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.

 

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

page: 10
41
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Meh ... no one should be shocked by this one. I only read the first few pages of responses and wow, calm down a bit. I am not in favor of an AWB but I am also not seeing it as a way for the government to take our rights away and eventually leave us with nothing to protect ourselves with.

Think about it. What happened when Clinton got his AWB. Yes, every scary looking gun was banned, high cap clips and so on. But, did it stop you from owing a firearm? Did it prevent you from buying ammo? Probably not. If you are truly concerned, write or call your congressman/woman and let them know how you feel about it. I will.

I believe this one will be much like the first AWB. A feel good measure that makes tree huggers smile. And, much like the first one, it will have no impact on crime or violence.

Also, the comment about it being good for Mexico was completely asinine.

J




posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by TV_Nation
 


The drug cartels having automatic weapons and grenades [as mentioned in the news story] have NOTHING to do with American gun owners, the sale of guns in America, or the smuggling of guns from America. Automatic weapons are already illegal here without a class III license, which pretty much means law enforcement only in most states. So where are these weapons coming from? It is OUR OWN GOVERNMENT that is at fault, for giving tons of equipment, ammo, guns, and even millions of dollars to the corrupt mexican army and mexican police agencies, who intern just hand them over or sell them to the drug cartels.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by DelMar
 


Its not so much the AWB itself that I worry about but the question of whether or not they push further 5-10 years later. Adding to those fears are that the proposed bans I've seen have been much more expansive than the original Clinton-era ban.

I think their ultimate goal is a complete ban and instead of doing it all at once, the plan is to slowly erode our 2nd amendment rights until nothing is left.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by RE2505
For what purpose do you feel you need to be able to legally own assault weapons anyway? I'm in the UK and thank god for a complete ban on guns here.


If you're in the UK, then it doesn't concern you. If you guys want to ban firearms completely, that's fine with me and the vast majority of other firearm owners in the US. We respect your right as a nation to determine your own laws, but understand that we have the same right.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor78

Originally posted by RE2505
For what purpose do you feel you need to be able to legally own assault weapons anyway? I'm in the UK and thank god for a complete ban on guns here.


If you're in the UK, then it doesn't concern you. If you guys want to ban firearms completely, that's fine with me and the vast majority of other firearm owners in the US. We respect your right as a nation to determine your own laws, but understand that we have the same right.


WELL SAID!! That right is to bare arms!! Does not matter what types of arms those are!!



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
The audacity of the ban is mind-blowing.

Obama will continue to be protected by people with fully-automatic weapons, which are very hard for civillians to obtain, in order that he and his family remain safe. They don't use bolt guns.

The AWB will deny his employers, We The People, the same basic right of self defense.

Does he believe his life is worth more than mine or my family's?

Whether he would be assassinated by a politically motivated attacker or my family being killed by a criminal looking for a can of beans makes no difference to the basic right to self defense. Dead is dead.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tentickles
reply to post by RE2505
 


Uh huh.
Please see this : Youtube


Are you saying you need assault weapons for hunting? Or is it just the fact that your constitutional rights are being infringed? Can you not see that banning these weapons will reduce murder rates?
That video actually made me laugh with it's ridiculousness, some guy reporting "a 40% increase in gun crime since the ban was introduced."
Well of course there will be an increase because it wasn't illegal before the ban.


How would you feel about a complete ban on all guns? Local police too?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tentickles
That's it.

I declare that I am fully against this administration.


SEcond that! .. I wanted to give him a chance, but I knew that he had his agenda, and would stop at nothing.

From his economic policies, his socialist practices, and now the going against a campaign promise and attacking our right to bare arms!

He PROMISED that gun restrictions where "not a concern" for him, not something his administration would look at.. and look .. one month in, and he's targeting our right to defend our selves against.. him..

Simply disgusting, only word for it..



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor78

Originally posted by RE2505
For what purpose do you feel you need to be able to legally own assault weapons anyway? I'm in the UK and thank god for a complete ban on guns here.


If you're in the UK, then it doesn't concern you. If you guys want to ban firearms completely, that's fine with me and the vast majority of other firearm owners in the US. We respect your right as a nation to determine your own laws, but understand that we have the same right.


Hey, I didn't choose to ban firearms over here. I had no choice but I am thankful for it. I'm just asking why you feel you need these weapons? Just trying to understand.

[edit on 26-2-2009 by RE2505]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
It's really heartening to read this thread. The country is in what might be its worst crisis ever, everything is at stake, but wait -- maybe I'm mistaken, because so many people find time and energy to discuss there disdain for somebody who wants to take their TOYS away. Thing aren't probable that bad then.


How about if I tried to take your iPod away, hardly essential is it, or maybe a few of your books that I don't like, you can easily do without those.

This isn't about guns, it's about maintaining our freedom and upholding the Constitution.

