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.

 

Would you say that there are more/less/the same amount of gun laws than 10/20/30 years ago?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 11:35 AM
link   
And if we are honest with ourselves the real problem is people. We have a people suck problem.

I get why you feel how you do. You want to feel protected and don't trust anyone to do it but yourself. I totally get that.

There are so many variables and so much that can go wrong.

I always mention the article I read where 2 ladies are walking into wal mart. 1 has a gun in her purse and the other does not. Some dude snatched the purse from the lady without the gun and ran. The other last pulled hers and fired.

The problem is a person does not deserve to get shot in the back for stealing a purse. I also don't deserve to get shot cause the lady missed.

We have a people problem and there is no easy solution. I also feel we have a gun problem and gun culture problem.

Lots of strands on ole duders head




posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

He who sacrifices liberty for temporary security deserves neither.

Banning something is not a solution. We banned alcohol, it didn't stop it. We banned drugs, and now we have a huge problem still. How do you think banning guns will turn out?

The world is not a safe place; safety is an illusion. People feel the safest right before they die, typically.

Murder happens all over the world, China has a horrid knife/machete attacks on schools. I haven't heard them banning knives and such yet, have you?

Everyone has problems, we are all dealing with stuff in our heads. The problem is that we don't take the time to find out or talk with people like we used to. We're too busy posting our latest poop on facebook, or retweeting some non-sense from Hollywood to look up and see a sullen face and ask them how they are today, or even flash them a smile or investigate the expression.

A tweet won't save the world, but you could save a life with a smile and some genuine human compassion.

Guns have a place, in the right hands they counter the people who are sick in the head bent on mass murder. Too bad the places the mass murder happens are typically gun free zones where we're not allowed to carry.

Laws do not make anyone safer then they would be if people had mutual respect for each other and life in general. Anger, frustration, disrespect, disposable society mentality has been ruining this planet for 40+ years. Life is short, play hard slogans just make it that much cheaper.

I believe the pharmaceutical use in America exceeds any other place in the world. I blame the FDA, as they passed a law saying that things labelled a disease can only be treated by FDA approved drugs. Because life is short, we've come to expect an answer in a pill. Sad? Have a pill? Angry, have a pill? Fat? Have a pill, can't get it up? Have a pill! Quick fixes are not fixes, they are a catastrophe held in place with cheap scotch tape. Laws are feel-good measures, held in place with cheap scotch tape.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: notsure1

Change? Sure

From muskets to #ing uzis.
From horseback to flossing on Facebook

Yeah. Sure they saw that coming


These guys crossed oceans in sailboats to get away from real tyranny , then they beat those same fU%%#$S back to outright win our freedom.

On one hand you scream Trump is Hitler and the other you are ready for us to hand over our guns .

I want more guns now because Trump might be Hitler, You guys have it all backasswards...



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

I never said any of those things.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

Do you not agree that they would have wanted us to have the same weapons as our government, because we are the government?

Why else write it? I dont understand how you think now they are not relevant....



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: notsure1




I want more guns now because Trump might be Hitler, You guys have it all backasswards...


Irony abounds....I just bought another shotgun for protection from the right wing calling for revolution.

We're in a death spiral...

There's also a negative side.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: intrepid


Paris? or the 38 in Tunisia on the beach? It is not just an American problem so stop acting like it is.


One attack? I said frequency. Yes it IS an American problem.


I think it's a matter of firearms and violence being part of American culture and it doesn't help that the pro-2nd crowd in this country, in general, are irresponsible in how they discuss/approach the issue.


On this I agree with you, but I also understand why it is. Those who oppose the 2nd, use these shootings as fuel for their arguments, and for some odd reason, refuse to venture into any discussion that doesn't involve trying to limit-remove rights with guns. This issue has many moving parts and guns are only a small part of the whole. (IMHO)

Until people are willing to talk about the other aspects of this, parenting, mental health, family values, glorified killing culture, and many others I can't think of at the moment, it's hard to get the pro 2nd folks to be part of a one sided discussion.

I wish it were different.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Do you count the previous assault weapon ban failure as a law?



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude


Until people are willing to talk about the other aspects of this, parenting, mental health, family values, glorified killing culture, and many others I can't think of at the moment, it's hard to get the pro 2nd folks to be part of a one sided discussion.

