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.

 

What would it take for American citizens to hand in their firearms willingly?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by JackCash

Originally posted by lushyslushy
a million dollars to everyone who disarms!!


You are laughing, but I think you are on to something.

I bet a lot of people would jump at that offer. A LOT!


I know I would do it. Then I could buy bigger better guns on the black market and still have some cash left over.

I can think of no reason for giving up our only defense against tyranny and oppression.




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:19 PM
link   
The United States Government (and I say that loosely) will NEVER convice me that they can protect me from 3,4,7,9 sons of bi*ches entering my home with the intent of harming me or my family. The firearms I purchased is for the full intent of protecting my well being and the ones I love. This thinking resonates with the majority of gun owners and I promise, you will not see people just hand over their protection tools willingly or without a fight. Take that to the bank.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Sounds far-fetched I know.

But the possibility of a fake alien invasion comes to mind. Governments telling people that the only way out of an invasion is to give up their firearms.

Call me crazy but I see it as a posibility with hologram technology that already exists.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:24 PM
link   
First obstacle that they would face is repealing the Second Amendment. This would be next to impossible. They could however prohibit the sale of firearms and ammunition, and after time it would be a moot point as the gunpowder would break down, making the ammo too dangerous to use. This does not take into account the black market, which would happily supply fresh ammo to those willing to pay. I'd be willing to bet that the PBT wishes that the Founding Fathers had used the word 'muskets' instead of 'arms' in the amendment! Basically, it's never gonna happen! Our Forefathers put that in the Constitution to prevent the Government from ever being able to enslave the people.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by JSarge
Is it just because you have always had access to guns, so you feel your right shouldn't be taken away from you?


Thats your answer right there.

Its our right, and as such I will not allow it to be taken from me just as I would not allow any of the other rights from the Bill of Rights to be taken away.

This right is the most important as it gives us the ability to defend the others. Without it all the other rights can be taken away with the simple use of a pen.

Self-defense and hunting come in a close 2nd and 3rd to why I won't give them up.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   
I dont have a gun, but if you want everyone to give up their guns then all governments must distroy all theirs first to prove there is a benifit to giving up the ones the general polulation has... the governments will never give them up so there will never be peace on earth...

History has taught us violence promotes more violence..and war kills ... We are supposed to use history to learn from our mistakes and not repeat them ...See how much the majority of the population has learned from history....NOTHING .... if everyone learned from history then noone would join the military to continue the violence(I do support our troops in prayer they return home safe)but do not promote the violence.


.the only way for peace is everyone drop their weapons and extend their hands in peace but I dont see that happening in our great grand-childrens life.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:46 PM
link   
In the 1930s, a man was arrested for possession of an unregistered short barreled shotgun. The government's argument was that the short barreled shotgun was not a military weapon and thus not a "militia" weapon protected by the Second Amendment.

Fully automatic weapons made after 1986 are banned and pre-1986 strictly controlled. However, the standard firearm issued to US soldiers is fully automatic, clearly a military weapon that should be protected by the Second Amendment.

If making unregistered short barreled shotguns and basic military issued rifles illegal didn't incite an uprising, what's to stop them banning any other type of weapon they choose?

Why wasn't there an uprising in 1934? Why not in 1986?

Why wasn't there an uprising after Ruby Ridge or Waco?

When all "assault weapons" are banned, will there be an uprising?

What will be the final step that pushes an armed overthrow into action? Will you be left with a flintlock musket by that time?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   
For those who didn't grow up in the US, there is something that you may not understand. New England according to my theory is that they originated mostly from Germanic peoples. More industry-related.

Those who initially settled in the "South" were more closely descended by agrarian Celtic peoples. Of course with the ease of migration, this is increasingly changing with a more complete mixing of peoples.

There are those of us who grew up with weapons, specifically firearms. We had plenty of land to hunt or sport shoot, and if there was a problem, men from both the towns and farms would show up with their firearms and begin to address the problem.

Just as Brits for example find driving on the left-hand side of the road to be natural, we here in the US find that very uncomfortable, as we grew up driving on the right hand side.

Now why would we turn in our firearms, some of which are family heirlooms that have been handed down for generations? Why? For what reason?

You'll note that in our Civil War, many of the Southerners gave the North fits in the early years in spite of being vastly outnumbered, most bringing their own weapons to the fight, until the industrial might of the north begin to wear the South down. That's a hell of a testament to individual ownership of firearms.

