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.


To all the people who want to ban guns.

page: 29
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:42 PM
Reply to post by mwc273

And if running today he'd be ridiculed, laughed at, demonized, and lose with less than 4% of the total vote.

And people wonder why folks brains break and they go on nutty rampages.

When stuff sucks it sucks. When there's seemingly infinite opposition to doing anything the right way it sucks hard.

It wont get better in our lifetime. We were born with this # and we'll die with this # because the mob rules and the mob is dumb as #.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:50 PM

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Of course that's what the report says - it's what they wanted the report to say. Reports and polls can be made to show whatever results are desired.

Indeed. The very fact that they conducted their study in Philadelphia speaks volumes of its validity. But yeah, I guess a city with a homicide rate about 5 times the national average makes for a good representative sample of the experience of a typical, law-abiding American gun owner, right? And I'm absolutely sure they didn't include the criminal thugs in those statistics or lil' Johnny Gangbanger, either

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:20 PM
I say America is too deep in now for a gun ban to come in, if everybody that owned a gun handed it in it would be all good but im not to sure if that would happen. guns should have never been invented!

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:26 PM
After my battle over the divorce, I want to see how it is going to come out first..., I have every intention of opening a new hand gun and rifle production plant...

I want to open a new mass production facility.

We are going to mass produce $20 to $50 hand guns and rifles...

for $50 to $100, we make it out of plastic...

(The Sun magazine said their was a metal eating bug)

I will make sure that the ammo is under 5 dollars a clip of thirty.... I believe in freedom and feel it would be doing my part.... I want to flood the market where it is cheap... very cheap...

I want to do my part to ensure freedom...

(IT might be able to be done for less but, it would require 'interesting' choices in financing)

Imagine a world where for about the cost of a days labor you could buy a plastic gun and bullets with enough left over to buy a cheeseburger and drink....

could this idea be the reason the FEDS want to track bullets.....

well, what do you control advocvates think... weapons cheap enough everyone can afford them...

Yall showed me something interesting earlier. How to force people to buy your products...

Sells point...

Force everyone to protect their homes by buying guns.... Now that is an idea...

@ mods it is called irony and sarcasm... it does go with the thread...

I am curious about one thing... some of the mods are pro-gun some are anti-gunn who do yall deal with the conflicting emotions?

who is right?

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:55 PM

Originally posted by Rocky Black
Everytime someone gets shot the anti gun people and anti constitution people come out spewing all this crap about take away their guns and this will come to an end.

Well people I hate to break it to you but you are all wrong.

Here is your proof.

Look at NY gun crime. Oh wait but it is against the law to bring a gun into NY right. Well people maybe you can tell me why their gun crime rate and murder by gun rates are so high.

Now look at Massachuttes which has the most toughest gun laws in the state. Every single day there is a shooting in boston and mattapan or cambridge. Why you might ask? Because if you get arrested for a gun violation instead of a manidtory year in jail. If you get caught with one without a liscense you get a slap on the peeper and that is it. Suspended sentence time served probation.

Now lets look at the state of Texas.
All of its citizens or most of them are armed. It has one of the lowest crime rates and lowest gun related murders.

Why. Thats right. No answer

Taking away guns is not the answer people.

Look at any country where it is illegal to own or posses a pistol or shot gun. Find one and look up gun related murders. Hey why are they high gee I wonder how can that be.

Thats right taking away guns is the agenda of the socialists.To make us into sheeple so we cannot defend ourselves.

Oh you dont like that.

Here drink this coolaid it will make you feel all better.

Guns Kill People .... right ?

I tested this theory.

I took out two guns, loaded them, made sure the safety's were off and set them on the table. I set up video camera;s from many different angles to watch these people killing guns. For hours, the guns remained on the table in the exact position that I put them in. I had to get some sleep, it was getting late. When I awoke, sure enough, the guns were still there. I checked the video, they hadn't moved all night.

My conclusion, guns don't kill people, people kill people. I thought for sure, in this epic experiment, that both guns, on their own would have floated up and started a killing spree, But, they proved me wrong. I don't know what to do now, maybe buy more guns......

