It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


03:45 AM Home Invasion

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:24 AM


Can only half of you see my posts and replies? Something is going on, I just had my silver coins avatar removed.

Subject: Avatar Removed
from: AshleyD
sent: 13-7-2010 at 04:43 AM
A member of the forum staff, AshleyD, has removed this avatar from your profile...

I don't think anyone can see anything you write unless the reply button is hit

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:35 AM
Ah, mystery solved, the OP's avatar or background image must have been overloading the server bandwidth, and their posts were hidden until it was replaced.

[edit on July 13th 2010 by Ian McLean]

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:47 AM
reply to post by Ian McLean

Appears I was put on "globally ignored" and this has been fixed.

Not sure what everyone was seeing, everything looked normal to me.

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 02:27 AM

Originally posted by Ian McLean
Ah, mystery solved, the OP's avatar or background image must have been overloading the server bandwidth, and their posts were hidden until it was replaced.

[edit on July 13th 2010 by Ian McLean]

and just how big was his avatar that it was able to overload the server? must have been pretty big,

for the record at this moment i can see all of infolurkers posts no prob

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 02:39 AM
reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye

Sorry, I was being inexact. It's not the ATS server bandwidth that would be overloaded, but rather the bandwidth of users viewing the page. Their connection has to download the images for all the avatars and backgrounds, and if they're too big page loads on slow connections get bogged down.

The limit for avatars is 75KB, and the limit for background images is 50KB.

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 03:40 AM
This is exactly why we ALL need guns so when the government trys to do this one day we can fight them off. Still I'm all about the law that is protecting this guy, I think every state needs it.

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 03:58 AM
The repulsive thing is, here in the UK, the homeowner would face the serious prospect of a long-term sentence.

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 06:01 AM
reply to post by Doc Velocity

The morons in Congress all want to ban private ownership of firearms are the same people who hire private security to protect themselves.
Doc, only the RICH deserve to be protected by people with firearms

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 11:30 AM
Some guy blew another guy into next week while defending his home... what is the big deal?

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:24 PM

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
Gee, I wonder what was going through the burglar's mind...aside from a .357 wadcutter.

Now let's see, if our federal government had banned legal private gun ownership, then we'd probably be reading about a multiple homicide right now, and police would still be searching for the intruders.

And what really pisses me off is that anti-gunners are also packing heat out there, even as they argue to circumvent the Second Amendment.

You may not remember a fellow by the name of Carl Rowan, but he was a longtime liberal, political journalist, and one of the most outspoken anti-gun activists ever. Rowan is mainly remembered for his angry declaration: "anyone found in possession of a handgun except a legitimate officer of the law goes to jail—period."

Rowan demanded "A complete and universal federal ban on the sale, manufacture, importation and possession of handguns." That was in 1985.

In 1988, using a handgun that wasn't his, Carl Rowan shot a trespasser on his property. Rowan argued in court that he had a right to protect himself and his family by any means necessary. The jury couldn't arrive at a verdict, and the judge called a mistrial.

Rowan was never taken seriously as an anti-gun activist again. Duh.

And I know there are other high-profile anti-gunners out there who carry, because golly somebody might try to attack them... Again, DUH. Pathetic hypocrites.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 7/13/2010 by Doc Velocity]

Bravo Doc!

The hypocrisy of some is nothing short of unbelievable, but what is even more unbelievable is how some others tend to just soak it up. If anyone checked out the second link the OP posted, it really ticked me off.

In the second link it is a story of 2 home invaders who held a mother and 2 of her children in an upstairs room. An 8 year old girl hides in a closet and is able to call police.

Then they show an interview with the Chief of Police who is praising his department for being able to capture the Home Invaders and how everyone is safe and sound because the 8 year old knew how to dial 911. The Chief of Police admits, it took 5 MINUTES to respond to the 911 call.

Now think about that for just a second.... 5 minutes. That is a very very long time when someone is holding a gun to your head, and the the heads of your children. The Police do not deserve praise for this situation, they didnt do anything but pick up the trash. The only reason why the Mother and her Children are safe, is because the home invaders didn't want to kill them. They just wanted to rob them. I can say that with 100% certainty because if someone wants you dead, they won't wait 5 minutes to make it happen.

Weather you believe in gun rights or not, I think we can all agree that every single person on this earth has a god given right to protect themselves from harm. Fact is a gun can be the difference between a headline that reads "Home Invader shot when entering family home" or "Manhunt for Home Invader after family of 4 found dead"

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in