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.


"70% of Americans support a ban on semi-automatic weapons"

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 02:19 AM
reply to post by dave420

Dave your username is very telling...So I will ask you to stop being lazy for just one moment of your day and read the Constitution. It is not Dogma. Dogma is the mess we have today...Telling everyone we are at the top of our game when we have sunk nearly to the bottom of the sea. I want to be able to have auto-assault rifles, I want to be able to carry any weapon I wish without being harassed by the gestapo, I mean cops, over it. Because I want this country to be able to fight any threat foreign and domestic. I want the government to be AFRAID of ever thinking about curtailing our rights, and I want any foreign enemy to realize that invading America would be an exercise in futility.

I don't want to have to rely on my government for nothing. Especially not protection. I can do that myself. If having government protecting me from terrorists, or Russians, or Flying Spaghetti Monsters means taking away my rights, then I will take my chances with terrorists, Russians, and Flying Spaghetti Monsters before I give up one drop of Liberty.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by projectvxn]

posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:33 PM
lol the great part is people stating we need close air support... In the event of a nationwide rebellion the military wouldn't have CAS in most areas... and beyond that there are thousands of cessna's pipers and aerobatic planes, and thousands of people who know how to make rockets who says the rebels won't have CAS? Look up the technical war, tamil tigers, and some of the other brushfire conflicts online. You'll see that CAS can be built in OVERWHELMING numbers on a budget if you have people with the technical expertise to carry it out. Your only concern then becomes avgas ... oh wait! thousands of regional and private airstrips nationwide? the 82nd and the rangers can only secure so many of them.
Beyond that the US military's airframe count and maintenance requirements would give them very limited cover. This isn't even covering the psychological impact on pilots sortying as fast as they can rearm and fuel that are having to kill their countrymen.

On to the next point the vaunted artillery,

1. err anyone who thinks the lower ranks of the military is solidly behind the regime at this point doesn't know anyone in the military. Blackwater and their ilk on the other hand... that's another story.

2. the US military has THOUSANDS of artillery pieces sitting in basically undefendable depots around the US. You think no one would think to pull a smash and grab?

3. the minute an MLRS or 155 with toe poppers loaded fires on the citizenry and the crew sees it's results you'll have basically neutrallized the arty by default because the crews won't want to fire.

I'm not saying that armed revolt wouldn't be without Massive casualties and a factionallization the US probably would never recover from, but the question that needs to be asked is "Is what we have that good?" In the land of the free there certainly are alot of laws governing that freedom. And there is a basic stricture our founding fathers let us know they believed in strongly "people should not fear their governments, governments should fear their people." Personally I think it's time to remind some people of that.

Now beyond that... the second ammendment is NOT anachronistic nor is private gun ownership a cause of a significant portion of "violent crime" look up what all is included in violent crime numbers sometime... Then do some thinking and talk to a brit and ask them if when a fight breaks out everyone even peripherally involved goes to jail. People in power have very sophisticated techniques to make the US look like the wild west but honestly it really isn't.

[edit on 20-9-2008 by roguetechie]

posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 05:33 AM
A few years ago i built a upper receiver that turned my AR15 into a pump type weapon.
That was when the state of Calif was trying to ban semi-auto assault weapons.

That makes it no longer semiauto.
and no longer a assault weapon.

But i bet they would still take it.

I also noticed that there is a blurring of the definition of semi-auto weapons and assault weapons.
What one are we talking about here. It is becomeing unclear.

Assault weapons are semi auto but not all semiauto weapons are assault weapons.

A M1 Garand is a semiauto rifle but NOT a assault rifle.
but a M1 Carbine is a assault weapon.

posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 06:17 PM
An assault weapon is anything they pick that week that could concievably give a civilian parity of equipment with their military counterparts. the catergorization is based almost entirelly off of "aesthetics" if it can be spun as scary looking it's on the list.

edit to add: Oh and FYI the m1 carbine makes the list because of one of the most disastrous missions in LA swat's history. The so called symbionese liberation army got cornered and shot it out with the swat team until the houses they were in burned down on top of them. The SLA used quite a few readilly available m1 carbines and a variant known as the Liberator pistol which shortened the m1 into what was basically a submachine gun / machine pistol.

[edit on 26-9-2008 by roguetechie]

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 09:19 PM
I doubt so many people would want to lose their ability to protect themselves from criminals who will still have guns no matter what kind of laws are passed.

posted on Oct, 11 2008 @ 02:26 AM
If there's one thing these petty tyrants fear most, it's a well-armed, well-informed citizenry. That's why the leftists in the US embrace gun control, mandatory public school education, and the "Fairness Doctrine".

As for "public polls", 11% of the general public think that Elvis is still alive.

Ironically, what these clueless gun control nuts here in the US fail to realize is that if there was gun control back in 1775, there would be no United States.

posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 12:52 AM
this is the thread on propaganda.

then you will understand "70% of Americans support a ban on semi-automatic weapons"

pure propaganda by the anti gun movenment.

posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 08:23 AM
Interesting comments, seems that everyone in here is scared to death of their government. JUst by reading all these comments it becomes obvious America is not the freeist country in the world by any means. Who the hell would want to live in a country where you need guns to defend yourselves from the government. It isn't the gun ban which would be the problem, it is the fear and paranoia of people in this thread.

posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 09:01 AM
70%? Um.. I don't think so. Wherever he pulled that statistic from, I think it likely the sun doesn't shine there... and he should put it back before what's left of his brains fall out on the floor.

As the saying goes.... Lies.... Damn lies.... and statistics.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by Resinveins]

posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 09:26 AM
reply to post by DarkStormCrow

This is rediculous. what needs to be done is a crack down on the manufacturers who produce cheap guns made for personal confrontations.

Bryco Arms and their fed dubbed "ring of fire". The cheapest, worst guns out there that you can buy for 60 bucks new. These are the throw away guns. The ones people use for confrontations and then throw it away.

Unfortunately, the poor need to be armed, too.. and with decent guns costing a minimum of 300 it's rough.

Banning semi-auto guns completely is completely out of line.

posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 09:28 AM
I think it's pretty fair to say that 70% think an assault weapon is a belt fed machine gun. If they knew an AR-15 is more like their Grandpa's hunting rifle they might get a little pissed someone wants to steal that right away!

posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 09:31 AM
reply to post by bdswetty

So what is it when some thug idiot chucks a nice 1911 or Glock 17 in a sewer grate? Those arent cheap. The problem with the "cheap guns are used by criminals" idea is that it assume criminals are just walking into any old gun shop to buy their firearms.

How to you decide what's a 'cheap' gun when the criminals are buying from their buddies trunk?

I dont buy the "Saturday Night Special" theory at all. It's just more propaganda to puch the anti-gun movement forward.

posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 09:31 AM
Popular support is a fickle thing.

The same people that use 70% of people support a ban on semi-automatic weapons as a reason to ban them will do a complete 180 and ignore the fact that 30 out of 30 states voted down gay marriage. Then they will do another 180 and say that since Obama won the popular vote America has spoken.

Bottom line is popular support only matters when it supports your point of view.

<< 1  2   >>

log in