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.

 

It's official, Obama to make AWB permanent

page: 9
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheHunted
Should we be allowed to buy a Howitzer because the constitution says we have the right to bear arms. No no no...


Why buy one when it's perfectly legal to build one and register it as a "muzzleloader?" You can even drive around town towing it from garage to field.

There should not be any restrictions. No no no... restrictions. Restrictions, registrations and bans are a relatively new concept in this nation. Until my neighbor needs a license to get drunk and smoke cigarettes or buy a bottle of simple bleach (all of which are infinitely more destructive than my AR) I will view all firearm regulations and restrictions as unfair and unjust and an afront to liberty. Even if my neighbor had to be licensed for all that I'd stand beside him and against the regulations and restrictions. I'll opt for liberty over "safety" (real or perceived) everytime.

As far as the knowledge you claim to be "dropping" goes I see nothing more than redundant loop cycles of the same valueless catch phrases over and over. Where's ctrl+break to stop the batch?




posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 


I disagree! Time is relavent when pertains to weapons. This country has changed so much since the constitution. Cities are more populated and firearms are much more then they once were. We have to adjust to the way of life. Theres no place for such weapons in our society.

[edit on 26-9-2008 by TheHunted]



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Awww, did somebody come back cranky? Did you miss your nap? Actually what I have been doing if you haven't noticed is stressing my points. Since you are having a difficult time grasping them. One day when you have valid point you should try it.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TheHunted
 


By this logic, I wouldn't be able to play a game of baseball, rake my yard, or enjoy a round of golf on Sunday.

Maybe I should just cut off my hands and feet as these are far more deadly weapons. Heeee-Ya!!



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ObamasLoveChild
reply to post by TheHunted
 


By this logic, I wouldn't be able to play a game of baseball, rake my yard, or enjoy a round of golf on Sunday.

Maybe I should just cut off my hands and feet as these are far more deadly weapons. Heeee-Ya!!



Explain how a ban on assault weapons equates to a game of baseball, or your hands and feet?????



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


If you're looking to ban "assault weapons" so the less than 1% of crimes they are used in will be committed with something else to somehow make us "safer" than you should certainly conclude that banning something that is used to commit far more crimes such as hands or feet.

Or, hands and feet are not necessary to simply live so why not ban them?

We've been in the same stupid loop for three pages now.

And sorry "The Hunted" but just as a 6 year-old pulling on daddys paint leg and repeatedly asking "why" constitutes expanding the point you too, yes the great "The Hunted", are just repeating yourself.

You didnt respond to: why not register and license bleach, cigarettes, incense etc... if safety is the goal?

Added, you should give up the "great power and range" excuse. You and I both know the 5.56 and the 7.62x39mm pale in comparison to the cartridges of the hunting rifles you seem perfectly happy not to ban. Unless you want to ban them the whole "stray bullet ripping through city blocks" angle is moot. Again, a point that was brought up pages ago.

[edit on 27-9-2008 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 06:37 AM
link   
When I started my career in DIA (eons ago), my boss, a naval commander, was giving me an off the record rundown of the personnel I would be working with. I was surprised that there were no army personnel, and really no combat arms personnel of any service represented. Commander X replied that they were not well suited to seeing the strategic picture. Boys with toys, he said, are like the repairman with only a hammer. Every problem looks like a nail to him.

If you feel you need an assault weapon to defend your house, your tactical judgement is defective. If you want it to defend yourself against the NWO, take your meds.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Office 4256

If you feel you need an assault weapon to defend your house, your tactical judgement is defective. If you want it to defend yourself against the NWO, take your meds.


I completely agree and it's been covered over and over and over in this thread.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Personally as a gun owner I believe it should be okay to have assault weapons not from a protection stand point but from a collector stand point. Besides its fun to go to the range and unload such a beastly weapon. But then again so many crimes are commited with military grade hardware and not handguns that its a wonder this didnt happen sooner. I know myself fear very much all the random Rambo like characters running through city streets... Im sure this weapons ban is gonna cost money... Perhaps they should just tax assault rifles a bit higher and use that money to pay for more police so we can get the unregistered handguns off the street. But that would make sense...



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kahis
But then again so many crimes are commited with military grade hardware and not handguns that its a wonder this didnt happen sooner. I know myself fear very much all the random Rambo like characters running through city streets...





posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


I believe ThisGuyRightHere explained it nicely in the post following yours. As is illustrated by gun statistics in America, far more crime occurs with everyday objects than 'assault rifles'.

Just because you have an inborn right to do something doesn't mean you have to do it. You just don't have the right to tell someone else not to. There were some pretty basic principles set fourth in the Constitution which, if you'll recall, was written by men who were fleeing oppression. They knew that no matter where our great nation headed there were a few key things that would keep us forever free of this oppression.

I live in a small virtually crime free community, but if I get a wild hair I see no reason why I can't shoot whatever gun I want. It's part of being a free society. If you live in an area where there is rampant gun crime perhaps you should seek solace elsewhere. At least question why your police force, that you pay for, isn't doing their job.

