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.

 

The Second Amendment: A Treatise

page: 3
52
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Reply to post by Grimpachi
 


I'm absolutely serious.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Then I will just say we will never see eye to eye because I completley dissagree with you.




posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Your retorts bear the marking of an undercover Anti.

Sorry, but the (un) logical step to go from "Yes, there is a right to bear arms" and then add "but......" is how every anti gun rights person starts and proceeds in discussion.

And with the whole "Giving grenades to Children"? That mimics the whole retort of "Well, would you put landmines in your front yard" crap.

Sorry, but just because you "feel" safer with restrictions in place, it is still restrictions and infringement. Does not matter how much you spit polish the turd of a retort, it is still a turd.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Great thread. And yeah, people should be allowed to have sniper rifles, anti-air missiles, grenades and anti-tank missiles, if they can afford them.

Back in the day, people had CANNONS, actual artillery, as private property. And it was all legal.

If the military is in foreign wars (like Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan) and the US gets invaded, the average citizen need to be able to take out a Chinese/Russian tank/aircraft...

Hell, America and the west in general are giving that kind of weapons and more to the rebels in Syria and Libya... but us in the west cannot get the same hardware?

Second amendment, with no restrictions and no permits, that's the way it was intended to be and it's what it should be.

All the unconstitutional laws in NY, California and Illinois should have been discarded a long time ago...



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Reply to post by Grimpachi
 


www.youtube.com...

www.dailypaul.com...

www.givethemback.com...

wearechangeseattle.org...

www.prisonplanet.com...





 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



That Alex Jones is a blowhard he doesn't know what he is talking about. He loses credibility when he starts talking about the Xray Machine. As someone who has trained with these devices they are no more harmfull than standing in the sun for 15 minutes. DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR.

As far as training for situations that is nothing new and is nothing to fear. The cops in a couple of those situations were defintly out of hand but to be fair no one should wave a gun in front of a cop that is just common knowledge. N.Y. is a state with strict gun laws. The constitution does allow states to have sticter laws on such matters. Here in florida the laws are a lot loser I personaly would not wan't to live in N.Y. but if I moved there I would abide by the laws.

I am not a alarmist nor am I big on govt conspiracys and as a former soldier that has been in both the NG and Active Duty I know that soldiers will not turn against the populace.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Reply to post by Grimpachi
 


The Oathkeepers sprang from these situations you claim would never happen. If they would never / have never happened the. why the need for the Oathkeepers?

I wonder, what woukd happen if the one rare tyrant guardsman was trying to take my firearm and I fired in defense of my liberty? Would all those other non-tyrant guardsmen stop and say "gee, he must have been crossing the line" or would they just turn and blow me away?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Your retorts bear the marking of an undercover Anti.

Sorry, but the (un) logical step to go from "Yes, there is a right to bear arms" and then add "but......" is how every anti gun rights person starts and proceeds in discussion.

And with the whole "Giving grenades to Children"? That mimics the whole retort of "Well, would you put landmines in your front yard" crap.

Sorry, but just because you "feel" safer with restrictions in place, it is still restrictions and infringement. Does not matter how much you spit polish the turd of a retort, it is still a turd.



You have a right to your opinion and I have a right to mine if you have kids or one day have kids go ahead and arm them to the teeth for all I care just don't let them around mine. I don't know if you were or are a soldier by your pic but it seems stange to me that you would take that stance if you are. I have witnessed how powerfull todays weapons are and I also remember being a kid and know the two do not mix. I have been around enough destruction for this lifetime and I don't want to see it on my streets which is exactly what would happen if everyone could get there hands on any weapon they wanted.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Reply to post by Grimpachi
 


The Oathkeepers sprang from these situations you claim would never happen. If they would never / have never happened the. why the need for the Oathkeepers?

I wonder, what woukd happen if the one rare tyrant guardsman was trying to take my firearm and I fired in defense of my liberty? Would all those other non-tyrant guardsmen stop and say "gee, he must have been crossing the line" or would they just turn and blow me away?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



If you fired at me my soldiers better put you down because I sure don't wan't to die and for you to expect anything less is foolish. Why on earth would you fire at American soldier? To me you just proved a point of why Civillians should not have military hardware.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   
It is an inexorable fact that those pre-government (revolutionary) sentiments will change after the new government is established; ie, the Sedition Act of 1798.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Reply to post by Grimpachi
 


And just proved there is no such thing as a rare bad apple in a sanctioned gang.

A flesh-eating child-raping satanist would still be defended by the group because "hoo-rah" we're all brothers and other brainwashing tripe.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


I know both worlds I am currently a civilian but I have been a soldier so I guess I just have a broader view than yours. I can tell you just last week a teenager opened fired with two AK 47 type weapons on another kids home all because they were in a car wreck earlyer. Maybe its just me not having faith in people but I am pretty sure if he could have gotten his hands on a RPG or AT4 he would have used it rather spraying the neighborhood with over a hundred rounds. I am guessing you think that would be alright.

