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.

 

Would America ban personal firearms

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
.....it shows the insanity and stupidity of mankind in its fight for survival.

Noted.


I still cringe when I think about the american who debated taking a GUN To church is AOK simply because the law allows me to do it.

Can criminals carry guns into a church? Should a church have a sprinkler system? Fire exits? Extinguishers? Churches are just as prone to being invaded as every other place is....the last time I checked there's no spiritual force field that keeps out "bad guys" and "evil doers" from coming into a church.


I beleive in self defense, and a countries right to arm itself.
But when regular citizens are allowed to buy an AK47 for there HOUSE, it borders on the verge of insanity.

Where are you from? Are you from that country that tried to ban kitchen knives?
So in other words, you belive in the Government's right to arm itself, not the county's.

If you care to look into the stats you will find that most (as in 95%, I think) of all gun crimes are commited with illegal, unregisterd firearms. The problem is not with the law abiding average American, the problem is with the thugs, wackos and gangbangers. Should the vast majority, law abiding citizens, pay for the actions of the few criminals? A "yes" answer could esaily be applied to number things in just about any country.


If you want to defend yourself? Learn a martial art, do some weights and avoid troublesome area's where there's greater chance you'll be mugged.

It doesn't matter how "Jet Li" someone is....all the MA in the world can't stop a bullet. How about we take Guns away from the criminals, not the average Joes.


[edit on 23/9/2006 by SportyMB]




posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 07:44 PM
link   
You have voted WithoutEqual for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Your right on my brother,and our gun hating british friend had it coming.Thank you for taking a warning for the rest of us.


The right to defend yourself and bear arms CANNOT be removed.
Anyone have any idea of how many guns are legally owned in the U.S.?
Prob in the ball park of 250 to 300 million and growing everyday! THANK GOD!!
Ever thought about what it would take to disarm america?
Lets say that theres 300 million guns in america,owned by 85 million people.Lets say that of those 85 million people,only 10% decide to fight whoever attempts to disarm us.thats 8.5 million fighters,not to mention the sympathisers for those 8.5 million people.Thats one hell of an insurgancy,thats a revolution.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 04:35 AM
link   
I think all the gun haters out there have no real understanding of the right to bear arms on this issue. This was a right given by the founding fathers for the purpose of the American people to protect themselves against the tyranny of goverment. This debate is not a podium for the anti gun lobby on the morals of having guns or an anti American debate its a debate on whether the US Goverment would try and use the war on terror to remove the right to bear arms so could those members who wish to debate gun morality/American bashing please do so elswhere.

It is good to see that there is a very strong feeling on the continuing right to bear arms and I think its something that you the American public need to watch very closely.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 05:14 AM
link   
All I can say is I hope they will not take our guns away. I believe in the 2nd amendment whole hartedly. Yes, we have the NRA and as a member of it I know for a fact it comes under fire a great deal... In my personal opinion they are trying very hard to get rid of the NRA. As well as taking guns away a little at a time. A few years ago, California, suddenly decleared certain weapons illegal and arrested those who had these guns and did not turn them in. Remember, these were once legal guns. So out of nowhere overnight they became illegal and the owners were suddenly criminals. So its very possible for this to continue to happen in places around our country little at a time so not to take to much notice. Other countries who had guns were also taken away and I guarantee they didnt think such a thing would happen to them.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Quite so Shar it only took one event in the UK to remove the right of law abiding gun owners all of whom had licences for their guns to be made a crimminal offence overnight. So you may will be right that the right to bear arms will be denuded a little at a time so no one will really notice, well I hope you and your fellow Americans will resist such errosions of your freedom and liberty.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

We are humans before we are citizens,
and owning a machine that can murder and maime INNOCENT people in truley tragic and unforseen circumstances is a haneous crime against humanity.


YOu mean an automobile here dont you ??

Or is your post public schooling at work??

I am sure you are describing the slaughter of millions world wide by automobiles or trains or buses...etc etc..etc

Thanks,
Orangetom.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Wow, 30years ago gun laws werent effective.

thats a great reason to abandon the idea.

