Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The British have something to say to us Americans!

page: 1
77
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+55 more 
posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Have yall seen this? Everyone should!
Watch the whole thing.. The British have something to say!



DK


[edit on 25-1-2009 by tensetek] (fixing link)

[edit on 25-1-2009 by tensetek]




posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by tensetek
 



Neo follow the rabbit.







[edit on 25-1-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Right on find dude!!

Don't ever let them take our guns!





Mattehinthebox



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Comrads, those British people are telling it like it is, never ever give up your guns, and "Never Ever" elect any official into office that wants to take away your guns.

The British people are suffering a terrible tyrrany nowadays without having guns, crime has gone way up, and they have cameras on every street corner watching their every move. Don't elect officials into office that want to put traffic cameras up, or soon you will have cameras everywhere and pretty soon you will realize that you are inside their outside prison.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by RussianScientists
Comrads, those British people are telling it like it is, never ever give up your guns, and "Never Ever" elect any official into office that wants to take away your guns.



Barrack Obama on Gun Control
He steers away from the question


[edit on 25-1-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Great find,

That video tells it like it is.

Anyone who thinks guns should be banned needs to realize how we'd all become defenseless victims if the same thing happened here.

Law abiding citizens wouldn't be able to protect themselves from criminals who'll get guns whether it's legal to own them or not.

When that times comes, simply watching it happen won't be good enough.

People will need to speak up, so there's no mistake.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   


Interpret this how you will; but given that the original novel was about thatcherian england...



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Idiotic laws or not, jail time or not - you come uninvited into my home at 2AM then you WILL be looking down the barrel of a 357 Magnum, and you WILL be leaving in a body bag! pppftttt!



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Yeah, we must not allow our second amendment rights be diminished or, God help us, taken totally away. But, really, the best message I ever received from England was Fergie. Yeah, what a hottie she was!! Until she moved to America and began that damned diet system which took all her vivaciousness and curves away. Andrew, you had a great hottie! Dumb butt.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Let your voice be heard ppl!



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by tensetek
 


Well, it's rather apparent, your motives in posting that YT video. Of course, as is usual with ATS rules, there seems to be no real link to the SOURCE of that video from YouTube (unless I missed it)

No matter...it is the same argument seen, ad infinitum, even here in the USA.

Let's take, shall we, a more in-depth examination into this concept.

Firstly, there are MANY laws on the books, in many States, that allow for....well, I'll call it "Eminent Domain". In simpler terms, if your home is intruded upon, and you use deadly force in defence, then you are well within your rights. (I don't know if these laws exist in England....maybe that's why we left in 1772...Oh! No, it's because of religion and taxes....THAT led to the REVOLUTION of 1776!!!!)

Back to "Eminent Domain". Being not a lawyer, it is my understanding that in most of the fifty States a home-intruder incident that results in the DEATH of the 'intruder' absolves the homeowner who used deadly force to protect his home.

Doesn't matter HOW the intruder was killed, once he entered the premises. We all think that a gun is the ONLY way to kill an intruder, but that is obviously untrue.

Let's try a mind-experiment. Let's say that no guns existed, but only 'paint-guns'....that is ALL we have, in this mind game. The 'loser' is the one with the most 'hits', that is, the most paint ball 'hits'.

A really smart person would lure an intruder into a situation where HE, the lurer, would have the upper hand....because, we all know that the intruder(s) are stupid and dull....haven't you been to the movies lately???

On another tack....How many of you who champion gun ownership for all have ACTUALLY fired a gun? AND, how accurate is your targeting practice?

Well, guess what? You're inability to actually hit a target is about as close as the guy who, wishing to be a criminal, is.

Here's a thing to keep in your brain....and STOP looking at Hollywood movies for the answers....in REAL LIFE a Peace Officer will only unholster their weapon when absolutely necessary. It seems that HollyWood has tainted the concept.....and that is a shame, because it leads to such misconception.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

On another tack....How many of you who champion gun ownership for all have ACTUALLY fired a gun? AND, how accurate is your targeting practice?



