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.

 

Is the post about getting rid of the second amendment and the constitution a fishing operation?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by DAVID64
 



Practice what you preach. Throw away your guns. If you are so dead set against people owning firearms then be ready to back it up with actions that will get others to follow. Post a video of you smashing your guns with a sledge hammer. We're waiting.


Why? Why should I do any such thing?

I am not against law abiding sane citizens from owning firearms. Why should I get rid of mine because I don't think that the insane should be armed?




posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 



Isnt that just racist code for black people?


Why? Do you think that all gang members or drug dealers are black? Because I don't.


reply to post by Lunatic Pandora
 


Good people through the mud? Like your buddy down in Arizona? He good people? He the kind of person that should have had a gun? 6 people are dead and one representative is in the hospital because of this "good person".
edit on 1/11/2011 by whatukno because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Ooooh Doggy!

It's gettin' hot in here!

So let me turn on the A/C

and cool the room down.

Stay on Topic and be kind to each other.

It's the ATS way.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Lunatic Pandora
 





This tripe, along with your complete LIE about the NRA, is why people get nervous when people like YOU talk about gun control. And it seems, all the people who talk about gun control share your particular penchant for disinformation.


Of course we get nervous. They are either an elite disinfo agent spouting disinformation or a naive bleeding heart puppet spouting the manta he was taught.

And no I do not like the extreme religious right either because many of THEM are also elite disinfo agents. The name of the game is divide and conquer while we fight among ourselves instead of identifying the true enemy.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
The origin of the NRA:


It was established in 1871 in New York by William Conant Church and George Wood Wingate as the American Rifle Association; its first President was former Senator and famous Civil War Union Army General Ambrose Burnside.[2] President of the United States Ulysses S. Grant served as the NRA's eighth President[3] and General Philip H. Sheridan as its ninth.[4]


So unless you can connect Grant, Burnside and some NY legislators to the Klan the notion that they are one in the same kind of falls flat.

But what chance does recorded history have against a spiffy cartoon in a slanted movie have?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



This post deserved more than the 1 star I was able to give it! It completely blew out of the water any chance of a link between the NRA and the KKK, any review of my posting history will reveal that I'm far from being a right wing nut.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Reply to post by whatukno
 


Sure you dont. But that doesnt matter. We're having a typical partisan argument about a typical partisan subject.

If you want the NRA to be a racist group supplying gangsters and criminals with guns to expedite their own demise then not wanting said criminals to have them means you wish to prevent gun ownership by minorities (since the NRA is racistly supplying them guns).

Or did you edit your previous posts to remove that?

I'm trying to help you out painting the NRA as a Klan front. Consistency supports your claim.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Why would I want to stop any law abiding citizen from having a gun, it's the heart of the 2nd Amendment. Oh that's right, the radical right doesn't think that minorities are actually citizens, in fact the radical right thinks that anyone with a darker skin color than a tan is an illegal.

But hey, that's why the NRA is in business, to make sure that gang members and drug dealers (and yes minorities which I don't think I added before but if you insist it's the case) have guns so that they kill each other.

Kinda the same line of thinking why the US Government sells arms to both sides of a conflict. If they kill each other, we don't have to go in and kill them ourselves.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 





I am not against law abiding sane citizens from owning firearms. Why should I get rid of mine because I don't think that the insane should be armed?


So WHY are you not addressing the core problem??? Getting the INSANE off the streets? Getting rid of guns or restricting guns is NOT the solution, Getting the insane real HELP is the solution and the blasted liberals with their Deinstitutionalization of the Mentally Ill are SQUARELY to blame.

Good lord man the Shooter was Identified as mentally disturbed. The police visited him but LIBERAL legislation kept them from helping this guy and preventing these deaths. Heck there is even LIBERAL legislation to PREVENT medicating the mentally disturbed!


If you want to do something constructive get behind legislation to institutionalize the Mentally disturbed!



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 


Because getting the insane off the streets isn't the conservative way.

Why should MY tax dollars be used to help anyone? If someone is insane and a danger to themselves and others they should starve to death or freeze to death on the streets like every other homeless person.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Reply to post by whatukno
 



(and yes minorities which I don't think I added before but if you insist it's the case)


Sure you did. You entire argument was based on the fact that criminals are minorities when painting the NRA as racist.

I like how you dont try to clear things up or even laugh it off as an obvious mistake but instead dig your heals in and make exponentially crazier assertions. Lots of fun.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


So Loughner is my friend now? You do know he wasn't a right winger right?

I might be, but I am not a killer.

Dude...I'm done in this thread, but I am satisfied that discerning people
will see your posts for what they are.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Guns are Inanimate objects. The actions with use of guns are all in the hands of the beholder. Why infringe on the rights of others, all because of the actions of a select few?


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.



What part of shall not be infringed dont some of you understand?



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


I believe I painted the NRA as a front for the KKK.

Not my fault that the truth hurts.