And your right its humans that pull the trigger.. but imagine not having a trigger to pull in the begining?

And If someone broke into my house, and I had a gun. Of course I would retrieve it then go out to investigate.

So now this robber who cared nothing more than stealing a radio for cash, is faced with someone pointing a gun at him, and the natural reaciton would be to defend himsefl using his gun.

There's alot more chance of BULLETS flying when the house hold owner emerges toward the robber with a pistol.

Maybe we will have to agree to disagree, because I really dont care to become personal and start abusing people on something that is so trivial intodays world.

I just find it sickening, that guns can do so much damage, that force has caused so much misery world wide yet people still firmly beleive that owning a gun makes them safer.

If you want to play with guns, go join the army.
Dont bring them into a society where one day I might be walking around..
because there's no need for a firearm, when your walking your dog, walking to the stand to buy a paper, having a coffee or going to church.


Agit8Chop,

I am going through this thread reading your posts and noticing the progressive trend in public education type thinking.

I have had this same conversation with a fellow in the UK with the same lack of logic as you have used here twice and I am only in the second page of this thread.

Notice your PLACEBO used here in what appears to be perfect logic and reason. It is not ..it is expendability and disposability of people and the property they sometimes take risks to acquire.
You dispose of the labor and risks taken by ordinary people out here to acquire moneys to purchase thier propertys. A robber coming into thier homes or propertys to remove said propertys often condems these very people to taking the risks twice or more to replace the property. You are wont to make these people by your faulty logic and reason ..disposable and expendable in order to put ointment on your very poor sentiments. This is the very poor logic and reason of many of our politicians. They too make people disposable and expendable along with their hard earned propertys for votes/cheap politics.
This is the nature of your PLACEBO. It is very subsersive and misleading.

Real people out here take real risks to earn their moneys and acquire propertys. Dont ever be ignorant enough to dismiss their efforts to labor for your PLACEBO sentiments. This is precisely what a politician will do. This is also what public education paid for by the body politic will brainwash us into thinking...buying into the PLACEBO. It is very immoral to make peoples labor ..expendable and disposable in this manner. Thinking people can see through this. Publicly educated people often cannot.

The real question totally avoided by your PLACEBO is .."What is this robber doing in my home in the first place??"

This is precisely the point totally missed by the poster I debated from the UK. His point was to the effect that if guns were banned wouldnt it be more likely that the robber would also not have a gun? Talk about a dumb ignorant PLACEBO. It is the same PLACEBO or fingerprint of public education brainwashing.

What is this robber doing in my house in the first place?? That is the American question!! Dont you people ever forget this in favor of the "International United Nations PLACEBO."

We Yanks/Americans believe in Private Property. Your PLACEBO takes the Private out of Private Property and just substitutes property. Same as a politician or public education...financed by the body politic.

Those of you here ...Yanks/Americans ..remember my usage of the word "PLACEBO." YOu are going to see this fingerprint used over and over again by public education and also the body politic who finance public education. You need to be aware of this faulty logic and the connection to the end of private property and substituted with "Feelings" needing government ointment on them....to the ending of your private ownership of property/firearms. It begins with phony faulty PLACEBOS like this.

There is something very questionably immoral about a government who will train and arm its citizens when it needs them to die and be maimed for thier Glory..but will not allow the same citizenry to own a firearm. This just does not make good nonsense.

YOu have to educate people to become this stupid..they dont become this naturally stupid on their own..it must be helped along. But this is precisely what someone is trying to do here in America. We are being made by subtilty/seduction to follow the "European " model.

Agit8Chop..I am a nuclear fueler by trade..I take serious risks at times for my moneys. I am not expendable or disposable for you or anyone else ..neither is the property I acquire sometimes at great risk disposable or expendable for your sentiments or the sentiments of the body politic.
Same with a Farmer...farming is a very dangerous occupation, How about a butcher, a miner, a nurse, a painter. All of these are occupations which entail some risk for moneys earned.

