It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Again, I'm NOT banning guns. You are free to own guns and bullets, but restrictive in the quantity of firearms, and amount of ammo.
Originally posted by jkm1864
I wouldn't mind gun registration and control if it was just at the state level. I do not want any information to go to the federal government because I do not trust them. I do not like the idea of gang bangers to have guns but I am not going to leave the family that follows the laws defenseless while the gang bangers rape and murder them. There is a solution but guess what as long as its managed by the federal government its not acceptable to me.
I definitely agree with you. Whoever said jackbooters will bash down your garage door hunting for weapons? I don't support that, in fact I think that is crossing the line WAY TOO FAR.
Originally posted by KarlG
My reason is that knives and rope cannot be used to kill 30+ people in the span of a couple of hours, or while they are driving, for that matter.
It's really, really something else to see the HUGE amount of people who have such ideas (no judgment here) on the unrestricted usage of guns and on the possibilities of violence in people who have free and easy access to firearms.
So, if you wish for there to be legislation to further control the general sale of firearms or mass-murder components like multiple boxes of ammo or subsequent firearms, please post here.
Originally posted by SpaDe_
Here is a link and the final nail in the coffin to just how good firearms regulations work. Take a look at this map posted in another thread yesterday by Centurion and tell me why the states with the highest regulation have the highest crime rates? Map Here! Gun laws work great.... right?
Originally posted by lunarminer
A little history here, our right to bear arms is clearly articulated in the Second Amendment in the Constitution.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
This is the original version, not the later one that was changed without an amendment.
So, why is it there?
Our Founding Fathers wanted the right to bear arms to be clearly laid out in the Constitution because during the Revolutionary War the US had a shortage of weaponry that was suitable for military use. Sure, the colonists had their hunting weapons, but these were mostly small caliber, short range weapons, that were not usefull against a professional military with long range weapons.
Those who joined the local militia, had to furnish their own weapons. So, there was a shortage of men, and an even greater shortage of suitable weapons.
They also had a critical shortage of ammunition. A lot has been made about how the militia often broke ranks and ran when faced by the British forces. One of the reasons is that they often only had enough ammunition to fire one or two shots. Yet, they would be there to fire their one or two shots.
The Founding Fathers wanted to do their part to insure that this situation did not recure in the future, and so they spelled it out in the Second Amendment.
Beyond the small arms problem, the young country also had a shortage of cannon, warships, and other heavy arms. So, our ancestors had to find sources for these heavy arms.
To aquire cannon to defend Boston, they staged a surprise attack on Fort Ticonderoga in the spring of 1775 and then carried the cannon to Boston, by hand. In addition Benjamin Franklin bought several cannon with his own money.
To aquire ships they had to negotiate deals with privateers (professional pirates) to use the privateers ships. These ships were small and could not engage the largest British ships. Later they negotiated a treaty with France, who had lots of ships of all kinds.
Unfortunately, there are those in our country who want to limit the right to bear arms, to hunting rifles and small short range weapons. Or as an alternative, they want to limit the amount of ammunition that a person can buy. That's like giving Barney Fife a gun, but allowing him only one bullet. Remember how well that worked out?
Either these folks are ignorant of our history, or they want to insure that the populace cannot arm itself.
So here we are back in the same situation as our Founding Fathers. We have Representatives who do not represent the people. We have a populace who is "allowed" to own only small arms. We have taxation without representation. (unless you think passing a Trillion dollar spending bill without anyone having read it counts as representation) We have a ruling elite who seem to think that they own everything and everyone in the Country. These same people are making spending commitments that exceed the GDP of the country and our children and grandchildren will not be able to make the payments. Yet, these elitists will not reduce their spending, they want to spend even more.