This isn't the UK, and some of us intend to make sure we never sink to that level.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   
How many more states will now start putting up resolutions similar to that of NH, Texas, Oklahoma, etc... now that word is out that Holder wants our guns to protect mexicans?

If I were in a border state I would be going crazy over this. Um, the mexican drug lords have guns, they are going past and on my property, yet you are telling me I cant own a gun to defend myself from a foreign power? WTF?

Obama and company better be real careful about this issue and how they address it. A good number of states dont much care for what the federal government is doing to usurp the 10th ammendment and creating all of this debt. What is the fed going to do when a state, say Texas stands up and tells its people, dont waste your time paying your federal taxes, we're going this alone for awhile?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

SCREW MEXICO



I don't care what's best for them. It's not our responsibility to help Mexico. And when it comes to the point - if it hasn't already - that we need to intervene with the drug cartels, it should be done with our country's top-notch Special Forces.

I really don't friggin think for half a second that if we ban "assault" rifles, the DRUG CARTELS are going to say, "Oh, well, we can't have these anymore. Better turn 'em in!"

If anyone thinks they will turn in their guns, they're idiots. Period. Sorry about the T&C and all that, but I really do mean "idiot" as in the "Dumbest type of person there is." They need a handler or something.

By extension, that means Obama is an idiot. A blazing, festering, good-for-nothing, starting to make Bush look like Isaac Newton idiot.

And so, it must be said,

SCREW OBAMA



When he takes the most effective weapons out of the hands of the folks living on the border, how exactly does he expect those areas not to fall into the complete control of the drug cartels? Our own police and border patrol are too busy being pansies to intervene...


[edit on 26-2-2009 by mattifikation]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   



Also, if you can have assault weapons, can I please have a flamethrower or bazooka?


You can currently own those weapons as well under a Class 3, Destructuve Device license. Most people just cannot afford them and go through all the checks to aquire those weapons.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Retseh
This isn't the UK, and some of us intend to make sure we never sink to that level.


Our level of gun related crime? I thought that would be a good thing.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by RE2505
 


Your level of being stabbed to death, or beaten up with makeshift weapons. Or your level of being watched everywhere on CCTV.

As has been said in politer terms by people less angry than I am right now, you don't live here, it's not your business or your problem, so butt out of it.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by RE2505
Are you saying you need assault weapons for hunting? Or is it just the fact that your constitutional rights are being infringed? Can you not see that banning these weapons will reduce murder rates?



I'll take these questions one at a time...

1) Do I need an assault weapon for hunting? Define assault weapon. There have been bans proposed in recent years that would cover even semi-automatic hunting rifles. Supposedly, there's one that even covers lever action rifles, which is absurd.

2) *Just* that our Constitutional rights are being infringed? In other words, its OK as long as its not a freedom that YOU would support.

3) No, I can't see that at all. A significant minority of US homicides are not committed with firearms; about 35% in a given year. In the best case scenario, I suspect that most of the remaining 65% would simply choose another weapon, and that you'd have perhaps a 10-20% reduction in the total number of homicides yearly. That's not much of an impact, IMO, especially at the tradeoff of stripping 100 million law abiding gunowners of their rights for no reason. Again, that's the best case scenario.

More likely, criminals would just continue to acquire their weapons through illegal channels and there would be no reduction whatsoever in the murder rate, though criminals might well be emboldened by the fact that the civilian populace was now disarmed.

As Ben Franklin once said, 'Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both'.

[edit on 26-2-2009 by vor78]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
reply to post by RE2505
 


Your level of being stabbed to death, or beaten up with makeshift weapons. Or your level of being watched everywhere on CCTV.

As has been said in politer terms by people less angry than I am right now, you don't live here, it's not your business or your problem, so butt out of it.


I'd much rather take my chances with a knife weilding assailant than some guy firing a semi automatic weapon mate.
You are also wrong, it is my problem. It's your gangster music and culture that influences kids over here.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 


What that guy said.

American's area proud people and this is in our Bill of Rights.
Hear it. RIGHTS, you can not take away what is rightfully yours.
With the government trying to do so we are raising protest here on ATS. We are a proud people and we enjoy what freedoms we have. With the Government trying to limit and take those freedoms away we are getting angry.
Like mattifikation said... Why dont you butt out on this one since you dont know our way of life very well.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by RE2505

Originally posted by Retseh
This isn't the UK, and some of us intend to make sure we never sink to that level.


Our level of gun related crime? I thought that would be a good thing.


That's nice.

You may have less "gun crime" (although you still have plenty, I notice) but your violent crime rates in general are considerably higher than the US.

And they've gone through the roof since your handgun ban.

Your country may choose to put the rights of criminals above those of the common citizen, and certainly that's up to you, but don't expect us to go along...



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join