My apologies for the harshness of this post but someone has to call it what it is.
The dumbing down of America and Americans.


Wise up people ..learn to spot the PLACEBO.

Orangetom



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Holy crap, its been f'n ages since i looked at this thread and almost every last page post is quoting me.
You guys must REALLY enjoy your guns... to argue so forecefully why I am an under educated rah rah using placebo's or what not..

jesus.. have your guns.. I hope one of your 'legal' guns wounds you one day.. so u can turn and say

"jee's, thank god guns are legal on the street.. look where it got me! ''

you can all debate this point yet fail to understand the logic behind your administration?

how is it you can be so patriotic, so passionate about firearms and your 'rights'

that you type pages of replies on a simple allowance of a rule in your constitution, yet you can allow the most crooked man to 'alter' all the other rules, and allow him to sh1t all over the world?

God gam GUN TOTING AMERICANS!

Get your f'n priorities correct..

because while your all so damn insane for your FIREARMS.
YOUR government is a hack, ruining the planet!

how many school shootings have you had in the last 5 months?
How many has Australia, Canada, New Zealand had?

But, im really debating to a wall here..

there's enough of you in that country that are so badly tapped, sooo mentally altered by todays style and greed that theres effectivley a majority now which means all the insane bs the world dispises you for, you choose to keep because u enjoy it.

Automobile? that your attempt at witt?
a man who keeps an automobile for the sole purpose of causing physical HARM to another member of his race... is a bloody idiot.
A man who keeps a gun beliving it will protect him and he should be able to SHOOOT people that he feels are on his personal turf, is a stupid psychotic idiot.


Or is that too 'post-public' schooling for you?


orangetom1999

You know i have a nice sunny spot for your 'placebo'
I find your post offensive to be hoenst.

Ignorant? Dumb?
MY placebo is a lack of education or something?


Answer me this,

Why am I dumb, ignorant and simply utilising my LACK of PLACEBO when saying I hate guns, and the pain and suffering they cause.

Ive grown up in a world where guns have never been legal in my society.
People arent scared of each other, we all agree on it lifes happy.
Sure robberies and assaults still happen,
but more often than not the very worst that happens is a few cuts bruises maybe a brocken bone at the most.
brings guns in to this equation for self defense?

All of a sudden this problem of society has become a fatal disease.

In a theoretical situation, if a man come up to me, and said that to me after hearing me debate my side of an argument.. I would of knocked his teeth out.

This is my opinion, an opinions never wrong, stupid, UN EDUCATED, misinformed or a reflection of my placebo.

Go buy your damn gun, keep it in your draw.. because should an accident ever hapen, all i can say is another mis led, un educated, mentally challenged gun toting american will be out of the world gene pool, and maybe.. just maybe a peace loving, world appreciating individual can replace him.. and remove his STUPIDITY!

[edit on 7-11-2006 by Agit8dChop]

[edit on 7-11-2006 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
We are humans before we are citizens,
and owning a machine that can murder and maime INNOCENT people in truley tragic and unforseen circumstances is a haneous crime against humanity.



I believe we call these "Machines" AUTOMOBILES, no? Perhaps you are right, we should ban anything that has the potential to maime or harm innocent people - like wood, or rocks or even fire. The senseless injuries suffered through the act of LIVING can no longer be tolerated! We should all live in bubbles!



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 08:28 AM
link   
It's sad to me because I usually like what Agit8dChop has to say, but in this thread he is way off. I'm going to state some of my thoughts sure to enrage some, and then end with a solution that will probably never happen, but who knows...

*Guns don't kill people, people use guns to kill people. If guns were never invented, we'd be killing eachother with crossbows and swords. I don't know about you, but i'd much rather get shot in the head or chest than sliced open or shot via a crossbow to the stomach.
*Guns are power, regulate power, keep power, and take power
"You can hate me or love me, but I have the gun."

*Guns help protect and also harm
Two sides. I'd rather shoot the criminal than have to engage in a knife fight because of firearms being illegal.

