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.

 

Assault weapons are the devil!

page: 22
10
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

i Went to School with a Guy Just like Mayor Bill Deblasio . Yeah , He was a Freakin' Wimp Loser Too . Live and Learn Peeps ........

edit on 8-9-2019 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Look who is talking when your country has resorted to blackmailing facebook and other public forums to enforce German laws around the world including in the U.S. about, among other things, "what German authorities consider as hate content in public forums..."



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: madenusa

I’ll see your limitations on the Federal Government and raise you three more on the States themselves.

Article 4, Section 2

The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.


9th Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


10th Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.


Since the citizens of each State are entitled to the privileges and immunities of the citizens of the several States, and powers not delegated to the Federal government are reserved to the States or the People, and enumeration of certain rights can not be used to construe to deny or even disparage rights retained by the people; the specific spelling out of the Second Amendment means there cannot be a “California Compliant” version of any firearm.

Think about that, individual States cannot convolute nor discourage with threats an enumerated nor an unenumerated right that is held by the people. Because that is something held by the people.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: contextual

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: network dude
those wishing to disarm the citizens can't have an honest discussion
their confiscation agenda is exposed when doing such




Great Britain and Australia laughs at your lack of knowledge, guffaw.
Less guns = Less shootings, dumb Americans blame Mario Kart, lol.


Oh really..?

Don't give me this bulls#@t that less guns means less shootings. The number has barely changed at all and alternative methods of inflicting harm have increased to boot, because people cant defend themselves. We still have a large number of gun related crimes in proportion to our population Vs the US per year.

More and more Australians are starting to realize this and a push to return our guns has gained momentum in recent years. Last election saw a majority conservative government installed for the first time in decades (and several indipendant gun reunification advocates actually saw a great deal more support than in previous elections). State elections will go down the same way in near future and eventually, we'll have a foothold to reversing the ill informed and kneejerk banning of certain guns.

As for Great Britain. They levels of violence in recent years have risen drastically, with multiple knife, acid, car, machete and a variety of other weapons of choice. Britain is screwed and heavily populated places like London are seeing this crap almost on a daily basis.

We are by no means laughing at the US. Not at all..!! Only the left are laughing and using incomplete/inaccurate statistics (with many factors conveniently left out), to show their points.
edit on 9-9-2019 by Ironclad1964 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I think you'll find that assault weapons aren't the devil, its the devil who is the devil.

I'm surprised that no Hunter has come forward to voice their concerns, the true gunslingers should come forward and ridicule those who abuse the second amendment without having a effin clue what it means.

A true hunter only needs a bolt action and a revolver, it takes skill and one shot, however these morons buy assault weapons for no logical reason.

Maybe the farmers, hunters and trappers need to come out and immasculate these idiots who buy these weapons of war 'a hunter needs only one shot, a moron needs a magazine' Australia did a similar thing with dangerous drivers, an ad campaign that cleverly shows reckless drivers given the pinky finger by women, and the pinky finger means you are under endowed.

Make these assault weapons less appealing, we have video games who sell online weapons and skins, and of course we have nerf guns, those are fun without fatalities.

However there are more characters in play, I'm not going to name names *big pharma, SSRIs*



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie


A true hunter only needs a bolt action and a revolver, it takes skill and one shot, however these morons buy assault weapons for no logical reason.

As long as one is not confronted by something that requires multiple shots to put down before it puts you down. We don't hunt on manicured forests stocked with specific game here; we hunt in the wild. I dare you to face down an angry wild boar with a single shot of any caliber you choose.

No, I take that back; I will not wish being turned into pig slop on anyone. Do not take that dare.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Wait. I'm still here, I'm still talking?

Can't talk about that, my posts are on the mods radar for a tad of mockery and provocations already. Find back to the topic and suck it up, buttercup!




posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie

Maybe the farmers, hunters and trappers need to come out and immasculate these idiots who buy these weapons of war 'a hunter needs only one shot, a moron needs a magazine' Australia did a similar thing with dangerous drivers, an ad campaign that cleverly shows reckless drivers given the pinky finger by women, and the pinky finger means you are under endowed.



Who paid for those ads? It would be interesting to know who wants to spend that kind of money to take away people's rights. Follow the money, and all that.

Who, in the US, is going to pay for ads showing women giving the pinky finger to to emasculate those idiot cops who carry assault weapons?

I can't wait see that happening at the next protest/counter-protest. Women giving the pinky finger to cops in full riot gear, that would probably not end well.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

Until they want max mag 5...then bolt action only...then powder load...then special permit to powder load...then....it won't stop until they get confiscation & ban. Time is the only challenge. Changing the societal opinion to desire that it happen is the goal.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 11:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Have you ever hunted?

