It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Democrat Rep. Debbie Dingell To Introduce Gun Confiscation Legislation

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:33 AM
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Question. Does any conservative on this forum ever fact check a story before registering their outrage?

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:34 AM
I would like to see the police force who volunteers to go door to door to collect these fire arms they want to confiscate....
I know in the Southeast they are most likely going to have a fire fight at each door. Maybe they should start in California first... hopefully that 10 round magazine law slows the carnage....

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:43 AM

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: DBCowboy

Just rolled my eyes so far back I needed my husband to smack the back of my head to free them.

Sounds like domestic violence to me....You can PM me if you want some help/advice on how to deal with an abusive partner....

Not joking

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:04 AM
a reply to: GuidedKill

Sounds like you need help getting a sense of humor. And I have no suggested help for you.

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:42 AM
Democrat Rep. Debbie Dingell To Introduce Gun Confiscation Legislation

Ah the smell of anti gun nuts in the after noon.

Would bull snip smell as sweet?

Take the guns, and forget about due process!

Guilty until proven innocent.

That second amendment doesn't say what it says.

That fourth amendment doesn't say what it says.

That fifth amendment doesn't say what it says.

That sixth amendment doesn't say what it says.

That seventh amendment doesn't say what it says.

That fourthteenth amendment doesn't say what it says.

Sieg Heil you Fascist hoplophobes.

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 12:14 PM
a reply to: Sillyolme

I don't care how large a majority support "control," the Constitution was framed specifically to prevent government overreach AND tyranny of the masses.

You guys are the minority.

Not possible. If I was part of a minority I'd have liberals excusing every choice I make, trying to pay for my rent and food, sucking my ass, and coddling me in exchange for voting for them and for whatever propositions they tell me I'm supposed to be voting for every election cycle.

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 12:20 PM

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: GuidedKill

Sounds like you need help getting a sense of humor. And I have no suggested help for you.

Most abuse victims say their partner didn’t mean it or they were just playing. It’s the strangest thing but often victims of domestic violence defend their attackers, even some say they were hit out of love.

Sounds like a desperate situation I know but there is help for you.

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 01:29 PM
I seem to recall some media outlet published a list of CCW permit holders in a state a few years ago. Names and cities, if not the actual address. I wonder if some concerned anonymous citizen “that would never do something for an agenda” kept a copy to make “helpful” tips to local law enforcement should this thing pass?

No one is altering firearms policies. If you like your gun, you can keep your gun.

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 02:28 PM

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: GuidedKill

Sounds like you need help getting a sense of humor. And I have no suggested help for you.

Help is Always Close By


posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:16 PM
a reply to: dawnstar

Do you have a thought on the matter, or is it easier to let someone else do your thinking for you?

So, in response to the erudite response...

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 05:36 AM

How is what she is proposing bad in the case of mentally unstable or certifiably violent people not possessing firearms?

Because violent and unstable people are mostly conservative and a big part of Trump's base.

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 07:25 AM
a reply to: seagull

seems to me that while most posting on this thread has been discussion domestic violence (which I really didn't see mentioned in the linked article), I was thinking for myself and discussing another segment of the population that I believe this law is more aimed at.... the mentally unstable... or those suffering from dementia and the like.
And I remember a thread not that long ago, asking why us liberals never want to talk about mental illness and how it relates to these mass shootings.. well, this thread, along with that video, shows why it doesn't matter what we say about that.
nothing can be done till the crime is committed I guess, only by the time that happens we end up with a whole lot of needless deaths and injuries...
but I still wonder why my crazy great uncle was left alone in that house filled with bullet holes with his guns, terrified of the non-existent ghosts. this was years ago, and it's quite possible that the fact that his home was at that time kind of out in the boonies, so most of it went unnoticed. but still, the family knew, and there should have been someway, someone who could have intervened.
the world is a different place now, and hopefully someone this crazy would be taken care of in a humane way maybe, but then again, I have met a few crazy people out there, and I don't see them being taken care of.. so who knows.
you would probably have no gripes with the idea of taking the car keys away from someone when their sight becomes so bad they can't see the stop signs or their memory becomes so bad they can't find their way home from the corner store down the street... it would be not only for their protection, but for societies.
so why stand against a law that is aimed at taking guns out of someone's hands if it's shown that they pose a danger to themselves and others with it?
your "constitutional rights"???
ya we have a constitutional right to free speech, but when that right is abused, when lies are spread forth in an effort to rile up your base... and members of that base lose their sense of reality and come out of the woodwork, guns in hand and reacts violently, aren't those doing the riling up partially to blame for the destruction the crazies leave behind.
and when enough crazies come out and the gov't is forced to act to prevent that destruction from happening, aren't they also partially responsible when the gov't starts curtailing those rights in an effort to provide a safe environment for all?

Alex Jones has another lawsuit coming at him... this time for falsely indentifying the parkland shooter...

our rights come with responsibilities... abuse those rights and ignore the responsibilities that come with them and well.. the natural progression of events is that those rights are lost!!
the number one thing that we all could be doing to prevent more mass shootings it acting more responsible!!!

