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.

 

Bernie Sanders Calls for New Zealand-Style Gun Ban in U.S.

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: NeuronDivide
In my opinion civilians have absolutely NO need to own fully automatic, military style assault rifles with high capacity magazines. Handguns more than suffice for personal protection.


Have you ever shot a gun? If you think you should not have guns then feel free to move to a country without the right to self defence.




posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Which one of these are okay? Both the rifle and the pistol not only use the same round but the same magazine. And the last picture is the same rifle with tacti-cool crap loaded up on it to make it look scarier.

I don’t really expect intelligent discussion but I’ll still try to inform in the hopes exposure to truth will break the brainwashing.






posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker
The leftest are really serious about coming for firearms this time and here is just another example. Crazy Bernie took to twitter today to call for bans here in the US.

What I do not understand is why they concentrate so hard on rifles when handguns are utilized to commit the vast majority of both murders and crime in general.

Anyone have a good answer for that?


Yes.

Progressivism is about feeling good; it's about the mental images they hold (stereotypes), and how those images make them feel. It's why statistics have no effect on them.

One mental image that every progressive has, is of hirself as a member of the elite class. They picture irselves as running things, because in most cases, they are. Or can at least realistically daydream about it.

They also have a picture of themselves as being cosmopolitan members of the urban unit where they live. They pretend that minorities will welcome their leadership, and magically drop all the aspects of minority culture that aren't cool and hip. Everybody in the future is going to be a knowledge-worker who takes the train to work and who lives in a cozy apartment in the urban core.

The very existence of poor/ white trash screws up that phantasy.

White trash admire big trucks, big guns, fried meat, and their big president. A monster truck rally pretty much sums up what progressives believe is wrong with the country.

Now, giving up your guns is the entry-ticket to the liberal "agenda 21" pipe-dream. The reason they want to ban guns is because they want to ban the poor white trash who own them. Progressivism is about inter-dependence---how we all need each other and rely on each other. Rugged individualism is the real problem, because poor white trash don't NEED progressives.

Country folk can survive. And that drives progressives crazy. Progressives need country folk to be as dependent on big government for welfare, for law enforcement, for an education, as every other minority.

This isn't just a culture-war. This is a class war.

Scratch a progressive, and you find eugenicist. Over a craft beer, they will admit that they'd really like to round up all the "trump supporters" (white trash), and drop them all on an island someplace. They really wish in their heart of hearts that someone could round up all the conservatives, and banish them to an island somewhere.

Well, They did. You're standing on it.

.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

Oh that will have them screwed up for weeks.
Some will never understand what you posted!



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: 727Sky
a reply to: dug88


An ar-15 is a glorified hunting rifle and not even a really good one for that.


I can tell you have never hunted feral pigs or you would not have said that.... The AR-15 is the weapon of choice for everyone I have ever known who had to get rid of the pigs destroying the farms and crops.. Many videos of a feral pig hunt at youtube

On another subject no fear if they ban first the ARs then of course the hand guns will be next so leave it to an enterprising German to come up with "The Tactical Repeating Crossbow !" youtu.be...


As cool as it is I would have hated to try and kill pigs with such a weapon.. Plus a bow and arrow or a cross bow is to slow to kill... This is a Coyote kill and if you look they are feasting on two cattle. Warning for all the big city apartment dwellers who think protecting your life, property, and livestock is wrong...don't watch the video.. youtu.be...


I used a night scope equipped AR-15 as all the hunting was done at night. Anything out to 125 yards was DOA.. Two 30 round mags and something to eat and drink was all I usually needed but I did carry two extra mags and a 1911 45 cal. just in case. The pig problem went away when a female Mountain lion moved up from Mexico. Within the first month of us finding her tracks the pigs left the area probably with her tagging along for she never killed any of the live stock in our area.. Mother nature has a way of answering our prayers sometimes, No ?





No wild pigs here. We've moose and bears and #. If you're gonna go assault rifle for hunting here an m1 would be more ideal.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

The middle one is definitely the better looking.
Love the looks of a classic beretta



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

The CX4 Storm is a very nice and accurate carbine. If you have a 92 FS, I recommend buying one while they still make them. Be prepared to have to order from your local gun shop though as it seems no one keeps them in stock.

The best review of it is “boringly accurate” and I have to agree.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Handguns are short range weapons.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Bernie Sanders is a socialist piece of #, obviously. No news there.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders

Aren't you just a wealth of cutting edge information......... Lol



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: caterpillage

I love the feel. But I have larger paws and long thumbs for working the safety. Some don’t like the snap of the recoil or the weight. But i find that solid feel more reassuring than the striker fire polymers. And the weight grants me a firm stability, but my two hand stance is teacupping the heel of the grip.

You can get the CX4 in 45, but good luck finding an 8045 Cougar to pair with it. I was lucky enough to find a Stoeger, who made a few of them with Beretta’s tooling after they stopped production.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: angus1745
The public shouldn't have assault weapons. That's pretty much all there is to it. What the hell are they (gun mfrs.)thinking selling them to the public in the first place? You can't justify that nonsense. Not with any amount of asinine mental gymnastics.


