It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When they are widely available it will be so much easier to get them. At least with a knife you can try and run away.
It's like the Yanks are afraid that King George is going to come back and get them, or something. That precious "but what if we are invaded!" line gets me every time.
Originally posted by tommyb98201
I do not believe we are in any danger of loosing our right to carry weapons anytime soon. We just might have to wear a holster. I dont agree with this and Im not all that much into guns. I do , However support the 2nd amandment as I have read it and supporters of it several times.
The founding fathers werent as much concerned about protecting ourselves from each other as they were protecting us from a government gone mad. Thats the conclusion I have drawn.
Bury a few guns and ammo somewhere just in case, then come protect me, I dont own any. I will feed you.
Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
Ok so, they are hightening requirments to have a concealed weapon licences and now some people no longer qualify for it anymore.
They arent taking peoples guns from them. All that has happened is the minumum requirments to have a concealed weapon licence has gone up. So some people no longer qualify. I fail to see the conspiracy here. People can still have their guns. Just certain people are no longer able to have carry a concealed weapon.
Please some one explain to me why 146 people out of 1,024 not meeting the new requirments is a big deal. While im not sure what part of the new requirments disqualify them for their license I would venture to bet that they probably dont need to be carrying a gun around anyway.
Unless they are being taken away from them because of ther race, religion, gender, sexual orentation. Or unless the US government is sweeping down and taking every single gun away from everybody I see no real conspiracy.
All I see is a small portion of people in California not meeting the new requirments.
Am I missing something here?
[edit on 12-10-2008 by gimme_some_truth]
Originally posted by zorgon
Yeah RIGHT.... You mean HAND GUNS... but ARMS include rifles and shotguns which are LEGAL to own in Canada
Originally posted by theotherhawk
I don't have any felonies against me but I have had a restraining order. To say the least It was completely unprovoked and full of made up. I guess it looks like they're going to use someone else's pack of lies against me as an excuse not to grant me my Civil rights to have weapons. Just another reason to hate that woman.
Originally posted by slykiwi
my god, i cant believe that anyone can actually advocate gun laws under the delusion that they reduce crime. does it occur to you that the U.S. has the slackest gun laws in the world and the highest guns per capita in the world, and yet it also has THE HIGHEST GUN CRIME RATE as well as the highest non gun crime rate
[edit on 14-10-2008 by slykiwi]
Originally posted by nfotech
.....Countries with gun bans have huge crime problems, especially gun related homicides. All gun bans do is create a huge pool of helpless victims.....
that is ridiculous. gun bans stop guns getting into anyones hands not just innocents. one of the problems in our 'great' country, is that our constitution contains the seeds of doom in the words "the right to bear arms". innocents to not carry around guns, if they know that no-one else has them. a man who carries a gun however, may jump on an opportunity to rob, rape, or defile that he would not if he did not have the power. in the U.S. it is far easier to get guns even in the states with strict anti gun laws, than anywhere else in the world. if you think that other countries have higher gun crime then you are obviously severely deluded.
[edit on 14-10-2008 by slykiwi]