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 07:57 AM
I haven't read the thread yet but your post is intriguing.
I am not sure where you are going with it though. The best I can tell you are talking about the hardcore leftist dems? If so I agree. We should never allow those crazies to arm themselves. They will inevitably go out and shoot at people to save rabbits or earn stars and flags and stuff.
I could agree with you some if first we get control of that magic book they use to declare who is crazy. It is at the heart of this "science" to control the magic book where they write down every year new types of crazy to prescribe new drugs to. Now the magic book is going to be used for more than who gets the new drugs. Now they intend to identify crazy to take away guns from them. And driving cement trucks too.

So, imho, we need to get control of the magic book for the new entries into it these coming years. And put the crazy back into lefty and into the book so we can ban them from wearing pussy hats, guns and driving cement trucks.
a reply to: dawnstar

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 08:09 AM
a reply to: bulwarkz

crazy is crazy, it comes in all colors and assortments...
and quite frankly, both the dems and the repubs have to one extent or another been feeding some delusions to the crazies.
neither side should have control of the book, the book should be in the hands of those who are most qualified to determine crazy, the mental health professionals..

and by the way, right now, in california there's a politician who wants to declare all the homeless crazy, and build nice new mental hospitals to house them in... to me, he is just as crazy as someone who is working a full time job and still finding themselves outpriced when it comes to california apartments and homeless. to me, the sane thing to do in such a case is to pack up your things or sell them quit the danged job and go someplace where you can at least earn enough to have a roof over your head.. but well... that's just my interpretation.

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 08:15 AM

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: burdman30ott6

so, let's say there is a case of domestic violence, as it stands now, ya know what is likely to happen... the man goes to jail for a brief time, overnight perhaps, posts bail and is back out. the women may have gone and obtained a protective order, or she may have gone into hiding in a shelter, or whatever.... but the man is free to move about, go to work, visit his friends, or ya, maybe grab his gun and hunt her down...
what you are suggesting is that it's would be better, less invasive to his constitutional rights for him to remain in jail till his court date than it would be to ensure he doesn't have the gun to hunt her down but yet be free to move about, go to work, visit his friends... that's just plain insane.
only, I looked at another aspect of this law, when there is mental illness, or maybe someone suffering from dementia, something like that, where if we were talking about their having the car keys taken from them, there would be less protest than there would be having a gun removed from them. I've read the article the op linked to several times, and this is what I am getting from it...

A family who knows that someone in their family could be a danger to themselves or to others needs to have a tool that they can take that gun away.”

or are you wanting to make no longer being mentally capable of understanding your surroundings enough because of mental illness a crime? you would take a gun away from a child, you would take the stick away from them the first hint that they were going to misuse it, you would take the knife away from the child, even the rock...
what you wouldn't do is lock them in a closet because they hadn't learned yet how to use these things responsibly... well, we shouldn't be locking them away when they start forgetting what they had learned because of old age/mental illness either. you just go back to taking away the things that they might use to harm others or themselves.

You perfectly framed my point.

Just think of all the lives saved if we made bloshevism a mental illness in Russia and the US a hundred years ago? And then kept them from guns we could have saved the world from the Holodomor from ever taking place saving 10's of millions from forced starvation and mass slaughter.

So my vote for who to label crazy this year for the magic book are the new bolsheviks and everyone who wears a pink pussy hat in public

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 08:21 AM
Jerry Brown belongs in the book as well as everyone who voted for him. I have not gone full monty on all of Cali yet as I have hopes most of Cali can be saved from going into the book. The homeless have the only reason to stay in Cali due to weather making their life somewhat manageable. But for the rest of Cali it is debatablea reply to: dawnstar

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 08:32 AM
I foresee a time when Marion Berry and this representative from Cali to present a bill together calling it the

a reply to: dawnstar

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 08:50 AM
a reply to: bulwarkz

when I was young, our neighbor took in foster kids, luckily for these foster kids she was a great foster parent who cared for them, even adopted a few of them. one of the ones she adopted was a young 7 year old girl. this little girl had to be watched constantly because if she got a chance, she would find whatever she could to hurt herself. She was MENTALLY ILL!!! If she is still alive and hasn't managed to kill herself, I am pretty sure she is not that interested in your political bickering, hopefully, she is in a place in her life where she can function with the least amount of infringement of her freedom while remaining safe from herself.
politicizing who should or shouldn't be classified as mentally ill does a grave disservice to those who actually are mentally ill, who need supervision and assistance to function in our society and I am a firm believer that they should be able to live as free as they can while being safe and taken care of...

now, please, explain to me how filling the roles of the mentally ill with pick pussy hat wearers, is gonna help them? how it's not gonna drain what little funding is provided for the services they need and leave them out in the cold with no services?

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 08:58 AM
They murder millions. They murder/ed foster kids too. I point out the pussy hat wearers simply because it is so blatantly obvious and visible sign of mental problems. That is just pointing out the obviousa reply to: dawnstar

posted on Apr, 5 2018 @ 09:12 AM
a reply to: bulwarkz

ya, sure.....
except that out of all the demostrations that occurred around the time of trump being sworn in, were there any incidents of violence during the women's marches??? I think it's also obvious that those wearing the pink hats weren't prone to violence!!

unlike the groups that flocked to charlottesville who came armed to the teeth!!!

but, hey, my answer is simple, don't ever start a thread asking why the liberals never talk about mental illness when it's related to mass shootings!!! it doesn't matter anyways!!! you'd insist that my crazy uncle ralph had every right to keep his guns, unless of course, he was living in the apartment next to you and your family!!!

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in