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.

 

Do you think guns should allowed to be sold to citizens?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2004 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cardu

Originally posted by AD5673
I just wanted to know if you think that it is alright that in America you could go off and buy guns?

Yep agree with you I dont see how guns/weapons are going to help us anyway..

Cardu, I'd say you need to sign up for a course on the Consitution and US history, too.

Originally posted by Cardu
Well they could make new weapons that shoot love and peace on your enemy, not a dangerous piece of a # right in your body ouch

This is not likely to happen anytime soon.
Perhaps, yuo could also use a dose of reality.
I don't mean to sound harsh, but you need to tune in to human nature


[Edited on 14-5-2004 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on May, 14 2004 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
Im not saying it's all bad and all worse owning guns but MAYBE it would reduce crime.
Really? So you think if the legislature announced that all of the good people were no longer allowed to have guns, that all the bad people wouldn't be listenting? I assure you that once this news got out, all the criminals that own guns illegally would take it upon themselves to use those guns to commit crimes immediately.

The only tactical counter and equalizer to a firearm is a firearm. If you criminalize guns, then only criminals will have them. See how that works? I know you're just a kid, but even still I feel the overwhelming urge to tell you to DENY IGNORANCE!



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Yes we should be able to buy guns. If you had it your way the only people with guns would be the criminals. Do you think the criminals have their guns registered? I think not. Guns don't kill people....people kill people. Good citizens don't buy guns for the thoughts of killing or stealing. Most gun related deaths are not accidental.

Crime would not be reduced at all. The people commiting the crime are criminals and buy their guns illegally anyway. So their would be more crime and more criminals because they would have no fear of entering anyones house or establishment.

[Edited on 14-5-2004 by I See You]



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 04:09 PM
link   
First off, a collective "SHUT UP" to those of you who feel the need to be rude to AD5 for being young. In the fairly long time I've been an active member on this site I've seen plenty of people significantly older than AD5 who aren't even able to phrase a proper sentence. So I just want to say that I personally am impressed that someone who is 11 years old is even thinking about issues like gun control and the bill of rights.

Secondly, American Mad Man, it looks from your post that you've mistaken me for the person everyone is calling kid. If not, my apologies, if so please correct that in your own mind, thank you. As for your responses to my points I fail to see even one proper reason why someone should be permitted to own a weapon that has no value as to what it is mentioned in the second ammendment. There is a difference between defending yourself and having the ability to murder someone from half a mile away. If that distinction escapes you then I respectfully suggest that you reevaluate the situation.

As for my comparison of assault rifles to nuclear weapons... that is a tactic which involves exaggerating to make a point. My intent was to demonstrate that allowing people to own a shotgun for hunting or a handgun for defending one's home is different than allowing someone to own a laser sighted rifle capable of firing 100 rounds a minute at deadly speeds, or using bullets specifically intended to pierce through the very body armor our police force wears.

You can not at the same time bitch about plans for a robotic police force and defend the right to privately own assault rifles. Why? Because how can we in good conscience send a police force out to protect us (yes it's their job to protect us) when they can be killed at will by people who wish nothing but harm on society.

The excuses of "people get things anyways on the black market" reminds me of the reasons for not using "the club" on a car. Yes, anyone can get anything illegally but why make it easy for them.

Again, I will state that I believe strongly in the second ammendment up until it infringes on the more important right of other human beings to have life.

[Edited on 5-14-2004 by Djarums]



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Djarums
Again, I will state that I believe strongly in the second ammendment up until it infringes on the more important right of other human beings to have life.
The second amendment will never infringe on one's right to life. A criminal with a gun will. And that is why I carry a gun.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 04:42 PM
link   
And as long as it's normal people holding guns we have that balance you speak of.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Forgive me for merely skimming the entire four pages of this thread and simply posting my own 2 pennies :

My answer....

Oh yehhhhhhhhhhhh

But only for self-defense. If ANYBODY ever threatened anybody that I love, I would be like "I think I'm going to have to hurt you now"



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 09:20 PM
link   
This whole thing is just fine with me! I've had mine for a long, long time!!!



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Djarums

Again, I will state that I believe strongly in the second ammendment up until it infringes on the more important right of other human beings to have life.

[Edited on 5-14-2004 by Djarums]


Here's a flash for you, a right does not infringe upon another right. You have the right to keep and bear arms for one reason and one reason only, and that is to keep in check the government. According to the 2nd amendment, anyway.
Another right, the prime right, is the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Liberty and happiness is difficult to achieve on this plane after a dirtbag has murdered you for your belongings or just for sport. It is your responsibility to maintain your lifer the best you can. That is to say, it is your obligation to protect yourself and your family from the rogues of society, and that is best done with a firearm. Nobody else can do that for you. Were a rogue to decide to kill you, he needn't use a firearm as a knife axe handle or tire iron would suffice, but it isn't the weapon that infringes upon your basic right, but the rogue himself.

Again for the class, do not get the tool confused with the employer. It is the holder of the inanimate object that is either good or evil.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Hm.

Right to life? whose right to life?

What about a potential victims right to life?

The criminal in my opinion gives up his right to life the moment he decides to harm another for his own pleasure or profit.

Guns protect the right to life.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
No i havent taken any classes on the constitution, I thin it's wrong to own guns though! You could just go out side and shoot someone if youre pissed of at them. Do you know how much violence there is like around projects? It's because of guns. I dont live in the projects but i live in Brooklyn, New York, and i know!


Who commits crime the gun or the person holding it?



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Here's a link to The Army National Guard

"The National Guard traces its history back to the earliest English colonies in North America. Responsible for their own defense, the colonists drew on English military tradition and organized their able-bodied male citizens into militias."