You may say that was nineteenth century and has nothing to do with today. You are missing the point. As Americans, our armed citizenry is part of our culture, our habit, our values, and our tradition. These values are not equally held by those from New England, to this day. But New England is not the entirety of America.

You don't have to understand it.

You aren't American.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 01:53 AM
link   
I think taking away any of the items included in the Bill of Rights is close to impossible simply because they are the basis for the establishment of the United States of America. It would be simply IMPOSSIBLE.

Besides without looking too far by reviewing Mexico's policies we can see what happens when the Government removes a cititzen's Right to Bear Arms. Opression of the General public.

Not a good idea....



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 03:00 AM
link   
I've been making very similar points in the 'American Patriotism Scares Me' thread as quite a few of the posters in this thread.

I honestly believe that the right to bear arms is loaded with myth and fallacy. I appreciate and, in a small way, admire people who claim they will take on and defeat the American military if necessary. Despite of course the fact they will be taking on one of the most technologically sophisticated and well-trained armies in the world with nothing more than rifles and handguns.

I'm starting to believe that America's 'right to bear arms' is a hollow one in that if that's granted under the notion of being a defence against a government against its people - keep in mind this amendment came into being only a few years after the War of Independence - then if the people were a serious threat to the government then that right wouldn't actually be there and what rights you have regarding this - as in what weapons you can actually own - is tempered so you actually stand even less of a chance.

I think, on one level, the arms race has actually been against the American people as much as one against other countries.

I see this as similar to voting: if voting actually made significant differences, we wouldn't be allowed to vote. It's just a case of going through the motions and the pretence of us thinking we have power and control.

In that 'American Patriotism Scares Me' thread I've been asking at what point will the American people actually protect themselves against the government? Despite the idea of 'X amount of million armed civilians primed and waiting', I don't think the bulk of them ever will. One of the reasons being the tipping point for different people will actually be different in the first place. Some will see the signs and the 'writing on the wall' earlier than others. Others will sit back wanting just that little more proof that it's not 'all happening'. There will be no unity.

As has been pointed out by several people in this thread there's been instances in recent history where people have just surrendered their guns whether it's through ownership restrictions or something like Katrina.

Give a few more supposedly legitimate reasons, sold well enough, and a lot of people will give-up their arms. It's unfortunate that the government can't tie gun ownership to some paedophilia scaremongering as paedophilia scares seem to be pretty great at getting otherwise sensible people on the edge of their seat with hysteria ready to do anything or give up anything demanding something gets done to protect the children.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 12:45 AM
link   
Logic?

I know this is a touchy issue, but guys... The weapons do more harm than good.

The 'collateral' from the weapons being publicly available is mind boggling and to really put the icing on the fail cake, it seems like the US is one of the first countries in the developed world to slowly show signs of heavy oppression of it's people.

Hell, one glance at this NWO forum and that's all you see!

I mean, it's a contradiction. On one hand the argument is that US citizens need them for 'self defense' and self-empowerment (usually as a last line of defense if the government goes nuts)... But the US military has weapons far, FAR superior to those people at home can own, so what's the point?

Pull out a rifle, they pull out a tank. Something bigger? They have rockets. Even if you *did* get your hands on military-grade weapons, you don't have years of training whereas the military does... They also have numbers, at least on an organized level.

So there's my rant. I'm just pointing out the giant pink elephant in the room nobody wants to talk about.

If guns are keeping you free, then how are you being undermined by a NWO or whatever? If you aren't, then why talk about things like NWO's on ATS? Even if you *are* being undermined, then the guns clearly aren't working!

You sort of only get to choose one or the other. You can't say guns = freedom, therefore we MUST keep them to be free... Oh but our freedom is being taken away, and there's nothing we can do to stop it.

There's my 2c. An opinionated piece, but I felt it was worth posting none the less.

[edit on 18/10/08 by Duality]



posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Duality
 

You left one thing out of your equation. Hundreds of thousands of American civilians, were military. Many combat experienced. More combat experienced civilians that in the current US military.

Run your numbers again.



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Good luck to the commies who come to take them.

You don't like guns? Don't buy any. Don't like the second amendment? Don't like the wording, think it's outdated? Pack up and move to almost any other country, they have your attitude. Don't like the idea of armed citizens? That's o.k., neither did King George. Simply don't come to this country. If and when the ptb try to destroy my rights, they themselves will be destroyed.
You people in other countries have no idea how strongly millions of us will defend this right to the death. We don't care what your attitude is about guns. We don't care what a bunch of trumped up stats say. It's our right, end of story.