They might be thinking they're selling them to the same a-holes who are being trusted to buy booze and weed and not get behind the wheel of a car or other vehicle. You know? Responsible adults. In either case, that's probably wishful thinking, right?

I expect to find you in the threads about banning booze and weed (again).


The amendment is outdated and does NOT apply to the kind of weapons around today.


But didn't cannons exist when it was written? Do you think a cannon could do a lot of damage (in any century)? In fact, in those days, I would have thought that if you had the resources, you could probably acquire an entire warship full of cannons and so forth and there wouldn't have been a law against it. If you could acquire enough of them, you could have your own navy. As near as I can tell. I don't suppose the people who wrote that amendment ever thought of that. Or did they? Bloody yanks!


The amendment these idiots continually try to beat everyone over the head with


Gun grabbers shouldn't even be beaten over the head with a feather. Their brains are already fragile enough.


was referring to muskets not bloody AR 15's.


Actually, like I said earlier, a musket was just a small cannon. And the amendment doesn't mention the difference between a musket and a cannon. I wonder why?


Someone needs to gently explain this to all these gun happy Muppets


A muppet is a fancy puppet. A sockpuppet would also be a rather fancy puppet, wouldn't it? Of course, I doubt the various gun control advocates are literal sockpuppets but they are functionally identical. They're all really just the same guy.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti gun, I have a couple of semi-auto handguns

I appear to have gotten you wrong. I could have sworn you were supporting people who want to ban guns.


I sure as hell don't need some massive crazy rapid firing machine gun like the one Ripley has in Aliens to feel safe or to outsmart some animal with a brain the size of a watch battery.


Nor do I. I don't own a gun at all. I'm still alive in my mid 40s despite living in the dangerous US all my life


These things are not toys and we should be taking them away from the infantile and sometimes mentally unstable or retarded adults that rabidly defend the sale of them with their deranged interpretation of the 2nd amendment twitching and flailing like a dying haddock behind them.


Now here is where you might just have a valid argument. I would agree with you if you said that we should be sterilizing mentally unstable and retarded people so they can't breed. But instead, you're talking about treating the symptoms. Just can't go along with that.


Enough is enough. Enough was bloody enough 6 years ago.


There's no bloody reason to say bloody all the time. I've bloody had enough of this bloody stuff.


6 days it took NZ to act. 6 days.


So move to NZ. I'd honestly be just as happy if they banned internet there too and sent all the backwards gun control people there to # sheep and not bother anyone forever.

edit on 22-3-2019 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-3-2019 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

You forgot the one with the chainsaw bayonette.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Yeah, but I specifically and deliberately choose Beretta in the representations because the company predates the Constitution and the Second Amendment by more than 250 years. Just to squelch that old chestnut about modern arms and the founders.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Just a point about the wording in the Constitution, for those that ridiculously try to argue that the founders didn't mean modern firearms.

It says nothing about "guns". It specifically says " arms". There was much debate about the phrasing, as evidenced by the writings of the Federalist papers.

Those wise bastards realized that arms are ever evolving. At one time arms were spears, then bronze swords, then iron axes, etc.



The intent was clear. They specifically chose the word "arms" because the purpose was to insure that tyranny could be met with force.

Furthermore, for those that think it is an archaic, outdated concept, look no further than Venezuela for a modern day example of what can happen when a population is disARMED.
edit on 3222019 by Mach2 because: Sp



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

Also worth mentioning is the phrase "well regulated"
In the terminology of the times that would equate to "well equiped", so by that, the founders would mean for every household to have several select fire m4's in our cabinets.

You can bet our founders would have ar15's at the very least in thiers.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: caterpillage
a reply to: Mach2

Also worth mentioning is the phrase "well regulated"
In the terminology of the times that would equate to "well equiped", so by that, the founders would mean for every household to have several select fire m4's in our cabinets.

You can bet our founders would have ar15's at the very least in thiers.


Imagine what kind of hell would have rained down on the redcoats if the colonists would have had sniper rifles, with night vision optics....lol



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 12:14 PM
link   
I’ll let you in on a secret. The population will abandon their AR-15 in droves voluntarily as soon as the military adopts a new platform and ammo. The current desire is for a longer ranged rifle, so that whole curse of careful what you wish for rings true yet again.

And yes, there will be a civilian version of whatever is chosen due to recouping R&D costs and profits for manufacturing the new platform. So really, banning the AR-15 now is rather counterproductive if “thinking of the children” is the real reason behind the bansconsidering the Army wants a larger more lethal caliber that is more accurate at a longer range and under partial cover.

Funny that the names of both Beto and Bernie are not that far removed from Benito...



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: NeuronDivide

Civilians need the larger caliber, larger magazine firearms in case they need to go toe-to-toe with federal troops, to prevent tyranny.

I am not saying the fight would ever happen, but rather that simply having effective military grade firearms in civilians' hands remains an important factor to prevent the temptation of the Feds to go tyrannical in the first place.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Fowlerstoad

Generally speaking, if it came right down to it, a civilian armed forces more or less guarantees that the armed forces would also split in most scenarios.




top topics



 
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join