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.

 

Gun Control and Freedom

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 04:03 PM
link   
This may not be the appropriate location but it is mired in political circles.

Reference: www.cnn.com...

Once again gun control is rising to the top of democratic circles. The ban on assault weapons does have merit but if people like Feinstein have her way we would be gunless. As it is you have to know someone who knows a judge in NY state. Thankfully I do since I just moved into a more friendly carry county. What are everyone's thoughts on this topic?

Caveats:
- I realize there may be victims of violence by firearm on this site.
- I agree that automatic weapons GENERALLY do not belong in the hands of private citizens. I've fired them and they're fun, but ...




posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 04:21 PM
link   


Gun Control and Freedom


If by Gun Control you mean a ban on guns all togather than I dont think you can have both. Not for very long anyway.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Just say Hypothetically that somehow an extremly corrupt individual gains power in the white house.....we have no guns then what do we do after that???

Saddam was technically a president but he just faked the elections.....As great as america may be it is possible for these types of things to happen here.If that situation presents itself to the american people how will we defend ourselves???? I can pretty much garuntee that no other country is gonna come save us lol...WE ABSOLUTLY NEED OUR GUNS..

I will never trust a person that thinks all guns should be banned and when certain people do I wonder how much history they actually are aware of..and to tell you the truth I wouldnt be suprised if the knew next to nothing.

Guns for life!!!! litterally



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 04:47 PM
link   
the 2nd admen was made for the more secure gov't. it is stated that ppl have the right to carry and bare arms , and also to keep a well regulated militia for the security of a free state. if the guns are banned, then the us has complete control over the general populatiion. in other words, the gov't will be more willing to listen if you have a gun in their face.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Well, it was created to:

1) protect citizens from tyranical rule

and

2) as a measure of protection for the nation and for individuals.

But yet, basically you got it right.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 07:37 PM
link   
That is to say, as one of them did, so that if need be, we could take back the government from tyranny and arbitrary rule.

In that respect, there is no reason that the citizenry should not be owning automatic weapons if they choose (personaly, my position is quality of shot, not quantity), and as the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, there is no time when the government should be telling free men they cannot have the weapons of their choice.

Do you understand, though, that you are not free, and why this is?



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   
lol...I agree..quality over quantity...but I honestly would be willing to allow anyone to have legal access to automatic weapons...its a right and Im not afraid of other people being armed and will never be.

[Edited on 26-2-2004 by McGotti]



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Why take away guns?? Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Even if you take away guns, theyll find some other weapon.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Personally, I'd prefer a baseball bat if I were wanting to kill someone in anger. And not some cheap aluminum bat, either.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 08:07 PM
link   


Personally, I'd prefer a baseball bat if I were wanting to kill someone in anger. And not some cheap aluminum bat, either.


I agree 100% take your time and get it out of your system, listen to the screams and the bones break, ahhhh.....brings back memories.

[Edited on 26-2-2004 by Amuk]



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk


Personally, I'd prefer a baseball bat if I were wanting to kill someone in anger. And not some cheap aluminum bat, either.


I agree 100% take your time and get it out of your system, listen to the screams and the bones break, ahhhh.....brings back memories.

[Edited on 26-2-2004 by Amuk]


have you guys ever considered anger management?



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 08:12 PM
link   


have you guys ever considered anger management?


That IS anger management


Mine wasnt in anger I got paid for it.

I collected money.

[Edited on 26-2-2004 by Amuk]



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 08:33 PM
link   
You see? He got anger management and was paid for getting it.
Life is too good! Well, depending on what end of the bat you find yourself!



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Some very good points raised. I am surprised I did not hear one positive reply concerning this (pro-gun control). I am not sure how I feel about people having automatic weapons -- I don't have a problem with the current law that bans them; but only them. I've heard about semi-automatics being next on the chopping block however, and I'm not ready to relinquish my concealable .40 yet. For a $240 gun it fires great, doesn't jam (only on occasional reloads from the range), and always finds the target.

I have to admit the baseball bat does sound enticing for an intruder however. Except the blood would be a pain in the arse to clean up, and you'd have to wait until after the police investigation to clean up... Still, much fun there. Break into my home and you won't even crawl out. I've often thought I would just cap them in the knees to totallly ruin their life but then I realized I probably would end up paying their social security disability via taxes. So, back to death for the intruders.



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 08:25 AM
link   
I'm very much in favor of gun control.

And from what I've seen, the presence of guns doesn't deter an invasion (the common argument for them.) Iraquis were well-armed (and they are well-armed)... didn't stop the US from coming in and taking over the country.



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
I'm very much in favor of gun control.

And from what I've seen, the presence of guns doesn't deter an invasion (the common argument for them.) Iraquis were well-armed (and they are well-armed)... didn't stop the US from coming in and taking over the country.



Well Byrd I can understand your sentiment, but if the Iraqis would of fought it wouldn't of been so easy on our troops.

Do you think a Red Dawn could happen here in the US. Hell no! They would get their butt kicked, not only because the citizens would fight, because of the logistic nightmare too.

I can't prove this, but one reason that the Japanese might not of invaded the US in WWII is because of how well armed the public was. There is some talk of a Japanese commando group training to land in Santa Barbera and disrupt aircraft manufacture and cause death and destruction, but they knew they would all be killed eventually. Wheter by the military or the public or both no one knows, it didn't happen. How can we gauge deternce?

I have a Pinkerton Alarm system on my house. How many burgalers have been detered by it? Have no idea, impossible to measure somtehing like that. Nope your statement isn't logical, sorry.



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 09:32 AM
link   
The real criminals will always get guns. Some can get automatic weapons illegally without much trouble. If they are planning to kill someone anyway, do you think they will care much about an extra law about which gun they use? No... I think that all weapons should be legal to buy, but automatic weapons should have some restrictions. Maybe a very comprehensive background test and mental evaluation could come into play for buying those weapons..I wouldn't mind if it would help to keep them out of crazy people's hands. But they will probably buy one illegally anyway so...it wouldn't help much. If criminals can buy automatic weapons illegally, we should be able to buy them too and have equal firepower for defense.



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Precisely why we can not lose our right to bear arms. The criminal side will always find a way to obtain what they need so long as there exists a unit of currency.



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   
I am for gun control. Don't get me wrong and quote me as saying I want all guns taken away because I don't.

Rifles for hunting are one thing, but automatic rifles? How far will this go?

Remember that the second amendment said we have the right to bear arms, not neccessarily guns, so technically it wouldn't be illegal to own an apache or a f117 stealth.

I would not feel comfortable knowing that my next door neighbor has a machine gun, I don't know why anyone would.

When the constitution was written, they didn't take into account that we would have the technology to wipe out an entire city with one weapon. Honostly, what would our dinky pistols and rifles compare to the best and most highly trained and high tech army in the world?

Screw the bat, take martial arts, you can take down someone with a bat in no time.



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrJinglesI would not feel comfortable knowing that my next door neighbor has a machine gun, I don't know why anyone would.



Thats just the thing, if your neighbor has one, you know not to mess with him right ? So if you know everyone has a machine gun, people would know not to mess with each other or they get blasted. The country would be much safer if EVERYONE had a gun. You think someone would want to rob you as much if they knew for a fact you have a gun ? I doubt it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join