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: 20
41
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic_al

Originally posted by djvexd
reply to post by skeptic_al
 


I don't see Obama as the President that will discard the Ammendment, but
as the first President to actually enforce the Ammendment.



Technically this amendment is not enforceable against the people. And from a legal standpoint, in the wording, any measure that interferes with the peoples right to bare arms is an infringement. The amendment also implys that any act that would weaken the peoples ability to to secure a reasonable defense is an infringement. Shotguns, pistols and hunting rifles are not a reasonable defense.

I cant believe that no one has posted any info from the federalist papers. Written by the guys that where there at the time and helped write the founding documents. They make it very clear what the 2nd amendment means. I cant even understand why there is even a question.


Anyway...here is a gun confiscator for you..



www.youtube.com...




posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
From one of my past posts here.


Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. (Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.)



Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. (Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).)



When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...(George Mason)



The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them. (Zacharia Johnson)



That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. (The Virginia delegation)



The whole of that Bill of Rights is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.
(Albert Gallatin to Alexander Addison, Oct 7, 1789, MS. in N.Y. Hist. Soc.-A.G. Papers, 2.)


You an read the Constitution as well as the declaration of Independence and figure out who The People are...




[edit on 28-2-2009 by C0le]



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I live in Chicago, the murder capital of North America...if not the world. We have a mayor, the ( dis ) honorable Richard "shortshanks" Daley, who is always railing and ranting about getting the assault rifles and guns off the streets. He never stops to either comment upon law abiding people not shooting others, or what his definition of "assault rifle" is ( he rightly believes that most of the sheeplike populace of Chicago thinks that assault rifles are "automatic machine guns." He tells all who will hear him that he will never allow the citizens of Chicago to own handguns. According to Mayor Daley, if concealed carry were permitted, the murder rate would multiply. Ha, ha, ha. This from a man who is never seen in public without a phalanx of heavily armed Chicago cops. Ha, ha, ha. This from a man who has always surrounded himself with countless underlings who keep getting busted by the feds and put in jail. Ain't he the sweetheart with his dreams of bankrupting Chicago with an Olympic Games bid.

Oh, and it gets worse, much worse. Barack "The Magic Man" Obama who is a product of the completely corrupt and inept Chicago Democratic political machine. Obama is marginally a bit smarter than our ex-governor Rod "Elvis" Blagoyovich, and beleagured new junior state of Illinois senator Roland "I'm so damn happy" Burris. Obama got his senate seat through Chicago Machine shenannigans, and any intelligent person knows that he lucked into the presidents chair through local and national "hidden hands." He is an inexperienced ( politically and culturally ) and a left-wing neo-communist to boot. He couldn't pass the background check to be a Chicago cop, or an FBI agent, and yet now he is in the oval office pontificating and giving the rubber stamp to the mechinations of Pelosi and Reed in DC. Talk about being an empty suit...a cardboard frontman...a poseur of elegance and poise ( when he has a teleprompter at hand )...a "rob the rich ( and the middle class ) to pacify the poor" champion of leftist lip service, the best that can be said is that he "gives good speech!"

Yeah, Obama wants to round up all the guns from the good and law abidng people in ( once ) great country. Of course the thugs, ex-cons, killers, punks, gang bangers, thieves, perverts, and serial rapists will still have weapons that they will continue to use on us ordinary joes of the world. Bad guys don't give a hoot about gun laws. So who is Daley and Obama kidding? You can't legally own a bb gun or a paintball gun in Chicago. If Obama and his mouthpiece, the unctious Eric Holder, have their way, the second amendment will be altered so as to ban everything from slingshots to shotguns. That is a fact. Hold onto your wallets, your firearms, and your dignity my friends. Obama wants to put each and every one of you under his thumb.




posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   
So they're using the drug cartels on the mexican border as an excuse to ban assault weapons in the U.S.?

I guess if we turn over our AW's, the low lifes involved in drug cartels will turn theirs over as well? (rolls eyes)



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by blue413
So they're using the drug cartels on the mexican border as an excuse to ban assault weapons in the U.S.?

I guess if we turn over our AW's, the low lifes involved in drug cartels will turn theirs over as well? (rolls eyes)


If your worried about drug cartels beating down your door, then you really
are living on the wrong side of the track in the wrong part of town.

Only people involved in drugs kill other people involved in drugs.
If a drug dealer kills an Innocent, it is purely incidental. And they
would have know that person was Involved in drugs.
Simply, If you're not involved in drugs there is absolutly no reason for a
drug lord visit you.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Unless of course...

