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.


History of Un-armed Citizens

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 03:47 PM
Here's something that just happened on Valentine's Day in South Carolina.

Police traded roses for guns. There was no amnesty and they admitted that there were no incidents and no arrests. So, basically, they just removed a bunch of legal guns from law abiding citizens and got zero illegal guns out of the hands of criminals. What's the point in that other than just gun grabbing?

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 03:47 PM
I know about the Warsaw Ghetto and uprising. I know Polish history well as I was born I Poland. The reason I am in US is because I was not a law obeying citizen. I was thrown in jail for what I believed was right. I did stand up to communist regime and pay a heavy price for. The MPK complex was surrounded by a hundreds of heavy armed police and even if I had a gun - I would stand no chance. Being brave and being stupid it is a difference.
December 15 1981 - I could die that night or have chance to fight again.
I choose to have a chance to fight again latter and that what I did. No weapons and communism felt. Guns are not always the best option.
About the ghetto uprising - the Red Army was standing right across the Wisla river and waiting for Germany to finish the jews. The reason for that upraising was that Russian told them that they will help-they never did. Russian "send" them on a suicidal mission.Jews never had a chance against German army alone.Never trust a Russians.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 03:54 PM

Originally posted by buttafuqua
reply to post by thisguyrighthere Matter of fact, it is even easier for an indivdual to obtain a firearm now, than it was back when I was a kid.

When were you a kid? Used to be you could order military surplus machine guns COD no questions asked. Delivered right to your door. Oddly enough idiot kids werent running around killing each other. Go figure.

Used to be nearly every high school kid had a rifle in his truck or a rifle in his locker as they would hunt before and after school. Used to be schools had rifle teams and practiced and competed just like any other sport. In neither case were idiot kids killing each other or themselves.

Hell, if banning anything at all is to make us safer it would be idiots.

I can definitely get behind a ban on idiots.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by liesnomore

Who ever said guns were the best option? What we are saying that that we want guns to remain an option. Once that option is removed we are left with very little.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 04:00 PM
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

I agree with that 120%

Robert A. Heinlein wrote that "an armed society is a polite society"

I believe that to be true. Do you think people would go around shooing in schools if everyone in that school had a gun? They know it will take time for the cops to get there and then devise a way to get in and blah blah blah. In that time they know they can do what they want to do, play god.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 04:07 PM
If a robber points a gun at you and you were unarmed, which of the following options would you want?

Wish that you had a gun.

Wish that guns should never have been allowed in the hands of the average civilian.


Second scenario, the police or a soldier threatens you with a gun when you are innocent.

Wish that you had a gun.

Wish that guns should never have been allowed in the police and civilian force.


Third scenario, drug dealers invading you and other unarmed civilians when neither you nor the police have guns.

Wish that you had a gun.

Wish that guns should never have been created in the first place.


In my opinion, humans are competitive and rather brutal when it comes to vengeance.

Americans make it sound as if you don't have a gun at your disposal you can't live?

Look at the past 4000 years before guns, we didn't have guns, and people were not afraid of someone pulling out a gun in the middle of the street.

All of these are arguments used in this struggle.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 04:13 PM
reply to post by die_another_day

In all 3 of your situations all a person can do is wish. You can wish all you want, what we face now are facts.

Fact - guns have been invented

Fact - the police/military/people have guns

Fact - Guns are used by good and bad people

Fact - Gun laws only effect people who follow the laws

When guns were not around people could not fear them because they didn't know about them. But most people had swords and if you didn't have a sword you feared the sword. Going farther back a sharp stick. If you didn't have one you feared those who did. When a few have the better weapon it will be feared by those who do not have it.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 04:14 PM
We would all love to live in a peaceful and nonviolent society.

However until all the bull# is weeded out and people have moved beyond violence that is not possible. Here are my thoughts.

Let me give a few examples:

Monkeying with another monkey's monkey:
Bad Karma

Harassing communication toward others:
Bad Karma

Messing with people's property:
Bad Karma

Attacking someone:
Bad Karma

Messing with people's money:
Bad Karma

Messing with people's drugs:
Bad Karma

I think that guns are a necessary form of PROTECTION.

I don't think that they should be used as a form of retaliation in petty situations.

If someone breaks into my home or is intruding on my property and I have to take the law into my own hands until law enforcement arrives so that due process can be served. Then that is what I will do. I don't agree with all the bull# about felons not having guns. If the criminals would be kept in jail for the full term instead of getting probation then maybe they would think twice before doing something stupid again.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by DragQueen4Peace]

[edit on 18-2-2009 by DragQueen4Peace]

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 04:36 PM
Nice OP.
However, I don't buy it for a second.
There is no way in hell Obama will abolish the 2nd amendment.
Not without full-out civil war first.
He'll more than likely institute a ban on automatic weapons, and that is bad enough, but he'll never take away all of our guns. It would be a fool's errand.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 04:55 PM
President Obama has no intention of doing any of this so I'm not sure why you're even posting this information. This is classic scare tactic stuff that is simply not truthful at all. Total BS.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 04:59 PM

Originally posted by buttafuqua
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

I would call a ban of guns to be just that. Whenever I can't walk into a Walmart, or waltz into a gun show and purchase a gun. When I would be unable to easily purchase a gun on the street, then I would say that we are in fact not easily able to obtain guns.