I wish it were different.


To be honest these things have been discussed, at least here, with no give by either side. Merely defensive crap and obfuscation. I guess "discuss" is too strong a word when there's no understanding forthcoming by both sides of this equation.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: schuyler
The plain fact is that the cities where there are the strictest gun laws have far more shootings. For example, if you remove Chicago,, Detroit, Washington D.C., St. Louis, ad New Orleans from the murder statistics, The United States ranks 189th out of 193 countries in the world for murder. These five cities all have vert struct gun control laws.


Link please.


I think its from www.madeupstatistics.com.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Saiker
Access and morality have changed not the gun laws themselves. If a child or anyone unstable can reach a gun there's a problem. When a person is irresponsible in storing or selling a gun that is in violation of current gun laws they themselves should be charged with the crime that gun was involved in.

Guns are a huge responsibility and unfortunately parents, gun owners, and gun stores are failing at being responsible and have for many years thus the access by those that have problems and children are able to almost readily get their hands on them.

The solution is biometric trigger locks for every gun. Those found without a trigger lock are charged in the same manner as one would be charged with extreme negligence in a crime.


I don't disagree that gun owners bear a lot of responsibility to keep guns secure. Charge them after the fact, make a big deal in the media about "Irresponsible gun owner charged for not securing his weapon." But in order to enforce a law requiring owners to secure their guns, you infringe upon privacy rights in a totalitarian way. Should gun owners have to give up their 4th Amendment rights to exercise their 2nd?

Charging someone with a crime for not having a biometric lock is similiarly totalitarian. Should gun owners have to pay to put these devices on their existing guns? Isn't that akin to a poll tax?

Also, a self-defense situation is when you need a gun to work the most. Adding a level of complexity that can fail is counter to the point of carrying a firearm for defense.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

I'll bite. If there were no guns, then no one would die as a result of guns. That is obvious.

The problem is, Pandora's box has been opened, guns exist, and the knowledge of how to make them is well-distributed. How do you suppose we could have "no guns" again?

I'll shock you. If I could snap my fingers and make all guns everywhere disappear along with any chance of them existing again, I would. It wouldn't stop violence and killing though.

I can defend myself without a gun from everything but someone with one. Until criminals of all stripes have their guns taken from them, myself and a lot of other people will hang on to ours.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: intrepid


Paris? or the 38 in Tunisia on the beach? It is not just an American problem so stop acting like it is.


One attack? I said frequency. Yes it IS an American problem.


I think it's a matter of firearms and violence being part of American culture and it doesn't help that the pro-2nd crowd in this country, in general, are irresponsible in how they discuss/approach the issue.

No the pro 2nd crowd is tired of whiney little foreigners thinking they have a say in our laws..



Again, it is a matter of culture. I'm very pro-2nd and I still try to distance myself from the gun culture in this country. They are irresponsible, uneducated and perpetuate ignorance on many levels.


There is, of course, no data to back this assertion up. If anything the data shows the opposite. Given the vast number of guns and gun owners in the US, the comparatively tiny number of accidents every year would tend to lead one with an open mind to conclude the overwhelming majority of gun owners are educated and responsible with their firearms.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

Your logic is flawed, you are meaning if only CIVILIANS do not have guns and only the government, more people have been murdered throughout history by their OWN governments than anyone else in history, including in wars. Most recent history, Soviet Union, China, Germany, Cuba etc. SMH Don't even get me started on the criminals, and how they would give up their guns...

edit on 20/3/2018 by Grimmley because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: cynicalheathen
a reply to: TinySickTears

I'll bite. If there were no guns, then no one would die as a result of guns. That is obvious.

The problem is, Pandora's box has been opened, guns exist, and the knowledge of how to make them is well-distributed. How do you suppose we could have "no guns" again?

I'll shock you. If I could snap my fingers and make all guns everywhere disappear along with any chance of them existing again, I would. It wouldn't stop violence and killing though.

I can defend myself without a gun from everything but someone with one. Until criminals of all stripes have their guns taken from them, myself and a lot of other people will hang on to ours.


Not only that but there's no reason to think any of the people who are killed with guns wouldn't simply be killed by other means. Nobody makes the decision to commit murder because they have or can get a gun. They make that decision for other reasons, then they decide which weapon to use. Nobody in their right mind would seriously believe that someone decides to commit murder, can't get a gun, and then would change their mind and be like "well, I guess I don't really want to kill that person anymore".

