It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Removal of the Right to Bear Arms

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 02:29 PM
I have often wondered have the recent mass killings in the US just been as the media puts it the action of the lone Nutter/Misfits or are they organised killings with the aim to remove the right to bear arms.

We know there are for what ever reason unhinged people etc. who do kill but the knowledge of such people is an ideal opportunity to up the anti in staging high profile killings and using them as a pretext to remove weapons from the hands of the American populace.

Yes we can lay some of the killings at the door of lone gunmen etc. but can they all the events be blammed upon them. I think that its highly unlikely that they are just the work of some lone madman/men, that it is highly probable that other forces are at work with the sole purpose to use these events to remove the right to bear arms. There has been an increase in scale and frequency in these events is that a possible indicator.

What do American gun owning citizens think of such a scenario.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 02:39 PM
Revoking the right to bear arms is one of the most tragic mistakes a country can make. I have a feeling the media attention being given to these random attacks are in an effort to push the liberal agenda to revoke the right to bear arms.

Of course the old adage remains true- when you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns. The law abiding citizens would turn over their guns and be left defenseless against violent criminals, in the event of a corrupt government take over, and foreign invasion.

But the main problem is, it is an absolute impossibility to remove all weapons from circulation. Guns were not always required to be registered and there are still many hunting rifles that were in circulation before permits were required.

Registered guns are going to primarily be in the possession of law abiding citizens who obtained the guns after the ownership of guns were required to be registered. In the event of revoking our right to bear arms, only the law abiding citizens who are on the record of owning guns will be the ones who have them taken away. The corrupt will still have possession of their weapons.

Surely guns are scary and it would be a beautiful thing if they had never been invented but it is pure fantasy to think you can take them out of a society that has had guns in circulation for centuries. It is impossible to recall every single one.

Going back to your original assertion, yes, I think these stories are being impressed into our mindset in an attempt to eventually agree to give up the right to bear arms.

However, guns are not the only method of mass murder. Knives, home made bombs, and other weapons have been used to commit such tragedies. If guns were unobtainable to such criminals, they would simply use another means.

When they say "Guns do not kill people. People kill people" is fundamentally correct. This will not solve the problem for it has been proven throughout humanity that the hearts of such people are wicked. They will only develop another means to carry out their plans while the innocent will be left helpless.

[edit on 12/11/2007 by AshleyD]

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 02:49 PM
I agree there may be an agenda here but I feel like we have been counting on the Police and security way to much and these Colorado shootings speak for that very loudly, there was a vietnam vet there asking a male security guard for his weapon cause the male security guard wouldn't do anything except hide.
Until the female security guard showed up and shot this guy they were all at his mercy the vietnam Vet will more likely than not get a concealed carry now..

it is great that the police are there at times but not so much when life is in danger as they are a reactive force where carrying a concealed weapon is very proactive and allows you some chance of defending yourself

So I guess this story speaks for both sides in some light, maybe less would have been killed had they been armed however no one would have been killed if this guy didn't have a gun..

at any rate I don't see people putting up with this for much longer my only worry is that they will give up more freedoms for security and all on this board know what Ben Franklin said about this

any person who would give up freedom for security deserves neither...

2 cents spent


posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 02:59 PM
Following Hurricane Katrina, troops marched into wealthy Louisiana neighborhoods and began confiscating fire-arms and taking names of completely innocent civilians.

They did not go out and confiscate weapons from roaming vandals, they went after innocent citizens.

This was all part of a test - the next orchestrated catastrophe (not saying Katrina was orchestrated, but it was an obvious FEMA training fiasco), the next catastrophe will lead directly to martial law and guns WILL be confiscated. Those who refuse will be shot.
This is what FEMA is all about. Disarm the public and move them into concentration camps.

And yes - the VTech shootings and recent mall shootings were perpetrated by brain-washed teenagers. The VTech shooting was carried out by a kid who was the son of government agents, the CIA has massive brainwashing campaigns to set lunatics like this loose on the public.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:05 PM
Some people think they can remove all potential harm from a society through laws and rules.

It just doesn't work that way.

