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.

 

Trump Administartion bans bump stocks

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2018 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
I'm okay with this. I don't think this leads to gun grabs or anything. It's just a bump stock.

And as for the Dems...Obama and Clinton didn't take anyone's guns away.

I can see where you're saying it's a slippery slope..and first they start with this etc. But I don't see it that way. I think this is common sense Gun control.


Except for when they slipped up and straight up said their intention is for a bump stock ban to lead to more.

"When they give us that inch, that bump stock ban, we will take a mile." And the crowd loves it.

ETA: And yeah, I know, she's not a lawmaker, she was just meeting with them. You'd have a hard time convincing me they're not on the same page. I challenge you to find where she ever said something like this again too. After this, she got the call and the lesson about not revealing their true intentions in this manner.
edit on 18 12 18 by face23785 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 18 2018 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Me pointing out Trump's corruption does not mean that I am ignoring or justifying Clinton's or anyone else on the left for their own corruption. You don't see me defending Clinton, you see me calling Trump out for the same things that Clinton does. They are so much alike yet ATS doesn't seem to care for some reason.



posted on Dec, 18 2018 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I will bow out of this

Suffice to say I agree with you that all crimes should be gone after, even if someone I voted for committed them

I think that if you looked objectively at how you bash threads about intel corruption as pushing a divisive msm narrative, while the yourself discuss the importance of discussing trump corruption you would see the hypocrisy

Again, I have been hypocritical many times in my life, and welcome when people have showed me that

Either way, despite me feeling you act hypocritically, no hard feelings



posted on Dec, 18 2018 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I don't advocate for discussion of his corruption, I advocate for recognition of it. There's very little of that from the anti-liberal crowd on here, they prefer to sweep it under the rug in favor of Clinton's corruption, using her treatment by the media as justification for Trump's history.



posted on Dec, 18 2018 @ 08:50 PM
link   
www.everydaynodaysoff.com...

Go there, read the entire thing, then tell me that we should be OK with yet another damn slice being taken. At no point in recent history have we had a single federal win on the topic of gun rights and now this? If an even half-competent person challenges trump's run they will get my vote because he has now thrown his hat in with the Antis.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Helig
www.everydaynodaysoff.com...

Go there, read the entire thing, then tell me that we should be OK with yet another damn slice being taken. At no point in recent history have we had a single federal win on the topic of gun rights and now this? If an even half-competent person challenges trump's run they will get my vote because he has now thrown his hat in with the Antis.


Haven't you figured it out yet? They're all in on it together and they're faking the different parties to appease the masses. The only time you should ever pay attention to what they say is when you're taking notes to compare what they said to what they actually do when they don't need your vote anymore.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 01:08 AM
link   
Pretty sure the Russians put Trump Mafia up to this



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 01:34 AM
link   
This is only a token gesture that will not achieve anything meaningful at all. What's really needed is a major tightening up civilian ownership of all rapid-fire weapons (semi-auto) and I can't see that happening in my lifetime.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 06:36 AM
link   
why dont we just admit it , we dont want psychopaths with guns, so the common sense approach is unfortunately a psychological screening of all people who wish to own guns ! wouldnt that at least remove the potential for people with mental health problems from taking out their issues on innocent populations

surely of you want the right to own a gun , you also want to ensure that others are legally and mentally competent in their use
so you wont mind submitting yourself to a screening to determine you are not a threat to others
edit on 19-12-2018 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Bump stock has nothing to do with firearm ownership.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum

Sorry no.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Helig

No slice was taken. Anyone who is educated on the subject really should not have a problem with bump stocks being illegal.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pilgrum
This is only a token gesture that will not achieve anything meaningful at all. What's really needed is a major tightening up civilian ownership of all rapid-fire weapons (semi-auto) and I can't see that happening in my lifetime.


What the hell is a semi-automatic rapid fire weapon?



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Calm down, calm down. I’ll go have a talk with Trump and see if he will allow bump stocks for lever action rifles.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Lol, what a joke.
Most mass shootings are by handguns in inner cities.
But hey, whatever makes people feel better.


Indeed most are by handgun.

