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.
Originally posted by AlienChaser
reply to post by mandroid
Great post Mandroid!
Thanks for doing some digging and and then actually coming back here to link it for everyone else. To often when people dig they come back and argue the point in their own words. Good job showing that the OP is written to be more inflamatory than it should be.
There are real dangers in their rhetoric though.
We don't want to take their guns away. We want them registered. We don't want them crossing state lines as this legislation would do in the District of Columbia. [1]-Pelosi
So after a year and a half fighting in court I was convicted of operating a firearm while intoxicated (a lesser charge even though my pistol was in its case under my bed the whole time, but still allows me to own a pistol) A large fine, 40 days in jail AND forced to surrender my pistol.
There's one....
If you are ever in a seemingly minor incident, be very aware of what happend to me.
Originally posted by maybereal11
What is wrong with you people. I own guns...but I CAN READ!!!
Holder was responding to this question...
Asked whether gun rights under the U.S. Constitution complicated the effort, Mr. Holder said, "I don't think our Second Amendment will stand in the way of the efforts we have begun and will expand upon."
He is simply stating that he sees no conflict between the second amendment and ending ILLEGAL GUN TRAFICKING TO DRUG CARTELS IN MEXICO. ... THIS STATEMENT ISN'T ABOUT TAKING AWAY YOUR GUNS...UNLESS YOU ARE SELLING THEM TO DRUG CARTELS?????
How did that statement get turned into Holder stating that he would "not let" the 2nd amendment stand in the way of "taking our guns"???
When you joined the NRA did you sign a waiver proclaiming that you would mindlessly gobble up any bit of BS they hand you?
There should be an intelligence test and psychological screening prior to allowing folks to own firearms.
Originally posted by Logarock
Its not simply a matter of reading friend its a matter of being able to translate the vague language. .......
Did you just fall off the hay wagon or something? Are you listing to everything these people are saying in total? Holder called americans "cowards" a few weeks ago so just for that he gets kicked every time he opens his suck until he apologizes instead of back tracks.
Originally posted by mandroid
.............
Our right is to be able to keep arms and bear them as well. It could be argued (unsuccessfully) that a Bowie knife is an arm and as long as we all get to keep and bear Bowie knives around we have not had out right infringed upon. This isn't my personal belief so save the flames for someone else.
Originally posted by maybereal11
What is wrong with you people. I own guns...but I CAN READ!!!
Holder was responding to this question...
Asked whether gun rights under the U.S. Constitution complicated the effort, Mr. Holder said, "I don't think our Second Amendment will stand in the way of the efforts we have begun and will expand upon."
He is simply stating that he sees no conflict between the second amendment and ending ILLEGAL GUN TRAFICKING TO DRUG CARTELS IN MEXICO. ... THIS STATEMENT ISN'T ABOUT TAKING AWAY YOUR GUNS...UNLESS YOU ARE SELLING THEM TO DRUG CARTELS?????
How did that statement get turned into Holder stating that he would "not let" the 2nd amendment stand in the way of "taking our guns"???
When you joined the NRA did you sign a waiver proclaiming that you would mindlessly gobble up any bit of BS they hand you?
There should be an intelligence test and psychological screening prior to allowing folks to own firearms.