It is not fair to remove the potential for a homeowner to protect their family from harm. That makes a man feel helpless and helpless feeling people oppressed people can make big trouble, and rightfully so.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:10 PM
That would not happen in my neck of the woods to many rednecks and we all know each other so I don't see it happening here... not enough lawmen here to enforce that kind of thing and not enough National Guard either

but just in case I have some hidden and have a metal mill and metal lathe as well as blueprints and material so I can make more..


posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:59 PM
As I have posted before on this issue, our guns will be rendered useless in a full scale attack of any kind.

With the biological weapons and the lazer weapons and the weapons that make your skin burn and blister.............

We are in for a world of hurt I am afraid.

But of course the right to bear arms is still an important constitutional issue and shouldn't be taken lightly. But then again I read on another thread that with the new homeland security manual is included to say that defenders of the constitution are domestic terrorist.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:57 PM

Originally posted by interestedalways
A But then again I read on another thread that with the new homeland security manual is included to say that defenders of the constitution are domestic terrorist.

Absolutely true. We can be labeled as terrorists for declaring our constitutional rights. We will be labeled the same for demanding that we keep our guns during a crisis.

This is why the police force is being militarized across the country. It's no longer a matter of protecting our rights, but enforcing the removal of them from the general public.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:55 PM
This might sound really odd, but having the chance to live all over the country this is what I have noticed. Up in the northern part of the country, people did not brag about owning weapons, and I can say that I never even saw one in any persons home. When I moved out west, people had them in their houses, and also had permits to carry concealed (not everyone, but quite a few people I met.) It was not uncommon to see "check your weapons" (as in check them in at the service desk) in a lot of the stores there. Moving to Arizona after my parents had been there for a while, one of the first things they advised me of was to never flip anyone the bird in traffic out there. People will follow you home and shoot ya! Now I live in the south, and everybody, has guns here. To my surprise, I have been in several homes where people have one stashed in nearly every room of their house.

I have discussed people loosing their right to have guns with some of the people down here in the south, and most say they would start shooting before they would ever hand their weapons over. In other words they will fight to the death before they ever turn them in.

It's no surprise to me that weapons were confiscated after Katrina (I live in Louisiana) because the chances of them falling into the wrong hands were great, and home owners would have shot and killed a heck of a lot of looters.

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 12:05 AM
Taking away weapons such as guns from the public (the right to bear arms) is probably the best idea anyone could come up guns no mass shootings, school shootings etc

There is no logical reason anyone needs a gun.

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 12:13 AM
reply to post by andre18

Yeah, and then they could remove forks, knives, baseball bats, poles, shovels, et cetera, et cetera.... How does that sound to ya?

[edit on 12-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 12:26 AM

Originally posted by andre18

There is no logical reason anyone needs a gun.

Really? What if three armed men broke into your house demanded all of your possessions and began to rape your wife?

Would you see that as a reason to own a gun or do you think you could talk your way out or get 911 in time??/

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 12:32 AM
reply to post by andre18

Guns are like drugs, if people want them bad enough, they will find a way to get them. Doesn't matter if they are legal or not. Most the people that own the illegal ones also do drugs........go figure!

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:49 AM
I’m not talking about anything but guns..........

See this is the moronic attitude people have towards defending your home....
This idea that you've got to defend your home with guns because there is always going to be someone going to rob you is so damn childish....

Let’s say defending your home is but one reason.....a bad one at that.....besides that......that's think you need guns for that one reason....

The main reason i hear, "we need guns to defend against people with guns," you take away the guns, there's no need to defend yourself against people with guns, because there's no guns to defend yourself against.....

And it's true guns can be accessible like drugs.....but there's still less deaths and shootings caused by guns, if it was illegal.

FACT: Comparison of U.S. gun homicides to other industrialized countries:
In 1998 (the most recent year for which this data has been compiled), handguns murdered:

373 people in Germany
151 people in Canada
57 people in Australia
19 people in Japan go Japan...

54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States WTF...........

[edit on 12-12-2007 by andre18]

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:58 AM

Originally posted by andre18
Taking away weapons such as guns from the public (the right to bear arms) is probably the best idea anyone could come up guns no mass shootings, school shootings etc

There is no logical reason anyone needs a gun.