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:59 PM
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:10 PM

Originally posted by neverleanonus

post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions

Their is such thing as freedom of speech ... I am appalled that you would remove this. Although it was extreme, who are you to be judge and jury over simple ranting and raving, Isn't that what this site is all about, I don't go around trying to rid posts of people who strongly disagree with me or even come to dislike me .... you are wrong .. period
edit on 13-1-2011 by VI0811 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:27 PM
reply to post by VI0811

Oh my god I almost just fell off the chair. Funny.

Like my rocky on guard.

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:30 PM
reply to post by VI0811

mods can we star him for original thinking....

can you upload the vids to youtube and post here with them

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:38 PM
At the end of the day, this is still who America is when the going gets tough....mic cut at1:30 mark.
edit on 13-1-2011 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:49 PM
reply to post by ripcontrol

now this is interesting...

I just got into a conversation where I was told that they would turn me into the feds... For wanting to open a legal manufacturing plant...

All because the liberal idiot thought it was a bad idea.... I told her go ahead and gave her someones name I don't like
( heh brains for (said it was my name with pride)

Note she also saw the ATS logo...

It is this bad, because it is weird that a conversation broke out.... Especially like this...

I complained to the store owner she was postpositioning me and other men in the store ... (she looks like she is ready for the club)

think I am going to duck out real quick...

Praise the lord and pass the ammo

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 10:23 PM
I believe in gun control but not gun banning. That means if you have a criminal history or are mentally ill you should be denied access to guns. We cannot afford to have crazy people shooting politicians, judges, business executives, etc because it reflects poorly on our society and makes a strong case for banning guns altogether.

I was stunned to find out yesterday that you can even posses a fully automatic weapon provided it was registered before 1986, pay a $200 federal fee and then buy that weapon for 10 fold its original value. Does'nt that mean that only rich people can afford them and everyone else gets stuck with a shotgun or pistol? Come hell or high water some people will be at a great advantage over others and those with no weapons at all...well you were too naive to begin with so don't complain.

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 10:34 PM
reply to post by VI0811

After I stopped laughing and regained my composure I gave ya a big bright shinning star. Thnx for the

I have to say, I am stunned by the ignorance of some of the post in this thread, mostly from people that DON'T live in this country. A week or two in Watts, S. Central or E. LA. would probably change their position on the topic. I do not want to live in a world/country without guns, I like to shoot, eat meat and the liberty to be able to defend myself from wild animals and people that want to kill me. I would however, would love to live in a world without violence, where I don't need to have a weapon of any kind to defend myself against man, unfortunately that's not a reality and everyone on this forum knows it. Humans are violent, they always have been since the beginning of time and all ways will be. Can anyone explain to me why the most barbaric and gruesome mass murders ever committed on this planet were long before guns were ever invented? People kill people not guns, pull your head out of the sand and imply the forums motto....deny ignorance.

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 10:49 PM

GunCite-Gun Control:Machine Guns

Federal Firearms Regulations
It has been unlawful since 1934 (The National Firearms Act) for civilians to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department. Machine guns are subject to a $200 tax every time their ownership changes from one federally registered owner to another, and each new weapon is subject to a manufacturing tax when it is made, and it must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in its National Firearms Registry.

To become a registered owner, a complete FBI background investigation is conducted, checking for any criminal history or tendencies toward violence, and an application must be submitted to the ATF including two sets of fingerprints, a recent photo, a sworn affidavit that transfer of the NFA firearm is of "reasonable necessity," and that sale to and possession of the weapon by the applicant "would be consistent with public safety." The application form also requires the signature of a chief law enforcement officer with jurisdiction in the applicant's residence.

Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.

(Sources: talk.politics.guns FAQ, part 2, "FAQ on National Firearms Act Weapons", and from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms,and Explosives (ATF) National Firearms Act FAQ. See also, "The Firearms Owners' Protection Act: A Historical and Legal Perspective" [Hardy, 1986]) )

Now my question becomes WHY did you need special permission from the US Treasury Department rather than than the FBI or ATF? Did the FBI and/or ATF not exist then? Seems a bit conspicious if you ask me since the US Treasury is for FINANCIAL MATTERS not gun control.