Interesting how it's only the somewhat suspicious, "can't quite put my finger on it" events that involve AR-15s. It's almost as if someone, somewhere got an arsenal of brainwashed candidates ready to activate and spread the message that "I shot people with an AR-15, so clearly these guns kill people all by themselves."



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: amazing

So if "laws" stop criminals from acting out, then why don't "laws" against murder stop criminals?






You're getting a little crazy there. Why have any laws then. And sell machine guns to whomever want's one. As well as surface to air rockets? Why an age restriction on Guns also? If laws don't stop criminals, then why have any?


Instead of banning more things that will be ignored by criminals anyway, why not make laws that increase the punishment?

If you're all for laws, then let people arm themselves however they see fit, just make it an instant death penalty for any crime where a firearm was used.

This "banning" just criminalizes law abiding citizens.


Maybe. I think you missed my point though?



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: amazing

Why?

What sense does it make?

So people who are criminals are going to start obeying the law now?

They'll want to do a mass shooting then say to themselves, "Hey! Bump stocks are illegal, I should try origami instead"?



There has to be some laws of some kind somewhere. It would be great if we lived in a Utopian society where every family taught gun safety and respect, where people got the mental health treatment they needed before they snapped etc. But we don't live in a society like that, so in the mean time we have to pass laws to protect ourselves from those nut jobs. As we saw in Las Vegas, a bump stock and literally turn a rifle into an automatic weapon. I still don't see a problem with banning this?


While the bump stock thing doesn't seem to be a big deal with those who understand firearms, the idea that passing laws make gun crime less, or makes thing safer is laughable. remember, Dealing Drugs, murder, Assault, Rape, and lots of other things are already illegal, yet crime still exists. It's almost as if the criminals aren't worried about what laws exist.......


My point is that we should have some laws of some kind. If not, then why have any laws at all. Why ban hand grenades? Why have background checks?


The point is, laws only work on the law abiding folks. And largely, gun owners seem to follow the laws, or this would be the wild west. So limiting my ability to protect myself would be bad. Bump stocks aren't a necessity in that department. Lots of people worry about the slippery slope aspect, but I feel a few things could change, but nothing before Mental Health gets a fair shake. If it was up to me anyhow.


I think this one, helps stop those who are mentally unhinged. A terrorist can work around this. I realize you can rig something up yourself that will work the same way though.



posted on Dec, 19 2018 @ 07:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

What the hell is a semi-automatic rapid fire weapon?


I'd hope you actually know what I meant IE weapons that can put a lot of rounds downrange very quickly with minimum effort without manually re-cocking between shots so that could be gas operated or simple recoil actions commonly called 'auto', 'semi-auto', 'self-loading' etc. Some might get into semantics over the 'auto' vs 'semi-auto' vs 'assault' expressions but the basic idea should be clear.

Banning the 'bumpstock' is a useless gesture intended to placate a select few. In politics, appearing to be doing something while actually doing very little to nothing, is something of an artform.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

What the hell is a semi-automatic rapid fire weapon?


I'd hope you actually know what I meant IE weapons that can put a lot of rounds downrange very quickly with minimum effort without manually re-cocking between shots so that could be gas operated or simple recoil actions commonly called 'auto', 'semi-auto', 'self-loading' etc. Some might get into semantics over the 'auto' vs 'semi-auto' vs 'assault' expressions but the basic idea should be clear.

Banning the 'bumpstock' is a useless gesture intended to placate a select few. In politics, appearing to be doing something while actually doing very little to nothing, is something of an artform.


So pretty much all we should be able to own are single-action revolvers and bolt action/lever action/pump action long guns?

Good luck with that. I will give credit where it's due though, at least you guys are starting to become open and honest about wanting to ban just about everything.
edit on 20 12 18 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Lumenari

I remember plenty of people defending bump stocks on here after the Las Vegas shooting so your comment that "no one cares" is false at best and a lie at worst.


I have so been laughing!

"Their tekkin our gunz! Gawd, it's R rite! Even 17 year old homicidal pyscho's should have a bump stock if he wants one, this is Amurica!"

Now it's "meh, who cares. Nobody seriously like those things anyway".

Another example of this: www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 12/20/2018 by angeldoll because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join