1. You told on him.
2. You witnessed something you shouldn't have.
3. You're related to a rival.
4. You're related to a cop.
5. You're related to somebody who owes him money.
6. You're active in politics and he "disagrees with your views."
7. You resisted his influence in some way.
8. He goes nuts and randomly decides to target you just because he's evil.
9. You end up in the wrong place at the wrong time.
10. That hot girl you danced with at the club last weekend was his wife.

There's 10 reasons. Hey, who said anything about anyone showing up in your house, anyways? Those criminal scum cause problems all over the place.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by TV_Nation

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban


abcnews.go.com


Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Ummm....No it won't. It will exacerbate the problem. You'll actually be giving illegal arms dealers more room to expand their profits. This is what happens in every country that bans firearms. If you go over to England for example. Most of the firearms you'll find in the possession of criminals (and I don't necessarily mean common street-thugs/hoodlums) are going to be fully automatic Avtomat Kalashnikov model 1947 assault rifles; (AK47s) or similar. Now with organized criminal elements (ie: mafia, triads) (the kind you'd see in the video game "The Getaway".) Those people have the REALLY hardcore military grade hardware. Not some chinchy semi-auto AK knockoff which you would find among common street thugs here in America.

Same with the Mexican mafia and drug cartels. They're going to get their armament supply somewhere. Whether it's coming from America or somewhere else. They ARE going to get it no matter what. The people who are involved in the drug cartels are EXTREMELY intelligent. Always one step ahead of the police. And they don't play games. About 8 times out of 10 they are MUCH better armed than the narc cops.

There are drug cartels out there in Latin America who own AH-1 Cobra Gunship helicopters of all things. And believe me--something that big like that plus the parts and equipment to maintain such an elegant piece of machinery such as a helicopter? All of which is plentiful on the black market. No joke.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Marked One
 


You all need to get over it. Obama will have them banned along with other weapons in the near future. You are a mere civilian, so YOU HAVE NO SAY IN THE MATTER. PERIOD! Just like you had no say in the bailouts or other various bills. This is the change the majority of America voted for, now stop moaning and complaining, and sit back and grab a bowl of popcorn. The next 4 years are gonna be one hell of a ride and YOU HAVE A FRONT ROW SEAT!



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Marked One
 



Yes, this idea that what? Guns going from the US to Mexico????

What like guns came into Vietnam from Cambodia?

Sounds to me like the average citizen needs an assault weapons "surge" into the area.


I saw a picture the other day of a pile of headless men dumped outside a small village down there. They need weapons, they need a 2nd amendment those poor people.

These entire goings on in Mexico have the earmarks of a destabilization campaign waged against the government and people of Mexico by some outside government.

Our press and government just keeps telling us it is the work of sophisticated drug cartels but dont you believe it. They are soldiers for outside powers supporting themselves with the drug trade as well as their masters elsewhere.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   
could be worse you Yanks could have the same gun laws in Canookastan , man we have bureaucrats who want to ban hand guns , I can see out right banned on hunting in Canada fallowed by banning FIRE ARMS



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by Marked One
 



Yes, this idea that what? Guns going from the US to Mexico????

What like guns came into Vietnam from Cambodia?

Sounds to me like the average citizen needs an assault weapons "surge" into the area.


I saw a picture the other day of a pile of headless men dumped outside a small village down there. They need weapons, they need a 2nd amendment those poor people.

These entire goings on in Mexico have the earmarks of a destabilization campaign waged against the government and people of Mexico by some outside government.

Our press and government just keeps telling us it is the work of sophisticated drug cartels but dont you believe it. They are soldiers for outside powers supporting themselves with the drug trade as well as their masters elsewhere.


Half the time? What happens is that drug cartels send their people north of the border into the United States to buy their arms from gun shows in Arizona and elsewhere. It's happened before. About three 50 caliber sniper rifles were smuggled south of the border. One of which was used to assassinate a police chief in Juarez. Plus other types of weaponry used to battle it out with the Mexican police with. And in most of these battles the drug cartels are actually winning.

The Obama admin intends to ban gun shows. He can ban gun shows all he wants. The drug cartels are STILL going to get there hands on armament here in the states. If not gun shows they'll get it from police and government armories. Either stolen? Or obtained via a federal agent or other government official who's being bribed or blackmailed into procuring weapons to them.

And I'm willing to bet that the latter isn't too far fetched. I wouldn't doubt that perhaps the arms are being supplied to one particular drug cartel so they can undermine the authority of the Mexican police who are most likely protecting the interests of a rival drug cartel.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   


The Obama admin intends to ban gun shows.


