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.

 

Gun Grabbing Congress Critters Come Out of Woodwork After Giffords Shooting

page: 6
47
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


I'm not sure how this contradicts anything I've posted.




posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by budski
 


I was simply identifying with your comment that the English sent a " rags of an army.


between an oppressed, under-represented people and a giant empire


The English were well organised and, financially backed, and went up against farmers, peasants etc, and got the crap beat out of them?

Do you not see the part about being oppressed, fighting a giant empire?


My ancestors have been fighting that particular fight for over 800 years, and the fight goes on today - and we are winning by political, not violent means.

And it's true, the army that the english (actually british) sent, was the dregs of the army - anywhere in the american/caribbean colonies was seen as a punishment assignment, and with various diseases, life expectancy was much lower than in many other postings, even where fighting was heavier.

So, how does the fact that you managed to shoot a few drunken british alcoholics make gun ownership such a necessity in the year 2011?
edit on 11/1/2011 by budski because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


I am proud to be a liberal. I know that the human rights of law abiding American people to enjoy the products of their hard won labours are under attack. Guns today. What will be next tomorrow. This is not about guns really it is about control. Perhaps son nutcase dresses up in a black cape and is dubbed "Batman" by the media then TPTB will try to ban the comic as Batman is a non conformist vigilante in the comics.

This is what happens when the Politicos loose the plot and have no cogent ideology for these troubled times. All they think of is cracking down on freedom. Authoritarianism is not only an aspect of the Soviets.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Well let's see? After separating from the tyrannical empire, and establishing ourselves as our own people with our own laws, yup, I think it would be safe to suggest, continuing fighting for what our founding fathers fought for stands as a good reason to embrace the Constitution.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by GeneralAwesome
 


Yes we have our problems with censorship just like most other countries, no more or less. You, however, make it out like we live like slaves in our "landfill of a nation".

Either you are trolling very poorly or you really need to get out of the house and see what the world is like outside of America, I believed you will be shocked at just how wrong you are.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by tiger5
reply to post by budski
 


I am proud to be a liberal. I know that the human rights of law abiding American people to enjoy the products of their hard won labours are under attack. Guns today. What will be next tomorrow. This is not about guns really it is about control. Perhaps son nutcase dresses up in a black cape and is dubbed "Batman" by the media then TPTB will try to ban the comic as Batman is a non conformist vigilante in the comics.

This is what happens when the Politicos loose the plot and have no cogent ideology for these troubled times. All they think of is cracking down on freedom. Authoritarianism is not only an aspect of the Soviets.


And yet so many of those who promote no gun control are right wing in their philosophy - this is the right wing that has taken away so many freedoms from you guys since 9/11.
But it is blindly accepted because it is wrapped up in the right words that appeal to those who see the oppression of others as equalling freedom for themselves.

Freedom is an overused word, and as a concept has no bearing on the US or many other countries today.

It really makes me laugh that people actually think they have even a modicum of freedom, especially when they cheer the homeland securty act, or the patriot act which have both done more to erode any sort of freedom than any empire in history - all brought in by a government that espoused freedom whilst doing the complete opposite, and which they wholeheartedly supported.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


They like shooting stuff.

I believe the argument really boils down to that, minus all the tunnel-vision propaganda that is spewed out.

Scares the crap out of me personally.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Interestingly enough, the left has also continued to uphold these restrictions, long after the righties have left power.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
. . .

Ah, yes, the good old "Intent" argument, as though people were able to travel back in time and read minds.

If it was THAT clear, there would be no need to try and interpret "Intent" which is basically an argument that weak minded people use when they lack the critical facilities to think for themselves.

It also happens with the bible - perhaps the westboro baptist church are correct in their interpretation of certain new testament passages as well?


Apparently your schooling is not all that great after all.

I said that it helps to read the founders' other writings to grasp their full intent.

Case in fact (from the cited link):

George Mason, one of the Virginians who refused to sign the Constitution because it lacked a Bill of Rights, said: "Who are the Militia? They consist now of the whole people." Likewise, the Federal Farmer, one of the most important Anti-Federalist opponents of the Constitution, referred to a "militia, when properly formed, [as] in fact the people themselves." The list goes on and on.


Therefore, you get the definition of militia, as the founding fathers meant it. Not by going back in time and reading their minds (ridiculous line to use, by the way. Just shows that your argument is not valid).


You fail at history if you do not think you need to look at intent.


What the Bible and Westboro Church have anything to do with this? I dunno. But keep on doing what you accuse others of doing. It helps show how the position you take fails to withstand the onslaught of facts.
edit on 1/11/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by budski
 


Well let's see? After separating from the tyrannical empire, and establishing ourselves as our own people with our own laws, yup, I think it would be safe to suggest, continuing fighting for what our founding fathers fought for stands as a good reason to embrace the Constitution.


And yet you only fight for those rights when it suits you?

Which parts of the constitution remain sacrosanct?

Not very many.

Judge for yourself which parts have been subverted
www.usconstitution.net...

So stop banging the drum about the consitution - it gets ignored when it's in the interests of the people who really control the US to do so, and no-one makes a peep, until it comes to their guns.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by budski
 


Well let's see? After separating from the tyrannical empire, and establishing ourselves as our own people with our own laws, yup, I think it would be safe to suggest, continuing fighting for what our founding fathers fought for stands as a good reason to embrace the Constitution.


So you live in the past do you? Are you not a believer in progress and change?

I think the dark ages are calling - they want their belief system back.....