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   
What would it take willingly...?

Over my dead body sums it right up huh.





...taps...

EDIT:

Reply to Duality...


The weapons do more harm than good.


PEOPLE do more harm than good, not the gun.


[edit on 24-10-2008 by silo13]



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
There is only one type of ocassion where handing firearms in is okay. Sometimes local police angencys will offer as much as 300$ per firearm in an effort to get guns off the street. When this happens, go buy as many mosin nagant rifles as possible(they for for 100$ and as low as 60$). Triple the amount of money you pay for each one, then go buy a new semi-auto or bolt action rifle.



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 08:40 PM
link   
this is a very big and scary thought with huge ramifications...i have thought for years that i would never give up my gun but when it comes down to it i will be facing armed military folks at the front door...i will die or they will die...i would like to think i would have the guts to do whats right (and make no mistake, standing up for the constitution is the issue here and the right thing to do is to stand against authorities taking your rights or your guns). I actually think we will see this come to fruition within 10-20 years so all i want to say here is wake up america and think through what you really believe! lots of people have stood up and died for our constitution to this point, will you have the guts to stand side by side with fellow patriots? i damn well hope i do!



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Duality
Logic?

I know this is a touchy issue, but guys... The weapons do more harm than good.

The 'collateral' from the weapons being publicly available is mind boggling and to really put the icing on the fail cake, it seems like the US is one of the first countries in the developed world to slowly show signs of heavy oppression of it's people.


How do guns in the hands of lawful owners do more harm than good? Please be specific, and cite actual figures for injury rates, mortality, accidental discharge, etc, in comparison to... Say, the police.


Hell, one glance at this NWO forum and that's all you see!

I mean, it's a contradiction. On one hand the argument is that US citizens need them for 'self defense' and self-empowerment (usually as a last line of defense if the government goes nuts)... But the US military has weapons far, FAR superior to those people at home can own, so what's the point?


This is a quote, from General Isoroku Yamamoto; "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

Did the Japanese not have a vastly superior military to the U.S. citizen at this time? You also falsely assume that the entirety of the U.S. military would attack its own citizenry during an "NWO Takeover" or other such event. I would argue that this is an assumption grounded well askance from reality.


Pull out a rifle, they pull out a tank. Something bigger? They have rockets. Even if you *did* get your hands on military-grade weapons, you don't have years of training whereas the military does... They also have numbers, at least on an organized level.


See above. I believe this "military grade weapons" argument is baseless. You cannot assume that the military obeys commands contrary to their founding edicts, which happen to include the defense of the citizenry. It is, after all, why they exist. Those who actually FOLLOWED such orders would be the rogues.


So there's my rant. I'm just pointing out the giant pink elephant in the room nobody wants to talk about.

If guns are keeping you free, then how are you being undermined by a NWO or whatever? If you aren't, then why talk about things like NWO's on ATS? Even if you *are* being undermined, then the guns clearly aren't working!

You sort of only get to choose one or the other. You can't say guns = freedom, therefore we MUST keep them to be free... Oh but our freedom is being taken away, and there's nothing we can do to stop it.

There's my 2c. An opinionated piece, but I felt it was worth posting none the less.

[edit on 18/10/08 by Duality]


We are more free right now that the Warsaw Ghetto was during the black days of this past century. Would you make an argument to millions of Jews that they didn't need guns, either? There's a phrase that the "Jews for Protection of Firearms Ownership" likes to use. Despite the fact that I'm not a member of their faith and descent, it strikes a chord. Their phrase is "Never Again."

Have a peek at what happens when countries outlaw guns...

www.jpfo.org...



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   

a million dollars to everyone who disarms!!


I would just buy a lathe and milling machine and build new ones
except they would be better because they would be full auto weapons.

You have to remember there are over 10.000 gunsmiths out there.
and most would be capable of building there own.

Add to that there is over 100.000 machinist out there that know how to do the machining if the had the blueprints.


The only way they would get mine was to invent a mind reading machine to read my mind to find where i buried them.

I bought over half of mine before there was paperwork required when you bought them that means that the government does not have records of me owning them.

I was less then 20 years ago that you could buy a gun at a gun show from a private party without any paperwork except a bill of sale.
how is the government going to find those guns.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join