I'm going to guess either no, or not a whole lot. ...and certainly nothing much larger than a squirrel.

I have hunted some of the largest game that North America has to offer.

Oddly enough, I use a bolt action rifle. For deer, I use an old, though virtually pristine, Savage .30-30, magazine holds 3, and one up the pipe. I'm a better than average shot, and more than once, I've needed a quick follow up shot or even two, because the deer moves just as I squeeze off the round, and I only wound it. A single shot rifle could possibly leave an animal to suffer needlessly in the woods if I can't track it down for whatever reason.

I've hunted bear, and you'd best believe I've got more than one shot on tap. You don't want angry, hurt bear coming uprange at you...bad things could happen.

I've hunted boar, and the same applies to them. You don't hit that first shot, you've got very angry pig on your hands if you're too close...

So this nonsense of one shot, one kill is just that, nonsense. Yes, it's always a good thing to get your game with the first shot...but things happen that negate skill. Bad luck defeats skill every time.
edit on 9/9/2019 by seagull because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 01:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: InTheLight

If the solution is a loss of freedom then nope


That freedom does not mean today what it meant when it was written. Now every civilian will be armed against each other, is that how you want to live?



Yes. You endorse removing rights and freedoms.

Admit it.


I endorse removing high capacity magazines (over 10 rounds) that would be a very good start...and only a start.


So you desire a loss of freedoms at least be honest about it


How is reducing your round number a loss of freedom. In what instances do you need mega rounds?


Let me put this in a way you might understand.

You and the rest of the anti-gun crowd are demanding a justification for firearms.


This is just like you standing at a voting booth and demanding a justification before you vote for why you want to vote for a candidate.

It is a police-state, Orwellian action.

It is wrong.


As in Australia, it is right, and they haven't had another mass shooting in 22 years. So obviously your priorities are clear.


actually your WRONG on both mass shootings and mass killings

here is PROOF

en.wikipedia.org...

First there was a RECENT mass shooing in June 2019.
so not only is your comment WRONG, but also your comment on "better background checks".

second there are MULTIPLE MASS KILLINGS shown and all follow the same criteria you use for US EXCEPT many DONT USE GUNS

so even with your "better gun laws " you didnt solve the problem.

the EVIL PEOPLE WHO BREAK THE LAWS found something else...

along with the FACT following the same criteria for "mass shootings" almost EVERY WEEKEND the gangs in chicago il alone do it and with guns that dont have "high capacity magazines"

also,
the definition of "mass shooting" has NEVER been legally established and what is mostly used (and used by you) is an incident where 4 people or more are injured or killed... note cant even agree that there is a difference between injured and killed much less a number that cant be achieved (and has) with a knife, sword (japan where no guns btw), vehicle (note TERRORIST ALREADY DOING) , bomb, ect.

lastly we have in this country a BILL OF RIGHTS...not needs but RIGHTS.
You dont have to "justify" your need to use your right
it includes EVERY RIGHT.
before you go to canned response the second amendment does not include fully automatic weapons (unless you get a special federal licence then even that is legal) , rocket launchers , cannons with explosive shells, and things that go boom.

now to turn your logic on country do you need to "justify need" to vote?
would you be ok with that?
bet not,
thats is why you cant "pick and choose" what rights have needs and what doesn't

so all around your whole logic about guns is nothing more than mental gymnastics and word play for your OPINION that guns are not a right.

scrounger



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I have heard gun-grabbers in the lefty even state "let's put the banning of firearms to a vote, if the majority are in favor ot it then ban it." Morons that make this sort of arguments don't realize that 1st: Rights enumerated in the U.S. Constitution are not up for grabs if the majority want to ban such rights. 2nd, why stop there? let's put it up to vote then and see if a majority in the U.S. want to ban the right to free speech as well... Heck, the left have been actively suppressing freedom of speech based on political ideology...

Rights are NEVER, and should NEVER be up to vote to restrict or ban such rights...



edit on 12-9-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 08:12 AM
link   
It is no longer if
The are coming to take your property


“Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47. We’re not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore.” Beto O’Rourke



posted on Sep, 15 2019 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar members of Congress... the document they claim to hold in such high esteem, conservatives drag out and dust off every time there is an election are in fact enemies of the Constitution because they support almost every one of the federal government’s illegitimate and unconstitutional prohibitions on possessing certain objects.
The Twenty-First Amendment Repealed the Eighteenth, nothing in any of the Constitution’s amendments gives the federal government any additional power to ban something.







 
10
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join