However, neither of those are the case. Matter of fact, it is even easier for an indivdual to obtain a firearm now, than it was back when I was a kid. I say this, because I see it with my own eyes. There are shootings everyday in my neighborhood, and I don't even consider myself as living in a bad neighborhoods. Guns are everywhere.

I for one would welcome some "eroding" of the 2nd ammendment. Firearms have killed many relatives and serveral friends of mine over the years. We could all do with a few less kooks with guns. Ask the kids at Virginia Tech, or the parents of those who lost their kids at Columbine.

Did those same parents ever sit up at night, wishing that one of the students had been lawfully armed, and thereby able to stop the killing before the lengthly wait for police to arrive?

I think they have.

Further firearms restrictions do not remove guns from the hands of bad guys - it empowers them by reducing the chance that someone will hand them a dose of justice before they are able to complete their heinous act.

As for the racial stuff, it's so far out in left field I don't even know how to reply.. Sure, there are lots of people who hate Obama because he's black. There were lots of people who hated Bush because he was white. Does it really make a difference what the racially extreme minority thinks?

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:14 PM

Originally posted by dodadoom
reply to post by buttafuqua

I appreciate your point of view as everyones here. I must agree it is the person that kills, not the gun.
However, it is the fact they ARE so prevalent that causes alot of the problems. It would be naive to blame it on that alone. It is just more common to settle arguments with guns. Call it the lack of a big bulge, no sense of right and wrong, a death wish or just no brains.
It must be a way to prove manhood for these kids, to "LOOK bad ass", to "stand out". The fact tv, games, & movies makes it honestly seem like poppin a cap in someones a** ain't that big a deal. Basically in the "old days" it was considered wrong. Almost like we think we got several "lives" left and alot more quarters! Just my take. There ARE too many illegal guns and there ARE too many that do not think a thing about poppin caps in people, unfortunately.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by dodadoom]

More gun laws won't change that. You can't legislate morality or intelligence.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:30 PM
reply to post by TXTriker

Well they've tried. The legislature's kept wondering why Americans were falling short of the bar every time they tried though. Lol.

The main reason crime will not drop is becasue the public, as a whole, condones it. Crime has become the less than savory part of life that we must all deal with. We have submitted to it. We permit and encourage it becasue we don't fight back, immidiately, there on the spot when it happens. And 9 times out of 10 the cops only get there after the actual crime has been commited.

Today a woman cant feel safe walking down the street after dark. Hell women in the days of the real West were far safer than those today. Back then when there were very loose gun laws every one was safer.

To those that would say the wild west was brutal, it was. But innocent men and their families were left alone. The gunslingers only faught with other gun slingers. And even criminals had a healthy respect for women and children.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:35 PM
reply to post by TXTriker

Thanks for that reply. I agree and thats more or less my point.
Guns have been around a long time, but crime has been around forever.
Knives are arguably just as deadly or "effective" if the intent is the same.
Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

Well, thats actually only half right.
Bullets are what actually do the killing!
Then should we really just outlaw the bullets?

Only the criminals benefit from gun laws.

I'm all for any ideas to help return morality to our society.
May be easier to do that, than raise the IQ level any.

I just wish sometimes we had a little more awareness and compassion.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by dodadoom]

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:57 PM
Just so you all know, gun's are not the only way to protect yourself.

That might help ease your worries.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:01 PM
reply to post by buttafuqua

I must respectfully disagree with you. There are many well educated people that have good reasons why they do not want guns banned. Furthermore what would make you say this is a race issue? The original poster did not mention anything racist. I am sorry but I am tired of people using the race card to try and intimidate people that disagree with them. You are the one that called all NRA members Rednecks. There are ways to have a mature exchange of ideas about things that reasonable people can disagree about. You have chosen not to participate in any such discussion, instead you yell racist and try and use that as an argument in favor of gun control. I think most people on ATS see right through this. I would suggest that you are the only one that has 'categorized' anyone, and I would respectfully request that you stop. If you wish you can enter the debate taking place by presenting facts and arguments.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:12 PM
reply to post by ALLis0NE

But what other effective method is there when defending yourself from another person with a firearm?

If some one brandishes a gun the first thing you should do is find cover.... I mean run until you can find a nice safe small spot to hide in. Only after you find cover should a person start opening fire in self defense.

If the conditions don't allow you to find adequate cover, then clear your holster and start shooting at the perp!

If you don't have a gun and the criminal does, the best thing to do is run. Fighting back against a gun while unarmed should only be done in a last resort situation. Other than that it's pretty much dumb.