*Guns ensure food when game is there
Why use crossbows or spears when you can use scoped weapons? It is more ethical in the case of the animal suffering and it is more efficient.

*Guns protect the innocent and also the criminal
Guns protect the innocent, and they also protect the criminal. It is a game of numbers.

*Guns protect humans from dangerous animals
Talk to those in Africa and try to throw your anti-gun rhetoric at them. They have criminals, evil governments, AND deadly animals.

*Guns offer a therapuetic solution to stress
There is seriously nothing like renting a Desert Eagle .357-.50 and blowing up a target to handle stress.

*The government has guns, so therefor you are entitled by the U.S. consitution to have equal firearms, I.E. It is your Constitutional right to be able to own an M-4 Carbine (fully auto... but you already knew that), S.C.A.R, Tavor, G-36c, Sg552, AK-47, Famas, Spas-12, Streetsweeper, .50 caliber rifles, MP7's, MP5's, and grenades. If the Army or Government has it, you should be able to have it too. Where is the outcry for this slip-up in the law? Having guns in america for law-abiding citizens is not only for protection from criminals but also to overthrow a corrupt un-American government.



My solution is this:

Make everyone over the age of 18 legally binded by carrying a handgun on their person at all times. Restrictions will be for criminals, those deemed mentally unfit and/or anti-social, those who fail the mandatory safety-courses, and those with gang-affiliation. Rifles and shotguns must be kept in their cars, or in their house(s).

Now you tell me if most criminals wouldn't be scared sh**less of committing a felony act with violent force. The famous california AK/FN bodyarmoured drum mag carrying bank robbers wouldn't have made it out of the door. 10-20 civilians all armed with pistols would have dropped both bank robbers. 9/11 wouldn't have happened. 80% of all people are good and social. It is the 2 out of 10 you have to worry about. Bad criminals would die out slowly but surely. It would be a disaster at first, but then progress into civility. If someone wants to shoot you, they know if they do, your whole family and all your friends with shoot them. ARM EVERYONE!!!!!!!!


Agit8dChop: Guns are not a threat to our (human race) survival. You or I could die tomorrow via a gun in a horrible crime or random shooting- but our community won't go with us. The true enemy of the human race is the Nuke. Nuclear weapons actually DO have the potential to wipe us out. Guns, even high-powered/high-tech/black budget weapons- rail guns, plasma, lasers, microwave.... all of that junk is child's play compared to Nuclear research and development. Where are your screams for that?





[edit on 7-11-2006 by jaguarmike]



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 09:11 AM
link   
No, you cannot arm everyone. Why? Because "everyone" is too ignorant, selfish, tempermental or just plain stupid to be permitted to carry a firearm. That is why we have a licensing process - to weed those people out. You must successfully complete a course then you must pass a security check THEN, and only then, will someone be permitted to carry a gun.

I am a certified firearms instructor in the state of Ohio and I can tell you that about half of the people that come in for the CCW course are NOT fit to carry a concealed weapon. It is part of my job to weed these people out and prevent them from obtaining their permit. They are, however, permitted to own a firearm just so long as they a.) keep it at home or b.) transport said weapon in accordance with state and local laws. This prevents accidents and is effective.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo
No, you cannot arm everyone. Why? Because "everyone" is too ignorant, selfish, tempermental or just plain stupid to be permitted to carry a firearm. That is why we have a licensing process - to weed those people out. You must successfully complete a course then you must pass a security check THEN, and only then, will someone be permitted to carry a gun.

I am a certified firearms instructor in the state of Ohio and I can tell you that about half of the people that come in for the CCW course are NOT fit to carry a concealed weapon. It is part of my job to weed these people out and prevent them from obtaining their permit. They are, however, permitted to own a firearm just so long as they a.) keep it at home or b.) transport said weapon in accordance with state and local laws. This prevents accidents and is effective.


