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.

 

State of Virginia Eyes Gun Grab

page: 3
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2019 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
a reply to: chr0naut
No, they peek through the curtains while calling the police -
If you are lucky.
If you have neighbors.
If they notice.
and if they care.
Do you live in a commune by any chance?


No, I don't live in a commune.

I'm a happy and safe Australian, living in New Zealand, where they don't even have snakes and poisonous spiders.





posted on Jan, 16 2019 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: soundguy

Irregardless of whether they've done anything untoward, right?

That's quite the tyrannical attitude to have, hero.

Just out of curiosity, which amendment is next in your zeal, dare I say fetish, to rob others of their rights??

First amendment? Since you don't seem to like contrary opinions. Fourth amendment? Since you don't seem to mind illegal searches and seizures...or unconstitutional, anyway.

Going on...

Fifth amendment? You know, though I have to wonder if you actually do, the one that mentions that one should not be deprived of property without due process.

Last, but hardly least, is the 14th amendment, which in its essence, doubles down on those above.

But, as someone pointed out above, you'll almost certainly be in favor of doing away with the Third amendment, too, right?? After all, they'll be living there to protect you.

Wow. Impressive. Six out of the first 14 amendments to the Constitution.



posted on Jan, 16 2019 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: chr0naut

Yea most people who have malicious intent generally don't act on it because laws prevent it...


Do you think that if you are armed it is going to stop someone with malicious intent from shooting you in the back of the head?

I like my chances of personal survivability better if neither of us is armed.


Even though it's hard for me to imagine living somewhere with no guns, I don't suppose it's all that different. Either an area is peaceful or it isn't. You only need to look at a place like London, England. They've managed to create a fair amount of mayhem without them.

Shot in the back of the head? Chances are about the same as being stabbed in the back. hit with a brick or baseball bat or having acid thrown in your face.



posted on Jan, 16 2019 @ 05:59 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Maybe we should wipeout all the bears, wolves, cougars, bobcats, coyotes, bulls, wild pigs, and a whole host of other critters that even Bruce Lee couldn’t take in fight. Start farm raising rabbit, squirrel, deer, quail, wild turkey and other tasty animals and make sure paper targets, clay pigeons, metal targets and other targets are destroyed. Get rid of the idea of collecting curios and relics, education and trivia and other manner of thought. Then we might have a starting point to be rid of guns.

And in the end, I bet there will be another government shutdown over far more money that a measly $5 billion between just compensation and outright property theft as the factions instead of for security versus vanity project that is currently ongoing over the wall.

And I bet the same ones that want them now don’t want to pay for them either.



posted on Jan, 16 2019 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: chris_stibrany

Oooh, "gun grabbers". Sounds like a risky pastime.

Obviously the only true defense is to kill these people before they even consider defending the peacefulopposing the armed.

We must all be cowed by the biggest bully with the most armaments! Sucks if these "gun grabbers" don't realize that.

LOL
huh?



posted on Jan, 16 2019 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: toms54

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: chr0naut

Yea most people who have malicious intent generally don't act on it because laws prevent it...


Do you think that if you are armed it is going to stop someone with malicious intent from shooting you in the back of the head?

I like my chances of personal survivability better if neither of us is armed.


Even though it's hard for me to imagine living somewhere with no guns, I don't suppose it's all that different. Either an area is peaceful or it isn't. You only need to look at a place like London, England. They've managed to create a fair amount of mayhem without them.

Shot in the back of the head? Chances are about the same as being stabbed in the back. hit with a brick or baseball bat or having acid thrown in your face.


You are less likely to survive if you are shot in the back of the head.



posted on Jan, 16 2019 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

Yep. It'll make us all safer.



posted on Jan, 17 2019 @ 01:58 AM
link   
"I like my chances of personal survivability better if neither of us is armed."

Oh, I understand now: a criminal intent on doing you harm will be obeying the laws of the land and will not have a firearm. They will be concerned to the point they will make it a fair fight.

If you have a fire extinguisher in your kitchen or garage, you're going to have to put your money where your mouth is and get rid of it. All you need to do is call the fire department if a fire starts in your home, and then wait for them to show up.

Of course that's not the proper way to prepare for the possibility of a fire. You have a fire extinguisher to give you a bit of a head start to protect the lives of you and your family during the time you're waiting for the professionals to show up and deal with the problem.

Same concept applies to owning a firearm for personal protection.

Don't tell me I have no right to own a fire extinguisher.




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join