The gun lobby and the NRA wants to make sure that everyone no matter what has access to firearms. Killers, drug dealers, gang members, and even militia members. Make sure that everyone is armed to the teeth.

My point is, maybe the gun nuts are wrong and not EVERYONE should have access to firearms but the law abiding and sane.

The post right above mine here is exactly what I am talking about.
edit on 1/11/2011 by whatukno because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Reply to post by whatukno
 


So Grant, the bane of the klan, was a klansman?

Just curious, are you ignoring the founding of the NRA or refusing to believe it?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Yea, revisionist history is a right wing specialty. Can't really believe everything that you read on the internet.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
I've never understood why people, any people frankly, would say that preventing good, honest, hardworking citizens from legally owning firearms would somehow benefit the rest of society. For me, all evidence is to the contrary.

Hollow-point bullets for example. Also known as cop killers, they are illegal for a person to own. Yet, they still exist. But how can this be? They were designated illegal yet they are still circulating. Why? Because the people interested in owning and using these bullets do not care that they are illegal! In fact, the black market for them has instead increased.

Making guns illegal to own will do nothing but drive up their value in the black market making it very tempting for people to try and make big bucks, especially in light of the recession, while putting them in the hands of those that intend to use them against innocent people! Simply adding another layer to the black market has now already increased the crime rate in this country. Imagine a bunch of criminals, fully armed with nothing to lose, facing citizens completely unarmed trying to fight them off with what..... a bat? a knife? Wielding a knife against someone coming at you with a loaded gun is suicide unless the shooter is half blind or a REALLY bad shot. Not the kind of odds I would want to be faced with. And I, as a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen with nary a blemish on my record has a right NOT to face those odds.

Now, there is controversy surrounding Arizona's gun laws since some officials are stating that more than 1000 people designated as mentally ill actually own legal guns. (I'm not sure how they derived at this number, but am merely using the figures heard over the course of the last few days). Should this be the case, I would say that Arizona perhaps needs to refine their gun laws to ensure that innocent, law abiding, mentally stable people have the right to own firearms and anyone deemed mentally unfit does not.

However, there is a huge distinction between refining laws and abolishing them altogether.

This whole situation frankly is rather sickening to me.

First, the act of Loughner is disgusting and unacceptable. Second, the democrats that came out on the news and began laying the blame of this shooting on the rhetoric of the Republicans through the course of the last year or so is equally disgusting. Especially since it has already been shown that Loughner had been planning this for 3 - 4 years. Frankly, I am surprised that this hasn't been blamed on Bush yet!

To try and make a correlation between a politically charged atmosphere and the possibility that someone, somewhere may interpret political discourse as a reason and justification for killing and shooting masses of people is deplorable. Do not allow yourself to be silenced in deference to those that trample on our laws and choose the wrong path! To do so would allow the only voices to be heard to be those that do not represent the majority of our society and are not what the United States of America is really about.

This lone act of a known mentally unstable person now fueling a debate about restricting free speech, abolishing the Second Amendment, and somehow laying the blame on others is a very scary direction for this country to be heading in in my opinion.

Lastly, for all of the posters on here wondering about ATS and our role in all of this are just as bad. I don't see anyone calling for YouTube to be banned despite Loughner's participation on that site. Nor is Facebook or MySpace being deemed as a direct cause for this tragedy. So why ATS? Because we are a popular conspiracy site? It's ridiculous that people would be so willing to give up their rights and even question their rights in the name of the poor decisions of others. You can not stop crazy by not talking about it.

As a final thought, ATS actually did more in my opinion than other sites to try and convince this individual he was on the wrong path. Whereas on Facebook and YouTube he merely can acquire fans, friends, and hits that can create the facade of support, on ATS a dialog was opened in which the majority of members tried to counteract his ramblings with logic, source, and reason!



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   


**********From TheSkinripper**********

I was hoping it would be a cold day in hell before I saw that name again



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 





Because getting the insane off the streets isn't the conservative way.

Why should MY tax dollars be used to help anyone? If someone is insane and a danger to themselves and others they should starve to death or freeze to death on the streets like every other homeless person.


BOY you put your foot in it on that one.

WHO the heck do you think the Salvation Army is !!! (The ONLY Non profit I support) What about the church group in Fitchburg MA that set up a a warehouse as a homeless shelter during one of the worst winters in the nineties. Heck what about my Mom and me who have volunteered and even taken into our homes several homeless people.

BUDDY NO ONE has cornered the market on compassion. That is the worst of liberal lies!

I have friends who have helped the down and out who range from a Card Carrying Communist Jew
who helps run a homeless place in Boston to Ultra Conservative Baptists who have volunteered at soup kitchens and helping the disabled.

(Oh and I am an Agnostic
)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Reply to post by whatukno
 


I'd show you my encyclopedia if I could.

I guess that's full of lies too?

I cant believe what I read but of course you can believe what you read?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join