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.

 

H.R. 2159, the Disarming American Citizens Act

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
it is one thing to talk big about how the government will have to "pry your gun out of your cold dead hands" and another thing to actually line up the sights of your gun on another human beings chest and squeeze out a round, then watch them flop around in their own blood and bodily waste like a dying fish. most people just don't have the stomach for that. not to mention if there is going to be a force to take your guns they are going to be well armed, well trained, and carrying automatic weapons. basically if it comes down to defending our second amendment rights a lot of us would die in the process. i hear a lot of talk but when faced with their own mortality most people will get scared and give up.




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Yeah.
I read the bill and agree with WUK.

There's nothing in this bill that even comes close to 'disarming' the public.
[facepalm]
If you are considered a terrorist, and are linked to the same subject matter, you shouldn't be allowed to buy firearms.

Sounds logical to me.

I highly doubt the gov't will label every citizen a terrorist.

Besides, again like WUK said, it's a dead bill.







posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   
All you nay sayers dont pay much attention do you? It will never happen? It already did. Remember when the feds came and took down a couple millitias? The reasons they gave the media were that they were religous wacos and threating the police or something like that. Do you know why they were arrested? If you look up the actual papers, you will find that that grounds for arrest was Armed criminal action. They were conspiring to challenge the govt. BUT they did so while having a gun on them. Because they talked about challenging the govt while having a gun on them they were not only arrested, but they are now no longer allowed to legaly own, posses, or buy a gun ever.

Edit to add they were also in trouble because they taught people how to use guns and explosives. For the reason of using against the US govt if necessary.

Not that I am a fan of this group but the grounds they were arrested on push buttons.

docstoc

[edit on 30-7-2010 by mrsdudara]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by mrsdudara
 


You know that declaring war against the United States Government is in fact illegal right?


Do you know why they were arrested? If you look up the actual papers, you will find that that grounds for arrest was Armed criminal action. They were conspiring to challenge the govt. BUT they did so while having a gun on them. Because they talked about challenging the govt while having a gun on them they were not only arrested, but they are now no longer allowed to legaly own, posses, or buy a gun ever.



Section. 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.


Article III Section 3

So, according to your account, they should have been tried for Treason. But fortunately for them, they weren't.

As far as Militias are concerned, There are two places in the constitution where it mentions militias...

One that everyone is familiar with is the 2nd Amendment, the other one is in fact Article 2 Section 8:


To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


Same source

So, in fact you could consider the arrest of the Militia members disciplining this particular Militia.

[edit on 7/30/2010 by whatukno]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   
They want to take your guns away? So what? The less guns there are in a country, the less gun crime there is. The less gun crime there is, the less your police will need to use their arms.

Why are Americans so protective over their right to own guns? I don't know anyone with a gun. I also don't know anyone who has been shot or anyone who has been in a situation where their life depended on owning a gun.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by philosearcher
Not sure if I should be saying this...but in my local parts of the state, my once fellow employees and I used to talk about if this would ever happen (among other things like zombie invasions, and end of the world survival type scenarios). Funny enough, though, I used to work with a few ex-military and just some crazies - But they all agreed that especially in this area of the state people would kill to defend their rights to keep their firearms. I, myself, would most likely be included (unless I start thinking of the possibility that the country would revert itself to the use of medieval weaponry (fat chance)). One of the guys I worked with even gave me his strategic plans for his little village (which is actually kind of surrounded by a moat-ish river and a mountain) to defend himself against anything...I mean ANYTHING. SO, there you have it, I believe if a little old part of Pennsylvania would be this willing to defend their rights...Just imagine what others would do.
Reminds me of a place in Huntington County, PA...... Near Mt. Union.

Oh well, I don't think they will ever be stupid enough to try to disarm us that way. I think they will just find a way to kill a large percentage off in one fell swoop, effectively disarming that part of the population.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
Might actually be helpful to read the bill before assuming.

While this is a stupid bill for many many reasons, it's not what the OP is thinking it is, and I will say this with the inflection it deserves:

Day aint taken yer gunz away!


Ok jeffro, dis iz hows it be goin' dis here bill be bout not givin' dem dar terrists papers lettin um sell gunz to der terrist buddies. Y'all got dat? Da gubermint aint takin yer gunz away!

I swear, fear mongering at it's worst. Yes, I will agree this is a stupid bill and it shouldn't pass, I have to say that if anyone writes any gun legislation the nuts come out of the woodwork and show people exactly why gun control just might be needed in this country.



Sorry but you are inequivacably WRONG!!! This is the denial of the transfer, issuance of an explosives permit, or purchase of a firearm.

Based on the SUSPICION that they are either an international or domestic terrorist. based on the definition of domestic terrorist.

That means they can say that a militia has aided another militia by trading with them and that is reasonable suspicion that they are aiding them and they can deny their right to purchase or transfer a firearm or buy explosives or sell firearms and buy firearms.

this means that they may not be able to take away the guns that they have, but they can deny them from purchasing new ones or transfering any previously bought.

Jaden



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Wow.

Naysayers?
Come on.

This bill is clearly being taken out of context and has absolutely nothing todo with 'disarming' the American citizens...

As the mis-leading title states.

I am not bashing anyone here, or any posters here for that matter.

There's too much hype and sensationalism flying around now and we need NOT add to it, by claiming a dead bill will 'disarm' Americans.

Even if there was legislation to support this claim, there would be much more hype surrounding it.

When this gov't actually does something to take away from my 2nd amendment completely, emphasis on completely, I will get alarmed.
We all know that TPTB have a plan.
We all know that we are well equipped to handle such plan.