This is reality, where criminals, the militarized police state, etc. can do whatever they want with the general populace - because they have guns. An armed populace is less likely to be wiped out at once or corralled by 'shock-troops' and other task-forces that could descend upon them. Outright war will not break out, but every person needs to be able to stand up to oppression in any form, especially when it becomes fatal. The only way to really do that is with weaponry.

If you want to say we don't need anything - speak about nukes. There is no reason on earth why humans should be offing each-other in mile by mile radius' for the sake of 'political stability'.
The people responsible for bringing nuclear weapons into the world will be the same to drop them on you and then take your weapons while you run for safety.

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 02:05 AM
reply to post by andre18

A recent relevant post on this is here:

If most people could truly defend themselves, there'd be a lot less motivation for criminals to attack anyone. In fact, if everyone had an infinite ability to defend themselves with capability equivalent to ANY possible attack, the world would be a very peaceful place pretty quickly.

I'm skeptical that the recent spate of strange, phychotic behaviors are just a "natural" occurance. As long as we fear that the average citizens and people around us are all unstable and ready to snap, we don't have to trust them with a conversation or our common ground of belief in changing the government, let alone a gun. All the criminals already have guns. Why will disarming everyone else make the world safer for people who care to improve it?

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 10:05 AM
reply to post by andre18

I would like to see you call a person who had a wife, or daughter raped or murdered by a home intruder childish and moronic.

Loosing things to a home burglary is one thing. Things are replacable. People are not.

You missed the point completely as to what I said. People will get guns whether they are illegal or not.

So, since you are sticking to what you said, I'd like to know how in the world you think that all the guns in America could be rounded up in the first place? That will never happen, even if they are made illegal. Do you have any clue how many unregistered weapons there are alone? Now who's the real moron here? You are dreaming!

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 10:24 AM
Americans will rue the day that the give up their weapons.
You have no idea what the world will be like in 5 let alone 10-15 years down the track.
You can't defend yourself with a pea shooter.
And oneday the police might not be your friend but your enemy.
Who will you turn to for protection then?

For the amount of guns in circulation, there isn't a total bloody frenzy happening
So obvioulsy MOST American gun owners are responsible.
There will always be crazies who want to go on a rampage.
If they don't have guns, they can always make home made bombs.

So it won't stop these nutters.

We have gun control in Australia and we still have heaps of crime that involves weapons, guns. So you'll never get rid of violence from society. IMO

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:26 AM
reply to post by andre18

I'm guessing that you are young based on your statements when I was younger I thought I could change the world too with dreams and hopes as I aged I realized that it takes more than hopes and dreams to change the world and while a lot of people will hope and dream with you most will not take action (you can't watch TV if you are at the local town meeting)sad but true in my experience

Also I have hobbies and things I like to do a hunter likes to hunt for this you need a gun I don't want to take away what they want to do just because I don't hunt, just like I wouldn't like to have my hobbies taken away from me because someone else thinks there is no reason for it..

Would a world without guns be better? Maybe but typically the people that lose their guns are the ones who have done nothing at all to warrant losing their guns leaving only the criminals armed great idea we have an estimated 350 million firearms in the US ( some say double that) just estimates mind you.. rounding up this many weapons would be a ridiculous waste of money and time

and again the old adage applies here guns don't kill people people kill people..

Maybe the problem isn't guns but instead the state of the world
and I kind of think that if people didn't have access to firearms they would just blow themselves up as people do in other countries taking even more people out with them..


[edit on 12/12/2007 by geocom]

[edit on 12/12/2007 by geocom]

[edit on 12/12/2007 by geocom]

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 12:16 PM
well it's going to the supreme court i believe , so we will find out soon

depending on how the hand selected judges interprets the bill of rights

If the economy is really gonna tank, and we are really screwed we will probably have our guns taken away, in case we get fiesty. Then we are toast.

Hopefully we will be offered jobs in slave labor camps, making who knows what, because if there is a large scale collapse demand for goods will go down, except for food and water. Perhaps their will be a need to get rid of a large part of the population when the west's economic model ( problem = no problem / more debt) collapses in on itself. Hopefully it will just be the u.s that gets hammered, and Industry makes a return to the nation, and the service sector jobs get recycled back to blue collar work.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in