Kozmo, I totally agree with you. I just want to take it one step further with restrictions, and let nature take it's course by giving power back to good people. At first it would be horrible- but what if it turne do out to be good? I said, "Restrictions will be for criminals, those deemed mentally unfit and/or anti-social, those who fail the mandatory safety-courses, and those with gang-affiliation. Rifles and shotguns must be kept in their cars, or in their house(s). " This is an extreme idea, and might be more laughable than practical- but really think about it for a while. Do you think eventually it would make the world hostile towards criminals and level the playing field of bullying? Possible long-term reprocutions (I do agree at first it would be a nightmare)? If this was implemented as a 50 year plan, I would like to know how statistics play into it versus how many would die vs. how many would live.

*Violent criminals would be less inclined to do violent acts out of fear of failure and loss of life. Only a small percentage would not care and do the crime anyway. I believe the majority of criminals would rethink their ways.
*Bullies in life would be unable to overtly suppress a population. They would sink down and do things coverty- that just means one needs to work on getting a better radar for spotting the bad guys.
*Our civilization is in the decline, and this is a hit-or-miss solution. This is why this will probably never happen.
*Because our civilization isn't ruined yet into eternal chaos- this could work better than in the Wild West.

I firmly believe that one day there won't have to be a gun, and there won't have to be a war. There are groups right now working 24/7 to bring about social reform that actually has a chance: Scientology. However, that final goal of having all the world social without war and crime will take longer than you and I live this life. My personal opinions could just because i've been subjected to crime. I've been robbed by one man with a shotgun and the other with a pistol and somehow lived to talk about it, had my car vandalized, confronted on the street by a criminal brandishing a pistol and threatening to call his friends (I got out of it by scaring him... i'm either a genius or an idiot that got lucky), and so on and so forth. In two of those three situations, the odds would have been higher in my favor if I was armed. They were armed. People don't know what it is like until they've been in the situation. My good friend is an Iraq vet forward observer with 86 kills under his belt. He can't sleep at night. He has nightmares and claws at nothing. He's thought he was surely going to die multiple times. He's going to become a police officer and will see the same stuff. Unless you're a rare case, it's hard to put yourself in others shoes when it comes to something as serious as threat of death. In high school I knew a guy who got out of harlem with good grades and entered private school on a scholarship. He was true to his ideals and was not a criminal. However, simple "private school fights" would bring up so much emotional baggage from past life-threatening attempts back in the ghetto of harlem on his behalf that he literally went berzerk the two times someone wanted to fight him. I mean we're talking a guy who saw his brother stab his girlfriend to death in their apartment hallway when he was 6. I don't know why i've met so many people with outrageous life stories, but i'm trying to put it to good here. Crime needs to stop. Sorry if this is rambling.

BTW my ex-army friend does not share my opinion on this at all, i'm not using him to further my point and rally the troop supporters- i'm just giving the best example of what fearing for your life can cause.





[edit on 7-11-2006 by jaguarmike]



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   
DELETED, POSTED TWICE BY ACCIDENT.

[edit on 7-11-2006 by jaguarmike]



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Granted.
We shall agree to disagree!




...... but for the record im right and your wrong!


OK, I've read enough from this (apparently) foreigner. First words that come to mind are butt out , and buzz off. I'm sure there are some weighty issues that need attending to wherever you live. So, let's get to it and just don't concern yourself with the laws and people of a place you don't live in and apparently can't stand.

Hmmm, so exactly what country do you live in anyway? Tell us all so that we can help you out with what's going on there.

Yeah, yeah, I know, freedom of speech, etc., etc. Well, along with that comes 'freedom to ignore' if I keep seeing more of this kind of "post" from you.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Quite so Shar it only took one event in the UK to remove the right of law abiding gun owners all of whom had licences for their guns to be made a crimminal offence overnight. So you may will be right that the right to bear arms will be denuded a little at a time so no one will really notice, well I hope you and your fellow Americans will resist such errosions of your freedom and liberty.


Hardly!