We all know where this is going.
It's up to you to either be prepared or fight fire with oxygen.





posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Can you imagine the logistics of rounding up all the guns in the US. The paperwork, the manpower.

All this crybaby whining about, "they are trying to take our gun away" is silly.

Answer me this....

If I can have a CCW, how can this be construed as "they are coming for our guns" get real!!



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by mileslloyd
 


Actually on the other side, I am all for the right to bear arms. It is a necessary right the American people have. What I don't condone is baseless fear mongering like this thread.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Masterjaden
 


Still doesn't matter because this bill is long dead.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Yep that is correct. I think they should have been charged with treason instead.

I am dissapointed that the files were closed so that we do not know the outcome.

Here is some of what I had a problem with:

" a. Conspirators acquired firearms, magazines, and ammunition, explosives and other componets for destructive devices, uniforms, communications equipment, supply and amunition vehicles, and medical and other supplies.
b. Conspirators engaged in military-style training in anticipation of the planned for military operations to include firearms and explosives training, weapons proficiency drills, patrolling and reconnaissance exercises, close quarter battle drills, and "man-down" drills, and prepared defensive fighting positions, ambush kill zones, and storage bunkers. During these training sessions, each conspirator in attendance carried and used at least one firearm. "

I do not like those being added because if they are/were found guilty it would set presidence would it not?

Over and over again in this document it states the person did this and that while having a firearm. That bothers me.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Masterjaden
 
You are probably wasting your time.

Whatukno reads things into the Constitution that are not there when it comes to the illegal alien problem, then declines to see what is there when it comes to 'Jethro' being allowed to own a firearm.

He is an obvious bigot when it comes to the poor folk of Appalachia who have never gotten a fair shake, especially when the feds had their 'war on poverty'. If you were a city dweller, you were 'poor', if you lived in the countryside outside the cities, you were conveniently..........

FORGOTTEN!




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by mileslloyd

Why are Americans so protective over their right to own guns? I don't know anyone with a gun. I also don't know anyone who has been shot or anyone who has been in a situation where their life depended on owning a gun.


Well, my friend, you need to drive through some of the neighborhoods in Chicago, New York, or Los Angeles....
Or even in Philadelphia.

Once you've been held at gunpoint to hand over your car to a gun-wielding criminal, you instantly wish you had a gun.
Or maybe that one time you might be held up at a gas station for a meager $43 and some change, you might change your tune.
All the while, these criminals had guns to control the situation.
Now, it will be an equal match.

Maybe it's just me, but I appreciate my rights as an American and don't abuse them.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 
This i believe will be a frustration for some time till the new people figure out how to do research first before posting the dead news.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by mrsdudara
 


Militias in their current form should bother you.

There should be militias in this country, and they should be under the guidance of congress.

When they act alone, in my opinion they are nothing better than street gangs.

If you believe in militias in their current form and agree with what they do, you have to by proxy agree with street gangs, because without the consent of congress, they are pretty much the same thing, just better organized and less armed.

Some people want you to be afraid, they find everything they can to try and egg you on to do something stupid. These people should be routed out and dismissed like the scum they are.

People must research these things to find out the truth, and yes, we must always be vigilant that the government doesn't try and take your guns away from you. Because I do believe that if you take guns away from the people, only criminals will have guns. At the same time, you can't succumb to baseless fear mongering threads and emails like the OP here. It's counterproductive and makes gun proponents look like raving lunatics.

[edit on 7/30/2010 by whatukno]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by havok

Originally posted by mileslloyd

Why are Americans so protective over their right to own guns? I don't know anyone with a gun. I also don't know anyone who has been shot or anyone who has been in a situation where their life depended on owning a gun.


Well, my friend, you need to drive through some of the neighborhoods in Chicago, New York, or Los Angeles....
Or even in Philadelphia.

Once you've been held at gunpoint to hand over your car to a gun-wielding criminal, you instantly wish you had a gun.
Or maybe that one time you might be held up at a gas station for a meager $43 and some change, you might change your tune.
All the while, these criminals had guns to control the situation.
Now, it will be an equal match.

Maybe it's just me, but I appreciate my rights as an American and don't abuse them.



I fully undertand where you're coming from, Buddy. that must be an utterly terrifying experience, but Do you think that would be happening as often as it does there if guns were downright illegal? they would be to hard for criminals to get ahold of, but I suppose it may be to far gone to get rid of all the illegal guns over there. Maybe yeah, business owners should have a permit to keep them in there workplace, etc, but maybe be a bit more strict on personal gun liciences?



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   
the 2nd Amendment will be the last to go

you don't start at the top of the list. you work up.

first work on the commerce clause issue (federal regulation of assault weapons, we'll see it again). then expand homeland security, broaden the terrorist definition, ratchet in civil liberties in general. got to make it easy to put a case on some poor gun owner. tap his phone, read her email, search their homes, all sans warrant of course. it's for our own good.

then take out right to assembly (bring down militias, next more main stream gun organizations). now take out the right to speech (internet controls).

after all of that, taking the guns is a breeze.

it's all in motion. but direct 2nd amendment attacks are still some time away.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mileslloyd
 



but Do you think that would be happening as often as it does there if guns were downright illegal?


I can go out right now, and within 2 hours I can have whatever kind of gun I want. I can even get the kinds of firearms that aren't legal for civilian use.

If guns were outlawed, only criminals would have them, the only real option is to keep guns legal, but toughen penalties for people who use guns for criminal purposes.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SecretGoldfish
 


Your whole post was LIES! Lies and fear mongering, just stop it!



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join