Doesn't matter. Once the lead starts hitting the wall the criminal will run like an athiest in the face of God.

Sure, the criminal may fire back and may be more accurate, but thats only because the criminals are the only ones allowed target practice, the only ones allowed guns.

If society is to exist in a civil manner, EVERYONE should be allowed to own a gun.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


One (or more) men breaks into your home..

Do you want to use the following:

Option A: Baseball bat.
Option B: Frying Pan.
Option C: Steak knife.
Option D: Fist, feet, biting, scratching.
Option F: Bow and Arrow. Or Crossbow.
Option G: Throw a paper weight.
Option H: Fetal position, under the blankets in a closet hoping they rob you blind and don't kidnap, rape or murder your loved ones.
Option I: Shoot the bastard from a safe distance, quickly, effectively.

I choose I, but then again, if we let our elected officials take our guns away.. then by the time we throw the paper weight and hope to physically overtake them, they probably would have shot you by then.

Seeing as criminals don't tend to abide by laws you know..



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Great post. God help the British, I hope they can win their right of of self defense back



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by tensetek
 


On another tack....How many of you who champion gun ownership for all have ACTUALLY fired a gun? AND, how accurate is your targeting practice?

Well, guess what? You're inability to actually hit a target is about as close as the guy who, wishing to be a criminal, is.

in REAL LIFE a Peace Officer will only unholster their weapon when absolutely necessary.



Better to be in a gunfight and be bad at it than to be in a gunfight with a phone dialing 911.

By the way, break into a policemans house and see how long it takes for him to draw a weapon.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   

On another tack....How many of you who champion gun ownership for all have ACTUALLY fired a gun? AND, how accurate is your targeting practice?



Good enough that there are a few less NVA regulars left from when i was in Vietnam.

I know of no cases where a homeowner had to take on someone with a full auto AK 47.

Criminals beware i am still armed and dangerous.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by badgerprints

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by tensetek
 


On another tack....How many of you who champion gun ownership for all have ACTUALLY fired a gun? AND, how accurate is your targeting practice?

Well, guess what? You're inability to actually hit a target is about as close as the guy who, wishing to be a criminal, is.

in REAL LIFE a Peace Officer will only unholster their weapon when absolutely necessary.



To the above quote: how many of us actually fired a gun? Are you serious?

You must not live in the U.S. because we have 100 million gun owners or so and most of us have practiced... also a good number of us are military veterans and there are 24.5 million veterans and were quite good at marksmanship.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


badger, you've just proved my point!!

Number 1....I WOULD NEVER break into somebody's house. Of course, IF (in a concocted scenario) I DID break into a Policeman's house, well OF COURSE he'd defend his FAMILY and property!!!! AND, I would get what I deserved, although I'd expect that a trained Peace Officer would know how to shoot to maim first, unless his life was in immediate danger.

Number 2.... a properly informed burglar would NOT target a Peace Officer's home. SO, your example is moot.

Number 3.... by definition, a 'burglary' is a crime that occurs in a residence or business when there are no victims present. A 'robbery', by definition, is a crime upon a person or persons.

Number 4... a Peace Officer, I must repeat, had received EXTENSIVE training. OF COURSE, in the event of a home incursion, that Peace Officer will respond with deadly force, or force as appropriate. BUT that is a result of years of training! How many casual gun owners can claim the same, hmmmm???



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Consumer Debt = you're going along for the ride.

Want liberty, start learning financial freedom or no one in power is going to listen.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I own a .45 Kimbler, I've fired it, but only as much as my waller allows me, .45 rounds are expensive


Yeah I may not be accurate with it, but a 45 round hitting any part of the body is enough stopping power to thwart the common person. Accuracy is for 9mm's which I'll be getting soon!





new topics

top topics



 
77
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join