If you're referring to the hand gun ban shooters had a choice - surrender them or move them overseas. Many pistol shooters now have their guns overseas & visit them regularly. I didn't and don't agree with the ban but you're incorrect to suggest the ban was 'overnight'.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Agit8dChop


That's completely childish, why sink to that level? You're a very smart person and I respect a lot of your views. However, this is why you shouldn't have American citizenship.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Quite so Shar it only took one event in the UK to remove the right of law abiding gun owners all of whom had licences for their guns to be made a crimminal offence overnight. So you may will be right that the right to bear arms will be denuded a little at a time so no one will really notice, well I hope you and your fellow Americans will resist such errosions of your freedom and liberty.


Hardly!

If you're referring to the hand gun ban shooters had a choice - surrender them or move them overseas. Many pistol shooters now have their guns overseas & visit them regularly. I didn't and don't agree with the ban but you're incorrect to suggest the ban was 'overnight'.




You do know he's saying it happened quickly right? Move them overseas or give them up? That's hardly a choice. I remember when I was shooting an MP5 at the gun range these two brits were all happy shooting their pistols and their jaws dropped when I started bursting and then auto fired- it really hit me how depraved you are. Haven't shot a machinegun? That's like saying you haven't eaten chocolate


Riddle me this: how much has crime gone up since you lost your ability to have firearms? Don't you have a Jamaican Yardy problem? Is the East End still bad? Don't your police carry MP5's and have a security camera on every street corner... MULTIPLE security camera's on every street corner? Your country is a police state resembling that of 1984, pure and simple. Let me be completely jerkish here and say, "If not for you, what about your children?"



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Any ban would likely be ignored by gun owners. I doubt that most gun owners would be able to resist a determined and organized forced attempt to remove the firearms, and may likely find ways to conceal them or declare them "sold" or "stolen".



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom
How would you the gun bearing citizens take this, would you give up your arms if told to do so or if you were labeled as a terrorist if you did not.


To quote...well...most Texans I know, "they'll take my gun when they can pry it from my cold, dead hands."

Our right to bear arms was not guarenteed just because people thought the loud stinky noisemakers were really neat, but because our founding fathers had no idea what the future would hold. They also didn't have access to things like the Encyclopaedia Brittanica, Wikipedia, or much at all, really, so the past was nearly as shrouded as the future.

What they knew was that government all too readily and easily would grab and hold whatever power it could amass. They knew the threat of tyranny was ever-present, no matter whose government, or what form. They knew that their own revolution required the use of force, deadly force, to attain independence from the tyranny of their own oppressors.

The founding fathers had no idea how well the new government they strove to create would work. Would it so weak as to be unable to amass enough of an army to protect the citizens, or would it become so powerful as to oppress the citizens it should be protecting? Words could be written on paper, and systems could be designed, and speeches could be given, but ultimately, if the contract between the United States Government and her citizens was not honored, the citizens needed the ability to protect themselves and/or revolt.

In a twisted sort of way then, the firearm is a symbol of the pact between a U.S. Citizen and their Government. It's a symbol that says "We The People won't use this as long as you do your job...or if we need a tasty meatsnack."



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 11:18 AM
link   
As I sit here in a very safe Juneau, Alaska, where it is perfectly legal to carry a concealed weapon WITHOUT a permit, I really wonder how people can think that taking away weapons from law adiding citizens would make this country a safer place. Then, I remembered this statement about liberals (anti-gun folks) that I heard years ago that I think applies to the mostly liberal anti-gun logic perfectly:

"Liberals consider that a woman raped and strangled with her panties is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet."

Want freedom with responsibility - move to Alaska.



Alaska Statute: HB 102, signed by the Governor on June 11, 2003 changes Alaska Statute 11.61.220 to allow anyone 21 or older, who may legally carry a firearm to also carry it concealed without having to obtain a special permit. The possession of a firearm at courthouses, school yards, bars and domestic violence shelters will continue to be prohibited. Alaskans may still obtain a concealed carry permit if they want reciprocity with other states or want to continue to be exempt from background checks when purchasing firearms.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join