They do?

Do you have any evidence to back this up, or is it merely suspicion presented as if it were fact?

I'll agree though, no US gun law is going to have any measurable effect on gun violence in Mexico.

Too much trade goes back and forth across the border to expect that they can keep our guns out any better than we can keep their drugs out.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex



The Obama admin intends to ban gun shows.

They do?

Do you have any evidence to back this up, or is it merely suspicion presented as if it were fact?


Certainly.


"I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller," Holder said, referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Washington, D.C. v. Heller, which asserted the Second Amendment as an individual's right to own a weapon.


Same article. Go to the second page. Third paragraph from the bottom. It's right there. Read it.

And while you're at it? Read this too after you're done. It's from "Alex Jones' Infowars".



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   
I'm not so sure that I believe that firearms are going into Mexico from the US to support the drug lords for the following reasons:

1. Expense. The cost of firearms in the US is at a premium. US consumers of firearms are currently paying through the nose for weapons. It would be cheaper to acquire them from other sources outside of the US far cheaper that would already be full auto.

2. They could only afford to purchase semi-auto firearms. Sure drug lords could pony up $16,000 for one full auto M-16 but why would they when they could get 32 fully automatics elsewhere? I doubt drug lords are that fiscally unaware.

More than likely there is a small amount if firearms being taken into Mexico, but they are probably being taken in by Mexican nationals working in the US buying them and smuggling them back into Mexico to protect their families.

Some of the information I see coming out of news networks is pure propaganda. I have seen outright lies not only in the national media but here on ATS as well. I try to pipe inwhen I can but it is like some people have no lives and do this all day every day spreading lies.

[edit on 1-3-2009 by xman_in_blackx]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   
I'm sick of this bullcrap with politicians.They are a bunch of greedy pigs,who don't want us to have control of our own lives,or our families.What are we going to do?



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
Some of the information I see coming out of news networks is pure propaganda. I have seen ouright lies not only in the national media but here on ATS as well. I try to pipe inwhen I can but it is like some people have no lives and do this all day every day spreading lies.


That's true. That's why I like to call CNN the 'commiecrat news network'.

CNN made it look like as if Mexican drug cartels get ALL of their arms from gun shows in America. In actuality a gun show is just ONE place where they get their arms. They'll get their arms from all sorts of places.

Here's a thread I posted a long time ago that mentions this. Again it has a video from CNN. Saying the same thing.

Little known war...



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
First time I've seen a shortage in my area was today at a busy Walmart. I would guess there was only 20% of the ammo left. Two clerks were out trying to restock but what they had was minimal. I'll be checking my local gun shops this week and my range. I know that I'll be adding to this frenzy and ordering a massive amount through the mail this week and purchasing ammo every payday until our Communist president decides to pass a law against ammo.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   
A few of the local gun dealers have a sign on the wall that says "Top sales person of the month," right under a picture of Obama. There are similar scenarios all across America. The sad part is that most of what he wants to ban (and what used to be banned) are weapons that just "look scary" to People. Assault weapons are either select-fire or full auto. Well, the people, including most of "Generation DUH" voted him in, and here's what they, and we, get. And many here thought Bush was the guy who wanted the New World Order.
BHO is an outright Marxist/Socialist, and he is afraid of our guns; which is exactly what the founders intended.... for government to be afraid of "The Peoples" guns. BHO did much work for, and contributed to, The Joyce Foundation. That pretty much says it all.

Edited for additional comment: There are no true "Cop Killer" bullets. That was a scare invented by Dems.

[edit on 1-3-2009 by zappafan1]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:55 PM
link   
All I can say is " Have gun will travel".........................I have my big guns and freedom is my agenda!



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Marked One
 


To be fair, the phrase "closing the gun show loophole" doesn't refer to banning gun shows. It refers to eliminating the loophole that allows you to buy a firearm without a background check if you buy it at a gun show or from a private seller.

Obama wants to ban a lot of things. Fortunately, it doesn't sound like Congress is willing to play ball with him on the issue. It's a good thing, too... many of the features banned by the Rifle Accessory Ban actually make a gun safer.

Foregrips, pistol grips, muzzle breaks, and collapsible stocks all make a gun easier to handle and therefor safer to shoot. Flash hiders make a gun safer to shoot at night. A bayonet makes a gun a little bit safer to confront a burglar with if you don't have any ammo around... :-o



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join