I see a lot of people gettting this wrong. The 2nd Admendment was created so states could have the tools to fight tyranny. It seems a common mispercecption that it implies that every joe six-pack can have a gun, "Well regulated" Trained and controlled by the state.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 11:04 AM
link   
That's right. Some people believe the 2nd Amendment only applies to National Guard either purposely or ignorantly. To those who believe it in ignorance, know that in the event of tyrranical rule, it will be that very National Guard that will be used to enforce martial law and sieze private property. For this reason, I distrust anyone who believes the 2nd Amendment only applies to the NG purposely.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 11:15 AM
link   
what i dont understand is you have to take a 2 week course an take a test to get the license to drive a 2+ ton car whitch causes prolly more deaths then guns an boxcutters, but for a gun its just a check to see if your not a Krimanal to get a firearm, wheres the 2 week course, wheres the test, wheres the insurance for the firearm ownerto pay the family of the kid that he/she killed due to leaving it out on the coffee table or under the sink, i mean somemore things can be done, just pull a Chris Rock an raise the price of bullets to 50,000 dollars then people would think twice before firing, "hey im gonna shoot you, wait here and Lemme get two more jobs 1st"

i believe we have the right to bare arms an protect ourselves but within reason ,semi-automatics are useful but shouldnt be sold to civi's but will continue due to the mass amounts of weaponsmiths who still practice as a form of hobby.this honestly will prolly always be a issue becuase of the knowledge thats already out, building a gun isnt very hard (getting it to fire repeatedly without killing you in one way or another is another story) i agree there could be alot more regulations that could be thought out still.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 07:51 PM
link   
militia ( n. )

1) An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

Professional meaningEngaging in a given activity as a source of livelihood or as a career, or Performed by persons receiving pay. The National Guard are professional soldiers. They recieve the same training and recieve pay for their service

2) A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.

The Reserves are a function of the Regular army. They are called in under the direction or the military, as they have been for some time.

The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

This means everyone.

A well armed populace IS the militia. Guns are for four things majoritivly:

1) To kill people in defense of the nation
2) To kill people in defense of your life, the life of your family, and your property
3) To kill people in defense of your country from a tyranical government
4) To hunt.

3 of the 4 are to KILL PEOPLE. Guns are made to kill people, and they are needed for such.

Stop with the pandering about guns. If you want be defenseless, that's your choice.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Stop with the pandering about guns. If you want be defenseless, that's your choice.


Agreed. However, I'll qualify that agreement
:

Bear in mind this is coming from a person who lives in NZ...a place where I doubt we've experienced a single School Yard shooting...and while there has been examples of mass shootings of people those are very few and far between.

Firearms are not something the average person will come across used in crime. You are unlikely to have a gun pulled on you in the street...more than likely a knife, if that. The firearms laws here are relatively strict and pretty much anything other than basic Hunting Rifles and Shotguns are VERY restricted. To own any such firearm requires extensive checks and some rather strict conditions of storage and just when, where and how they can be used.

As such...while I myself have a number of firearms they are essentially for Hunting purposes only. Though I do have a Mossberg 500 Pump within reach in the event of any 'home invasion' by intruders.

I don't see any point to carry firearms, concealed weapons or the like as a matter of course during the day. Again, perhaps because I'm also far from a small dude, relatively skilled in hand-to-hand combat and have somewhat of a 'Don't Even Fecking THINK About It' look...hahaha...well, thats what people say anyway


Personally think your first line of defence is just basic self-awareness and 'street-nouse'...perhaps its again my lack of knowledge of how things are in other countries...but it just seems somewhat 'overkill' to be arming oneself to the teeth for 'protection'. From whom? Rambo?



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
No i havent taken any classes on the constitution, I thin it's wrong to own guns though! You could just go out side and shoot someone if youre pissed of at them. Do you know how much violence there is like around projects? It's because of guns. I dont live in the projects but i live in Brooklyn, New York, and i know!


Those are dummies who get pissed off and do something stupid like shoot someone with a gun.

They shouldn't have a gun, but they do because it's their consitutional right.
But every gun has it's own personal fingerprint so to speak, thats why you register them and use them if you must.


Those dummies are most likely handling a stolen gun bought on the black market.
Their most likely to shoot someone and throw away the gun.

The crime rates w/ gun s are from people like you speak of.


New Hampshire has a 0 crime rate because everybody carries a gun w/ them and nobody #s with em.

Having gun/s protects you.

My husband has 4 guns.

I carry mace.


It's just good protection. Smart people will respect their guns.

Stupid people do stupid things with guns, and therefore should not have em but as I said above, black markets call for black hearts. And they will do evil with them.

do you know why they throw them away?
Because if it was registered to them, the guns print of the bullet would be in the body and it would show the person MURDERED so and so, and then he'd go bye bye.


Guns aren't the bad guys, bad people do bad things w/ guns.


How many times did I repeat myself here?



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Do you think guns should allowed to be sold to citizens?

Profusely, yes.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 06:58 PM
link   


New Hampshire has a 0 crime rate because everybody carries a gun w/ them and nobody #s with em.


Or just gets you killed faster, if they know your carrying a gun, they aren't going to stop you on the street, they'd just shoot you. But then again the crime rate is zero isn't it...

[Edited on 17-5-2004 by MrJingles]



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Do you think guns should allowed to be sold to citizens?

NO !! They should be given to the citizens as a right of citizenship.


And as a side note, about the National Guard.
Need Militia Members NOW !!.. to fight a foreign war!
Where are over 6000 of them right now?
In Iraq, protecting their individual states from tyranny.
(extreme sarcasm of course)


[Edited on 17-5-2004 by smirkley]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join