This whole conversation about "what if there was no guns" also neglects to take into account defensive gun use. Guns aren't used exclusively for murder. Even lowball estimates for the number of defensive gun uses per year go into six figures. How many of those people would be dead if they didn't have a gun? There's no way to know, just like there's no way to know how many of those people murdered by a gun would still be alive. I'd venture the balance wouldn't be good for the gun control crowd though.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude



On this I agree with you, but I also understand why it is. Those who oppose the 2nd, use these shootings as fuel for their arguments, and for some odd reason, refuse to venture into any discussion that doesn't involve trying to limit-remove rights with guns. This issue has many moving parts and guns are only a small part of the whole. (IMHO)


I can agree with that.



Until people are willing to talk about the other aspects of this, parenting, mental health, family values, glorified killing culture, and many others I can't think of at the moment, it's hard to get the pro 2nd folks to be part of a one sided discussion.

I wish it were different.


I wish it were different as well. Those that position themselves as anti-2nd need to step back and take a clear, non-emotional look at this issue. It is easy to knee jerk after a shooting takes place and call for certain measures to be enacted, but that knee-jerk reaction does not necessarily facilitate the "right" responses.

Also, the pro-2nd folks need to do more than just scream "shall not be infringed".

Both sides are doing a horrible job of communicating and are not showing a willingness to discuss this like adults.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785



There is, of course, no data to back this assertion up. If anything the data shows the opposite. Given the vast number of guns and gun owners in the US, the comparatively tiny number of accidents every year would tend to lead one with an open mind to conclude the overwhelming majority of gun owners are educated and responsible with their firearms.


I was not referring to irresponsible handling of firearms. I was talking about the irresponsible way they talk about firearms, what they could do with them and the downright stupid things they say that do not help the pro-2nd crowd convince others that they are not crazy nutbags.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: network dude


Until people are willing to talk about the other aspects of this, parenting, mental health, family values, glorified killing culture, and many others I can't think of at the moment, it's hard to get the pro 2nd folks to be part of a one sided discussion.

I wish it were different.


To be honest these things have been discussed, at least here, with no give by either side. Merely defensive crap and obfuscation. I guess "discuss" is too strong a word when there's no understanding forthcoming by both sides of this equation.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

this one went fairly well. I learned a lot from it.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 03:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785



There is, of course, no data to back this assertion up. If anything the data shows the opposite. Given the vast number of guns and gun owners in the US, the comparatively tiny number of accidents every year would tend to lead one with an open mind to conclude the overwhelming majority of gun owners are educated and responsible with their firearms.


I was not referring to irresponsible handling of firearms. I was talking about the irresponsible way they talk about firearms, what they could do with them and the downright stupid things they say that do not help the pro-2nd crowd convince others that they are not crazy nutbags.



That statement could apply to people on both sides of the issue. That's why I spend so much time discussing this issue with people here and on social media. I correct pro-2A and pro-gun-control people if I see them saying something that's not true.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

I wish it were different as well. Those that position themselves as anti-2nd need to step back and take a clear, non-emotional look at this issue. It is easy to knee jerk after a shooting takes place and call for certain measures to be enacted, but that knee-jerk reaction does not necessarily facilitate the "right" responses.

Also, the pro-2nd folks need to do more than just scream "shall not be infringed".

Both sides are doing a horrible job of communicating and are not showing a willingness to discuss this like adults.


It will take someone dynamic to bring the two sides together. But as I said, when you hear the anti-2nd folks, or even the kids from Florida, nobody wants to talk about anything but gun laws. I'm very much a pro 2nd and think that something needs to change. At this point, I don't know what that might be, but there have been some good suggestions, that all seem to be shot down, since they aren't along the lines of "taking all gunz away".

Making schools have one entry and exit point with alarms on other doors and locked from inside. make the visitors have a holding area so if a shooter wanted to come in, the staff would have a chance to keep him out. Metal detectors in all schools. Find a way to make the mental health system in the US mildly functional. (it's no even close at the moment)

These were some simple suggestions that if followed, couldn't help but save lives. yet, they aren't being discussed at all.




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join