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Highground
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


I'm not sure how this contradicts anything I've posted.


Soory mate. Was not aimed at you. Was aimed at Budski.
edit on 1/11/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Highground
reply to post by budski
 


Interestingly enough, the left has also continued to uphold these restrictions, long after the righties have left power.


So you really believe that they are the left?

They are both centre right, one a little more extreme than the other - that's it.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh

Originally posted by budski
. . .

Ah, yes, the good old "Intent" argument, as though people were able to travel back in time and read minds.

If it was THAT clear, there would be no need to try and interpret "Intent" which is basically an argument that weak minded people use when they lack the critical facilities to think for themselves.

It also happens with the bible - perhaps the westboro baptist church are correct in their interpretation of certain new testament passages as well?


Apparently your schooling is not all that great after all.

I said that it helps to read the founders' other writings to grasp their full intent.

Case in fact (from the cited link):

George Mason, one of the Virginians who refused to sign the Constitution because it lacked a Bill of Rights, said: "Who are the Militia? They consist now of the whole people." Likewise, the Federal Farmer, one of the most important Anti-Federalist opponents of the Constitution, referred to a "militia, when properly formed, [as] in fact the people themselves." The list goes on and on.


Therefore, you get the definition of militia, as the founding fathers meant it. Not by going back in time and reading their minds (ridiculous line to use, by the way. Just shows that your argument is not valid).


You fail at history if you do not think you need to look at intent.


What the Bible and Westboro Church have anything to do with this? I dunno. But keep on doing what you accuse others of doing. It helps show how the position you take fails to withstand the onslaught of facts.
edit on 1/11/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)


OK, first off, the westboro baptist church also like to base their outmoded beliefs on the "Intent" of what Jesus said in the bible, giving it intepretations that suit their agenda - see the relevance now?

It's typical of the pseudo intellectuals who like to hide behind "intent" when it suits their purposes to do so.

Ever stop and think that their intent was exactly what they wrote?

Isn't the well regulated milita now the national guard?

Cling to your feeble arguments about "Intent" - they mean nothing.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Hmmm. What writings of Jesus do they have to compare it with?

I can give you hundreds of quotes from writings by the founding fathers where they tell you exactly what they mean, and their intent.

Any student of history will tell you that when studying documents, definitions of the time and intent are paramount to the study.

Funny when you are faced with the truth, and you still deny it.


Can you please link me to a founding fathers quote that shows that a militia is not defined as the people? I have already given my evidence to the contrary of what you believe. All you have done is mock others.

time to put up or shut up, Budski
edit on 1/11/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


"And yet so many of those who promote no gun control are right wing in their philosophy - this is the right wing that has taken away so many freedoms from you guys since 9/11."

Partisanism hurts the ordinary Joe. Henry Ford was supposed to be a right wing tool Does this mean I should boycott Ford cars in 2011???? I am an individual above all. I judge each issue on its own merit. My verdict is that this is wrong. It is the thin end of the wedge. Why are you making this a right /left issue? Do you know how many leftists and liberals shoot for fun? Or just own one for protection?

Fact. A loaded gun is a neutral item. It is when the trigger is pulled that it becomes an ethical and legal issue.

"But it is blindly accepted because it is wrapped up in the right words that appeal to those who see the oppression of others as equalling freedom for themselves."

I have issues with the right and I have argued with them over them. I do not have an issue over gun control

"Freedom is an overused word, and as a concept has no bearing on the US or many other countries today."
True but do you have an alternative?

"It really makes me laugh that people actually think they have even a modicum of freedom, especially when they cheer the homeland securty act, or the patriot act which have both done more to erode any sort of freedom than any empire in history - all brought in by a government that espoused freedom whilst doing the complete opposite, and which they wholeheartedly supported."

Well I can go about my business and have freedom with the law and am free to wage campaigns against bad laws and bad government. I have more freedoms than Pinochet's Chile, Greece under the Generals or Russia under Bresniev.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by budski
 


Hmmm. What writings of Jesus do they have to compare it with?

I can give you hundreds of quotes from writings by the founding fathers where they tell you exactly what they mean, and their intent.

Any student of history will tell you that when studying documents, definitions of the time and intent are paramount to the study.

Funny when you are faced with the truth, and you still deny it.



Intent and the interpretation of such is just something else to hide behind.

If we are going to study definitions of the time, why are stalwart supporters of the 2nd amendment so loathe to factor in the difference between now and then?

It's a much different world, and what applied then does not apply now, in any way shape or form.

And yet that is conveniently ignored...



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by tiger5
 


I didn't make it a discussion about political philosophy - other posters did, when they started going on about "liberals" etc etc.

For me, gun control is about removing the means, rather than looking at a supposedly neutral object.

I say supposedly neutral, because owning a gun and knowing it is there, can in many ways change how a person reacts to a given situation.

I brought up freedom not to espouse alternatives, but to highlight that in fact we have very few freedoms in a real sense, contrary to what many people think.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Reply to post by budski
 


There is no difference between now and then, as the Constitution is still valid.

Durrr


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by budski
 


There is no difference between now and then, as the Constitution is still valid.

Durrr


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Of course there is a difference.

The world is a hugely different place - motivations are different, people are different, government is different and literally everything that was applicable well over 200 years ago is different, and more to the point, there is no doubt that "INTENT" would be different if the consitution were written today.

If it were written today, it would be for the benefit of corporations, and indeed has already been subverted by them.

You argue intent and time and then say it has no bearing?
Ridiculous.
edit on 11/1/2011 by budski because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
47
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join