By the way I said I was in the Army we say HOOAH try to get it right.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Your retorts bear the marking of an undercover Anti.

Sorry, but the (un) logical step to go from "Yes, there is a right to bear arms" and then add "but......" is how every anti gun rights person starts and proceeds in discussion.

And with the whole "Giving grenades to Children"? That mimics the whole retort of "Well, would you put landmines in your front yard" crap.

Sorry, but just because you "feel" safer with restrictions in place, it is still restrictions and infringement. Does not matter how much you spit polish the turd of a retort, it is still a turd.



You have a right to your opinion and I have a right to mine if you have kids or one day have kids go ahead and arm them to the teeth for all I care just don't let them around mine. I don't know if you were or are a soldier by your pic but it seems stange to me that you would take that stance if you are. I have witnessed how powerfull todays weapons are and I also remember being a kid and know the two do not mix. I have been around enough destruction for this lifetime and I don't want to see it on my streets which is exactly what would happen if everyone could get there hands on any weapon they wanted.


I have seen the devastating affects of person vs. Train, yet Trains are not outlawed..
Seen Person vs. Car, yet Cars are not outlawed.

You want possibilities and what ifs legislated in life. Those laws do not stop anything, they just provide a false blanket of security.

If my neighbor is dumb enough to let their kids play with guns, then the consequences suffered for poor choices will surface.
Not my problem.

Instead of outlawing or banning firearms or accessories, why not just enforce the law?

If you are shot with a full auto AK does not differ then if you are shot with a perfectly legal hunting rifle.
The result is still the same regardless.

Again, you want good feelings in the form of laws.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Reply to post by Grimpachi
 


If you're going to not have faith in people you mvht want to start with your peers.

Statistically armed forces personnel along with LEO's are much more likely to suffer emotional problems, drug abuse, alcohol abuse and are more likely to "snap" than non-service people and non-LEO's.

The numbers dictate we have reason to fear you not the othe way around.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Both with trains and cars you need a liscense yes. If you want to live where there are weapons in the hands of kids and you can get your hands on just about anything may I sugest moveing to Afganistan watch your step I mean thet literaly you might lose more than bargained for.

It amazes me how ignorant people can be. Sometimes I think people want this country to turn into a modern day wild west.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
Both with trains and cars you need a liscense yes. If you want to live where there are weapons in the hands of kids and you can get your hands on just about anything may I sugest moveing to Afganistan watch your step I mean thet literaly you might lose more than bargained for.

It amazes me how ignorant people can be. Sometimes I think people want this country to turn into a modern day wild west.


Ignorant? Ignorant in deed.
You do realize that you are posting in a thread, where it has been drawn out, in great detail, where there the law for licensing the use and/or carry of firearms is Unconstitutional?

You, are an Anti in Pro clothing.
Same ridiculous talking point retorts from the Brady Camp and bed fellows.

And yet, even with a license required, deaths still happen. You, just shot down your own argument.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Really LEO's?
I have just lost any respect I may have had for you. Are the stars in allighnment yet?


Soldiers see tramatizing things and will obviously have problems copeing at times but what you propose would bring that to everyones doorstep. No thanks I want no part of it.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
So well said,

How come they do not want to take away booze, I mean many get drunk and then use the bottle as a weapon.

not designed as a weapon


Or take away cars I know two people personally that their wives tried to kill them with a car.

not a weapon


Or any type of pokey object, people are knifed to death every day but does the News show a big picture of a fully automatic machete, no.

either not designed as a weapon or in the case of knives there are regulations regarding the manufacturing/possessions of such.

Stawman much?



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by cypruswolf
 


Anything can be a weapon.
The fact that one has wheels, and the other goes boom means very little.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Reply to post by Grimpachi
 


The numbers don't lie. Linking mobile is a pain as is viewing thread history but the stats are there over and over.

You can lose respect for me. No skin off my ass. But you can't lose respect for 80+ years of stats and profile studies.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Yes I support licenseing and as you pointed out Trains and cars are not illegal but as I pointed out they require a license. I didn't post in this thread to agree with everything others have said I don't know where you got the idea I did.
You fail to make a point.

Do you really think you are going to change my mind on this. If anything you have only solidified my resolve.

So far you have accused me of being anti gun I am not I am anti idiots owning Military hardware.

You called my stance a turd (whatever that means).

I could care less that means I care a little. I stated my view and instead of trying to get me to see your way with a inteligent conversation you attacked with nonsensicle rhetoric.

I was open to ideas but not anymore. Good luck with your next target.

BTW the question you should ask is what is the differance between a Hunting Rifle and MK19. Watch some videos.




top topics



 
52
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join