As someone pointed out earlier it's very similar to freedom of speech. What someone is saying or shooting has no bearing on their right to do so.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:28 AM
link   
You need an assault rifle to defend your house? Funny, but I don't recall ever seeing a news story about someone defending their house with an assault rifle. I'm not saying it never happened, but if people really needed assault rifles to defend their homes I'm sure we'd be hearing about it on a regular basis.

I think the whole idea is ludicrous.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

The president does not have the power or authority to ban guns. It would have to go through the house and senate, the later of which Obama is already a part of. So if he wanted to he would have just as good a chance from where he is. This argument always rears its head when the dems are ahead in a presidential election. More republican scare tactics




posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
[mo

oops double post

[edit on 27-9-2008 by red 5]



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by matttheratt
You need an assault rifle to defend your house?


For the fiftieth time, no. Only an imbecile would use a rifle, any rifle, (with the possible exception of a PCC) for home-d. That's not the point.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by red 5
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

More republican scare tactics



I'd agree with you if H.R.6257 wasnt introduced by and currently supoprted only by Republicans (Link) and if the statement:


They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent Link


wasnt from barackobama.com

Other than the Republicans on the right and the Democrats on the left you're right. Nobody wants to take my guns away.


[edit on 27-9-2008 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Hmm, well I am an idiot. But you can always move to Czech Republic.
news.bbc.co.uk...[/url]



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by boaby_phet
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 



Your going to run to somwhere else because you cant own a gun? that seems a bit silly, and i never really understood why americans make such a big deal about gun ownership..

noone needs guns!, guns are nasty little machines, simply developed to kill and hurt people or animals ( no, im not a veggie or against hunting!)

really, what do YOU need a gun for? and why does it upset you that you cant own a gun.. something that can only be used to harm someone.

on guns, america needs to stop living in the old times, this is 2008 ! not 1908.

guns are bad!, and the politicians are spot on with what they say , why they HELL does ANYONE need an ak 47 lying about their house unless their actualy at war and in genuine danger of someone shooting at the, ?


[edit on 25-9-2008 by boaby_phet]


Gun control was one of Hitler's ways of disarming the public.

In the UK after the gun ban home invasions went up, not down
because there was no threat of death due to the ban.

The right to bear arms is in the constitution, and you mention
an AK-47 which is a full auto weapon.

It is banned under other laws and rightfully so.

The Assault Weapons Ban is so moronic that it bans magazines,
bans some shotguns, and bans other semi-auto rifles for reasons
as frivolous as the gun " LOOKS " dangerous.

It is idiocy, and if you did not bother to read it then you are
speaking from total ignorance and this place is about denying
ignorance.

So do not be ignorant, read the law before you support it sheeple.

Let me shock you with another little known fact, people kill people
and guns are just one way to do it.

There is enough chemicals under most kitchen sinks to make
one hell of a bomb.

The peach pit is full of cyanide, are we gonna ban peaches ?

The fertilizer used to blow the Murrah Bldg to bits is still legal,
we better ban it soon. Oh yeah ammonia is in your pee, nitrogen
is in the soil lets ban both.

Ammonium Nitrate - primarily ammonia and nitrogen.

Ammonium Nitrate

They should ban Wikipedia for explaining it too !

Ppl that think of violence need to have brain detectors so
they can be all locked up if they have a violent thought !

Got to stop those thought crimes...

..



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Like others have said, the "LOOP" here is getting a bit narow minded. I suggest that those here who realy think that the politicians are not afraid of citizen firearms owners should spend a little time in the many DC cafe's at night. The staffs of many of our congress critters tend to get rather mouthy about whats been talked and discussed during the days meetings after a few cocktails at happy hour. You would be amazed at the tidbits of real info you can glean from a few short hours just sipping an adult beverage and listening. Besides DC is a great place for a family vacation. The larger hotels and the finer restaurants lounges are the places to visit after 4 PM. This is not a joke. When I worked in McClean, VA, I used to do this 3-4 times a week. Its the only way to actualy know whats going on in DC.

Zindo

Edit to say, do this during hearings on gun control! You will be amazed at whats said!

[edit on 9/27/2008 by ZindoDoone]



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I have a thought for all of you that think the shootings at the colleges is a reason to ban guns.As horrable as these shootings are the fact that a gun iis used limits the collateral damage and if there were some (qualified) person at the schools with a weapon avaliable to them, it would limt shootings even more.

Here is my thought;what if a determined person had no gun so got themselves a TRUCK (big 4x4 1 ton)with a very large brush grille(you know the type on most SUV's),waited tell class let out and drove up and down the walkways, grassie areas hitting people tell he had enough our ran out of gas or the PD finelly showed up.How many people due you think this person would kill before it was over!!?? Sick?you bet but the point is there will always be humans like this so to take away a person's felling of security(Gun Ban)just because some think it will stop the Killing is a sad sences of your own security but you take the rest of us with you.

If you don't want to own a gun, fine,but leave the rest of us who are willing to stand and deliver in a time of need alone,it just might be your life we save,or your child..




top topics



 
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join