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.

 

Ban handguns? Supreme Court taking a new look

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
I think ATS needs to add a feature where it makes the people read an article before posting. This is not against gun ownership its more likely for it. The laws banning hand gun ownership are in place, they are saying should we take that away (The ban). Ohh but then you'd have to agree with the gubment/Obama.. and you can't have that can you. =) ..

"DON'T TAKE OUR GUNS" (Government: We were trying to give you your rights back) .. OH, WELL GLEN BECK SAID... (Goverment: and there is your first problem)







posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:04 AM
link   
For the record Glenn Beck did cover this on his show earlier
This case will also help turn current state legal carry permits into a universally recognized document like your drivers license.

As for that fish & potato comment, really they are in the same place what makes them any different? Just because you feel like one is better... Hey I think certain people should not benefit from freedom of speech, but we allow the kkk to still meet and have rallies!



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
I was little confused with this one too. It looks like they are questioning the constitutionality of Chicago's ban on handguns.


That's what it says they are AGAINST THE BAN FOR KEEPING GUNS

People really need to read



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by PjZ101

Another atrocity on our consitution and to our freedom is on the docket with the supreme court and newly appointed Judge Sotomayor.


Namaste THIS


WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court says it will take up a challenge to Chicago's ban on handguns, opening the way for a ruling that could set off a vigorous new campaign to roll back state and local gun controls across the nation.


ROLL BACK GUN CONTROLS... Good grief people its the first freaking sentence for crying out loud


Victory for gun-rights proponents in the Chicago case is considered likely, even by supporters of gun control, in the latest battle in the nation's long and often bitter dispute over the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. A ruling against the citys outright ban could lead to legal challenges to less-restrictive laws across the country that limit who can own guns, whether firearms must be registered and how they should be stored.


Sad thing is people will be coming in to this thread and agreeing with you (judging by the stars you got) and are also not readying it


sad very sad indeed



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
They took the weapons off the peasants in China and Japan, which led to them learning martial arts and turning their tools of work into weapons. And look how wonderful China turned out.

America is going down a dangerous path. And the eyes of history are watching her. I hope her government relaxes a little and stops being so paranoid. And I hope her citizens become a little more awake and watchful about their rights being stolen from behind their backs.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lazyninja

America is going down a dangerous path.


READ THE ARTICLE Dang it
They are giving us the rights BACK not taking them away


At least in Nevada we have sanity... the worlds largest Gun Park opening in a few months. Did some work out there its HUGE and awesome

www.accessclarkcounty.com...


Also we don't have gun laws here... want an Uzi? no problem



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by KSPigpen
 


Actually.. I agree with you.

I thought the same thing.

On one hand, if they rule it un-constitutional, that means states rights are violated.

Then on the other hand, that makes it so that over restrictive gun laws are removed eventually.

Does this then become a win-win? Personally I think it is a deeper argument than that.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Lazyninja

America is going down a dangerous path.


READ THE ARTICLE Dang it
They are giving us the rights BACK not taking them away


I think we're simply witnessing in microcosm what propaganda can do whether it's alternative, mainstream, right, left or whatever. Critical thought has been usurped by the pernicious agenda whores!

Aw, shucks, I'm starting to sound like...

Never mind.


[edit on 10/1/2009 by EnlightenUp]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
On one hand, if they rule it un-constitutional, that means states rights are violated.


How? Since when does the Federal Government have no authority to uphold the Bill of Rights (that almost sounds a bit funny to say though)? I'm really confused by this reasoning. It is no loose confederation of sovereign states, it is a nation. They got shown what that means once already.

I guess "states' rights" means "states can do whatever they want when they want" which is really an agenda of those that cannot truely get along with anyone else.

Edit:
Ok, I will confess a slight paranoid tingle that says they want to centralize authority to restrict arms at the Federal Level without states being in conflict. On the other hand, ruling certain bans or restrictions as unconsistutional sets some precedent for what they should be able to do.

[edit on 10/1/2009 by EnlightenUp]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnlightenUp Critical thought has been usurped by the pernicious agenda whores!


Well next time your in Vegas you can take out your frustrations


She's cute but don't mess with her





And this week they were giving free clips


[edit on 1-10-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
READ THE ARTICLE Dang it
They are giving us the rights BACK not taking them away


Well to be true to the article, they are reviewing giving your rights back. How do you really think that will turn out?

You can't really blame people for not reading either. On ATS there has been 6,459 topics about how America is being disarmed. This one is a little different, but the topic was still presented in conflicted way so that people will click on it.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by Lazyninja]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:37 AM
link   
They won't get my arsenal easily



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lazyninja
Well to be true to the article, they are reviewing giving your rights back. How do you really think that will turn out?

You can't really blame people for not reading either. On ATS there has been 6,459 topics about how America is being disarmed.


I suppose there's truth in that but it actually suggests there is something underneath the surface that is in conflict with the claims (which I don't doubt most of those topics expound) that the agenda is to disarm American citizens.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 



Ban handguns? Supreme Court taking a new look


Is the title. and it reads like this:


The supreme court is going to ban your guns!


Myself and probably many others, had no idea that people were spitballing banning handguns in Chicago, or whether they were actually banned there. Also Chicago isn't mentioned anywhere in the title at all.

Maybe a less confusing title could be:


Gun ban under scrutiny


Or something like that


Anyway I'm not complaining, it's good thread with some good news in it. It just gets repetitive when lazy people like me walk into a topic with a misleading title, and then it ends up like this. (I know I know, don't be lazy!)

[edit on 1-10-2009 by Lazyninja]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lazyninja (I know I know, don't be lazy!)


There ya go


Now go out and get one of THESE





[edit on 1-10-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
reply to post by FatalGreenthumb
 


Read these and calm down.

www.google.com...

www.latimes.com...

/ycevu7y

This is an important case because it will determine if the current restrictive gun-control laws are constitutional.

It needs to be done and now is a good time.

Let us pray that the court will uphold the Second Amendment as a Constitutionally protected individual right at the federal level.



lol...that was pretty funny....getting all worked up over misunderstandings hehehe. But then again I was a bit confused which way the review was going at first as well. Its late and I havent slept well lately so thats my excuse. Hope the gun laws lighten up, bout time someone had the sense to consider these current laws a bit reaching....



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Lazyninja (I know I know, don't be lazy!)


There ya go


Now go out and get one of THESE





[edit on 1-10-2009 by zorgon]



Ok just because I saw it and thought immediately,"WOW" what the Eff is that gun and how could it possibly have come into that fine mullet sporting (perhaps in the past if not now) gentlemen's hands???

[edit on 1-10-2009 by Averysmallfoxx]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   
oh yeah and zorgon, why did the poor dude get a photo shopped head?? its painfully obvious now that I am paying a lil more attention...



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by PjZ101
 


It's never a good thing when the Supreme Court feels it needs to once again, check to see if we have the right to self-defense.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Averysmallfoxx


Ok just because I saw it and thought immediately,"WOW" what the Eff is that gun and how could it possibly have come into that fine mullet sporting (perhaps in the past if not now) gentlemen's hands???



I believe that is a 20 mm anti-tank, anti-material gun.

Zorgon will have more info when he gets back - but yeah that gun has/had anti-tank capability.


[edit on 1-10-2009 by Exuberant1]




top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join