I am sorry but I would prefer if EVERYONE were NOT ALLOWED access to machine guns OR EVERYONE WAS ALLOWED ACCESS rather than gangsters and para-military groups hoarding them for an unfair advantage.

Check out the HK-MP5n--perfect for a post-apocalyptic world?

edit on 13-1-2011 by EarthCitizen07 because: add picture and spelling corrections

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 11:25 PM
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

I posted this at the start of this thread. It should answer your question.

"Well, more than nine months have passed and the first crime numbers are in. Last week, the FBI announced that the number of murders nationwide fell by 3.6% last year, the first drop since 1999. The trend was consistent; murders kept on declining after the assault weapons ban ended.

Even more interesting, the seven states that have their own assault weapons bans saw a smaller drop in murders than the 43 states without such laws, suggesting that doing away with the ban actually reduced crime. (States with bans averaged a 2.4% decline in murders; in three states with bans, the number of murders rose. States without bans saw murders fall by more than 4%.)"

edit on 13-1-2011 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 12:22 AM
reply to post by mtnshredder

Banning semi-automatic weapons for the public was wrong. I agree 100% so I have no idea what your reffering to in your post. I was stating I am for weapons control so that lunatics and criminals don't have access to them.

My question was in regard to fully automatic weapons and the US Treasury.

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 01:38 AM
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Yes, the semi "assault" ban was stupid. Heres why The difference between a hunting semi and a assualt rifle for the most part is looks, you can achieve the same results with a hunting rifle. The N. Hollwood bank shootings are one of the few times (modern day) fully automatic weapons made a lrg impact of the crime being commited and they're dead. With all the red tape to own a machine gun, FBI background checks , registration and price $$$$$ most criminals are not going to spend 5K-15K+, not many people have them, so not many criminals steal them, not to mention anyone that owns a full auto is probably not the easiest person to go stealing a gun from. Machine guns are not an issue in the big picture, matter fact it's probably mute at best especially when you figure in the ease of converting a semi to full.

These are not real recent stats but it gives you an idea of the impact that machine guns have in our country, not much if any and the crime that were commited with auto's probably would have been just as effective with a semi.

"Again in Targeting Guns, Kleck writes, four police officers were killed in the line of duty by machine guns from 1983 to 1992. (713 law enforcement officers were killed during that period, 651 with guns.)

: Of 2,200 guns recovered by Minneapolis police (1987-1989), not one was fully automatic.

A total of 420 weapons, including 375 guns, were seized during drug warrant executions and arrests by the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad (Will and Grundie counties in the Chicago metropolitan area, 1980-1989). None of the guns was a machine gun.

16 of 2,359 (0.7%) of the guns seized in the Detroit area (1991-1992) in connection with "the investigation of narcotics trafficking operations" were machine guns."

edit on 14-1-2011 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:24 AM
I don't want to see guns banned per say. The 2nd amendment affords us the right to keep and bear arms. We can own and carry them but please note the 2nd amendment stops there. It does not give you the right to discharge a weapon.

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 03:40 AM

Originally posted by Lilitu
I don't want to see guns banned per say. The 2nd amendment affords us the right to keep and bear arms. We can own and carry them but please note the 2nd amendment stops there. It does not give you the right to discharge a weapon.

I think after 200 yrs that the courts have established that the definition of "bear arms" as written in the Constitution gives you not only the right to carry a weapon but to also use it for it's intended purpose. There is probably millions of court cases on the net that you could search to see if your definition of "bear" arms has ever been used in the court of law.
edit on 14-1-2011 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-1-2011 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:53 AM

Originally posted by Lilitu
I don't want to see guns banned per say. The 2nd amendment affords us the right to keep and bear arms. We can own and carry them but please note the 2nd amendment stops there. It does not give you the right to discharge a weapon.

Although I'm pretty sure I can find passages from Supreme Court decisions that would say otherwise, lets assume that you're correct for a moment, and that the 2nd Amendment says nothing of the right to actually fire that weapon.

Could you point me to a law that says that people can't discharge a firearm for self-defense or for sporting purposes? For all but a few areas of the country, you can't. You could even repeal the 2nd Amendment if you wanted and it would have no effect on gun rights without passage of additional laws.

new topics

top topics

<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in