem.

This is called a slippery slope fallacy.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: DBCowboy

No no no, you misunderstand.

Nobody is saying ban guns. They're saying ban guns.

Totally different.


Sorry.

You're right.

Because when you ban guns, magically, people who wanted to kill suddenly don't want to kill any more.

Because magic.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo




Start a thread stating you want gun stores to start selling grenades, RPGs, fully armed tanks, fully kitted fighter jets, etc...


Sure thing.

It will be located next to the weed stores.

I only accept cryptocurrency.


This would have been funny if you were a funny person.


Only to those with no sense of humor.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




Because when you ban guns, magically, people who wanted to kill suddenly don't want to kill any more.


If Gun Control worked.

Chicago would be Mayberry.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf

having to get someone to cosign or sponsor first time owners for assault type weapons could help a bit.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   
I'm just going to quote Bill Hicks here. (please understand the sarcasm)




There’s no connection between having a gun and shooting someone with it, and not having a gun and not shooting someone…



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Robot drones patroling schools.
Or ed-209 type robots or automated defence turrets in each classroom.
My bet is it will happen in 5 years.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Any so-called "background check" are illegal and unconstitutional, as they cannot cover subjects that the EU uses under MKULTRA effect and under the effect of other neurological weapons that induce violent behavior.

Moreover it appears we are again looking at a multiple shooter situation in Florida rather than a lone wolf student gone crazy.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Flanker86




Any so-called "background check" are illegal and unconstitutional, as they cannot cover subjects that the EU uses under MKULTRA effect and under the effect of other neurological weapons that induce violent behavior.


It is illegal.

And a thing they would not stand for the first and voting.

But since it's boom sticks they care not.

Lanza stole the one he used.

Cruz went through the background check and bought it legally.

There is no catch in place for what a person might do.
edit on 16-2-2018 by neo96 because: (no reason given)







 
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join