Many people often ask me why i chose to carry a hand gun when i've been trained in several martial arts. My response is why risk it? Yes it's good to know martial arts, but when it comes right down to it martial arts get you know where in a firefight.

Firefights are fast and loud. You have got to be ready and quick on your toes if you plan to survive one. And if you survive the first one, you won't be too eager to get into another... trust me. The people that look forward to a firefight usually end up dead real quick. All that hollywood firefight stuff is a load of bravo sierra.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:17 PM
reply to post by buttafuqua

How much you want to bet most of those murders in your neighborhood were committed with illegally purchased guns? Are you aware that the US cities with the highest legal gun ownership also have the lowest crime? (DOJ verifiable statistic). Why? If everyone in your neighborhood owned a gun I bet the gang members killing people would think twice. Again this is not just a theory this is a verifiable fact. A community will only take so much before they cut the middle man and fight back directly. I am sorry you have been through so much. I would purpose that guns are not the problem, the killers are the problem. Guns cannot be evil or immoral, they are an inanimate object. Left on their own they will never hurt anyone. Only when a criminal gets a hold of them do we have problems. There will always be criminals and they will always be able to get guns illegally. The issue being debated is whether law abiding citizens should be able to obtain guns.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:18 PM

Originally posted by liesnomore
If a armed solders and his buddies show up at my house and start barking an orders-it would be a suicidal not to comply.I can fire only so many bullets and my family will be gone with me. If there is a life after death - they will (my family) kick the # out of me for cousing their death. If I have a mine field and missile to strike them before they reach the house - I my think about using it.
The missile will have a "sonic boom" and mines will be non-lethal.
Dead man it is a worthless and you will have to clean up the mess, but wounded man can be healed and put to work to rebuild what he intended to destroy.

A free human does not bow to the will of others. A free human does not attempt to limit the rights of another, as long as the free human's rights are respected.

Anyone who attempts to inflict bodily harm to me or my family will be killed or I will be killed defending them. Whether by gun, knife, rock or bare hands.

It would be cruel to let our hypothetical "soldiers at the door" haul my wife and children away and perform whatever nefarious deeds they deemed enjoyable prior to killing them. If I were to kill only one so that they would think twice before going to the next house my death would not have been in vain.

To think that the world will not ever visit random violence on you or your family is naive. To be unprepared in the defense of your loved ones is irresponsible.

Oh if the world were all little pink butterflies and bunnies... but when power is centralized within a few over the many there will be tyranny.

Preventing that tyranny is why we have our guns.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by merkaba93]

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:21 PM
I just read through various interviews of Obama on the gun issues and what is posted on the Internet site. He is very evasive and never gives actual details on this issue. In other words he is another Politician dodging direct questions. No surprise there.

I grew up in a community were we all owned guns, hunted and enjoyed target shooting for sport. I often went to High School with a rifle on the rack in the cab of my truck and so did many others. Nobody thought anything of it.

The Game we shot was part of our family income. For a few pennies worth of ammo you could get a couple of hundred pounds of meat. High quality healthy eating meat at that. There is nothing more Open Range than wild game and birds. The food we gathered on our own was important to us.

My first experience with people who are afraid of inanimate objects was when I started College in the Los Angeles area. I was out on a date, came home to the girls apartment and her Baby Sitter was sitting there with a group of Police Officers.

While we were out, this Baby Sitter had rifled through all of her belongings and actually picked the lock on a box in the closet that contained a handgun. Perfectly legal but she was so terrified of just that gun being in the apartment she called the police screaming and they waited out of concern for the child.

Of course no laws were broken, so the Police did not care. They did however refuse to arrest the Baby Sitter for breaking the lock on the box and said since she was there with permission it was implied consent for her to rifle through whatever she wanted.

Since that time I've noted that most anti-gun nuts are control freaks. It is not truly the guns they are after it is the control of others they want. They know that the gun advocates are right about the criminals, not the guns being the problem. They don't care as it is a simple control issue. The farther Left you go the higher level of control freaks they are. Same goes for the Far Right but on other issues. This just happens to be a Far Left issue.

Obama is Far Left, so even though he evades all the questions, you could safely surmise he would like to take all guns away from citizens. If he gets the chance, he will do it, or try too. My guess is after he replaces a couple of Supreme Court Justices and gets control of the final remaining branch of government, he will then do whatever he wants and we can kiss gun ownership goodbye. Giving one Party that much control will blow up in our faces I'm fairly sure. How can it not. Look at the current Leaders, Obama, Pelosi and Reid. It just does not get any farther Left than that. Say goodbye to the America that once was and hello to the new foreign country that is soon to be our home.

I know now how my Father felt when we sat up together and watched the first Moon Landing and he saw the world he was born into herding Cattle on horseback dissolve before his eyes. Farmers who no longer know how to grow seed crops. People who no longer know how to hunt of fish for their own food. Robots totally dependent on others for everything in their lives.

[edit on 2/18/2009 by Blaine91555]

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in