Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

2nd Ammendment , Right to bear arms , Legally to be Challenged

page: 8
64
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 07:47 AM
link   
This is just another agenda by the obama administration to change the constitution and change the US into a socialist country that he can control and rule.




posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


Remember when towns use to have cash for gun programs. The citys would offer people small monetary compensation to turn in guns. If the economy gets bad enough how many people would volunteer to hand over their guns for $200 or $250 a piece?

It wouldn't be hard to thin out the number of guns without ever using force.



posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by triplescorpio
 


1.) I am from Texas

2.) I am an ex-police officer

3.) I know how to shoot my weapons

4.) I will defend myself, my family, and our freedoms, as outlined in the Constitution.

5.) Yes, I dare them to come and take my weapons.

5.) Kickboxers fall just as hard as anyone else when they have a bullet in them.



In short . . . you keep you fists and feet. I will stick with my bullets and guns.



posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48

Originally posted by WTFover
I always wonder, which of those who call for the disarming of the American people, will actually volunteer to go do the removal? If not, they should sit down and shut up.


It probably wont go down like that.

They will be nice and give people a Grace period to surrender the arms I imagine.

Then it would be a criminal offense to "own" arms,

Yes that i am sure is Exactly what they will do first. did you read they were talking about taxing each giun owner $50.00 every year and performing "psychiatric" evaluations on each owner and if you do not pass no guns for you. if you refuse you are a felon. i havent seen anything more about this though. if somebody knows where info is on this please private message me?



posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by triplescorpio
 


1.) I am from Texas

2.) I am an ex-police officer

3.) I know how to shoot my weapons

4.) I will defend myself, my family, and our freedoms, as outlined in the Constitution.

5.) Yes, I dare them to come and take my weapons.

5.) Kickboxers fall just as hard as anyone else when they have a bullet in them.



In short . . . you keep you fists and feet. I will stick with my bullets and guns.



How did kickboxing find its way into this discussion?



posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I am going to play Devils Advocate here for just one moment. But before I begin let me state for the record, I believe in the Constitution and will fight in whatever way I can LEGALLY to defend them.

Now to everyone who says "It can't happen here" or "It will never happen here" it IS happening and it CAN happen, how? It's really easy. The simple majority of the people in this country just don't really care if the minority can keep and bear arms, it's that simple. Once you realize that 95% of the United States does NOT post on boards like this or even think about this issue day to day, the easier it is to realize that all it will take is a small thing and most of the county will be behind any change to the rules. This is no longer the 40's 50's or 60's, even the 70's or 80's, this is a new world, and a new set of rules.

Number 2.. If you have guns and a court suddenly issues a warrant for the police to enter your home and take them, your defending yourself with your gun "to the death" and letting them "pry it form your cold dead fingers" will be irrelevant, you will be a committing a criminal act if you refuse and disobey, rights aside, if a court signs that warrant, you must comply, end of story. I wonder how many people when faced with that would really start shooting cops and becoming criminals themselves.

Number 3.. The government is not against using families to make citizenry comply, I'm finding that one out the hard way in something as simple as a lawsuit against a government entity (I won't go into details, lets just leave it at it's not pretty) but i the powers that be suddenly decided to march your family out into your yard and threatened to execute them in front of you, would you a) give up your guns or b) watch your loved ones perish for an ideal. No offense to anyone here, I'd choose A.

Flame me if you wish but reality is so much different than sitting there making grandiose claims about what you would or wouldn't do.



posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


was called a pansy it seems as long as the computer is impersonal people have big muscles like on the phone and what not just acknowleding that im not sum P..sy who can be called childish names without reaction.
GUNS GUNS GUNS the way of the ...
ehh this is old great ta meet ya

Be careful with those guns of yours



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Don't get all strung up on what one man says guys..
Our guns are safe...
America will rise...POWER IS IN NUMBERS AND WE GOT THEM OUTNUMBERED..



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I can guarantee you, any attempt by the current government to disarm America will result in Civil War or a mass assassination.
The South likes their guns and WILL keep them and the plain states feel about the same.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by vkey08
The simple majority of the people in this country just don't really care if the minority can keep and bear arms, it's that simple.

Well, that's the key point in that even an overwhelming public mandate to restrict Arms is not lawful cause for the criminal pundits in government do disobey the Oath of Office to "defend & uphold the Constitution." Regardless of public opinion, they are still required by lawfully binding Oath to uphold & protect our Rights. Thomas Jefferson summed it up nicely:

All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be
rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

Bold emphasis is mine.
Every Natural Right listed in the Bill of Rights & the Common Law carries equal weight...As the Supreme Law of the Land.

That's the difference between the Constitutional Republic (specified in Article 4, Section 4) & a democracy...In short, We the People don't have any legal backing to waive our Rights, not even under signed contract. The only reason under law for being restricted from our Rights is if we abuse those Rights by violating the Rights of others. A good example is the use of firearms in committing a crime. The government criminals have absolutely no excuse for claiming this nation as being under a democracy or that all majority-public mandates are to be enforced...Those mandates that would restrict or remove any Right simply cannot be enforced lawfully.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
. . .

How did kickboxing find its way into this discussion?


From here:



your a typical internet mucscles person im an am. kickboxer you call me a pansy???



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by triplescorpio
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


was called a pansy it seems as long as the computer is impersonal people have big muscles like on the phone and what not just acknowleding that im not sum P..sy who can be called childish names without reaction.
GUNS GUNS GUNS the way of the ...
ehh this is old great ta meet ya

Be careful with those guns of yours


I do not have big muscles, and I do not talk big at all.

I will state the truth, though. If that is "talking big," then the issue is with you, not with me.

And if you are not a pansy, why are you crying about guns?



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Ahh its a new day i motion for truce i do in heinsight beleive we would be on the same side if ever faced with a common evil. I do think guns serve an important purpose. However it just concerns me how easily they can be used for the wrong purpose.
I do think its unfortunate we got off an the wrong foot.
I do beleive furvently in the 2nd amendment i do get tired of people using it as a crutch( not you
) texas huh wish i was where it is warm its fn freezing in new york lately
anyways be well



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   
I would like to add one more reason for gun ownership. We all know the 2nd amendment guarantees firearm possession being necessary for the upkeep of a well-regulated militia. It is also commonly understood that we can have them for hunting, sport and self-defence.

In a real sitX, say a nuclear war or some horrible disease breaks out and things get so bad and you are so injured or sick that you wish to end your suffering or that of loved ones - firearms insure that we have the ability to end that suffering. I can see many situations where living is no longer an option and rather than waiting to die a cruel death I can make it happen quickly and without pain. Harsh, but a real possiblity.





new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join