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.


ATS Street View 05: Gun Control and Jared Loughner

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:08 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:08 AM
reply to post by mizbeach40

I found your closing paragraph interesting. What would happen if a tobacco like tax was placed upon ammunition?

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:27 AM
reply to post by thisguyrighthere


You want to find out the truth about citizens having firearms?... Just a little bit of research is enough to find out the truth, but these "firearms haters" don't care about the truth, or about facts.

Criminologist and researcher Gary Kleck, using his own commissioned phone surveys and number extrapolation, estimates that 2.5 million Americans use guns for defensive purposes each year. He further found that of those who had used guns defensively, one in six believed someone would have been dead if they had not resorted to their defensive use of firearms. That corresponds to approximately 400,000 of Klecks estimated 2.5 million defensive gun uses. Kleck points out that if only one-tenth of the people were right about saving a life, the number of people saved annually by guns would still be at least 40,000.

Read more: How often do Americans use guns for defensive purposes?

Guns Saves Lives contains true stories of Americans who altered the course of their lives and others by their use of firearms. They stayed alive and, in many instances, saved the lives of loved ones. They saved the lives of untold others from violence their assailants were trying to commit. They changed the lives of the thugs significantly, at least temprorarily, by sending them to jail, or permanently by killing them outright. Robert Waters interviewed the citizen defenders in this book and makes their stories available in far greater detail that the local media cared to. The hidden side of the gun ownership story is seldom told, but Robert Waters does so in this book.

Most guns crimes, and most crimes in general in the U.S. occur in states where there are stricter weapon laws, or where they are banned altogether, which is another fact that "firearms haters" love to ignore...

All we have to do is look at the history of the UK. Since the gun ban there has been MORE crimes, and MORE GUN CRIMES simply because criminals get their weapons illegally and they don't care about laws...

"Firearms haters" need to learn what the word CRIMINAL means... CRIMINALS don't care, and would not follow ANY LAWS "firearms haters" want to implement.

BTW, did any one of you not see the news that not too long ago a bit over a HUNDRED people were killed BY ONE JEEP, because the jeep lost control and it plowed into an Indian pilgrimage?

This was a tragic event, but is this a reason for banning jeeps now too?... or any other car which has been used willingly or unwillingly and which has taken lives?....

More than 100 dead, 50 injured in Indian pilgrimage stampede
Search for survivors hampered by heavy mist and thick forest terrain
By AFPPublished Saturday, January 15, 2011

At least 104 devotees were killed and more than 50 injured after a road accident triggered a stampede among thousands of pilgrims returning from an Indian religious festival on Friday, officials said.

More than 90 bodies have been recovered so far. Of these, 54 have been identified.

The Friday evening tragedy unfolded in a remote, mountainous area of southern Kerala as pilgrims made their way home from an annual ceremony at the hill shrine of Sabarimala that draws three to four million people each year.

Kerala Home Secretary Jaya Kumar told AFP that 102 people had been confirmed dead and dozens more injured, some of them seriously.

Police officials said a packed jeep had lost control and ploughed into a crowd of devotees packed onto a narrow road in a hilly and densely forested area 10 kilometres from the shrine.

edit on 19-1-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: errors.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:30 AM
Found a link to a book that shows the relation between guns and crime, and how increased gun availability to law-abiding citizens can help reduce crime ..

Criminals will get guns no matter what the laws are - they are criminals - and they don't respect the laws. Ban them? They would import them from Mexico or somewhere else, like thye used to do. The gun used in Arizona was a Glock commonly used by our own police forces and made in Europe. Citizens who take the time to follow the laws and conceal carry with a permit are less likely to commit a crime because they are trying to respect the laws. A lot of crime in the US is a direct result of drug use and the business of bringing drugs into the country, as well as border gangs, immigrants who refuse to follow the laws, and domestic abuse. It is also tied to economic distress and greed. Those things would happen with or without guns.

I respect another person's right to not own a gun, but expect the same right to choose to have one myself. Taking away a person's right to bear arms is a step towards taking away other rights. This country was founded because our ancestors didn't have those rights. if you want to give up yours, that's fine, but you're not giving up mine.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:46 AM

Originally posted by backup
Here's something for you all to think about. All weapons used in US gun massacres have been legally obtained. Restricting gun owndership wouldnt stop the killings? I can already count 40 Saved lives. And that was just from the virginia tech and Loughry shootings. Not an American just so you know.

Gun control has worked great in OZ.

Costa targets armed robbers, The Sydney Morning Herald, April 4, 2002.

Report #46: Homicide in Australia, 2001-2002, Australian Institute of Criminology, April 2003.

Crime and Justice - Crimes Recorded by Police, Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2000

Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?, Dr.
Jeanine Baker and Dr. Samara McPhedran, British Journal of Criminology, November 2006.

Austrian firearms: data require cautious approach, S. McPhedran, S. McPhedran, and J. Baker, The
British Journal of Psychiatry, 2007,

A ten year study has shown that there has been no effect on Australia's crime rate. Robbery involving a gun increased 160% in 2001. Gun murders are up, robbery is up, and home invasion is up across the board.

In the 15 years before the confiscation there was a 66% drop in the gun murder rate and firearm related deaths had fallen by 50%. So, please don't tell me how much safer Americans would be if we outlawed guns.

According to the 2005 National Crime Victimization Survey in America guns are used six times more often for defense than criminal intent. According to the 2000 National Crime Victimization survey for every accidental death, suicide, and murder involving a gun at least ten lives were saved.

A study done in 1985 asked felons several questions. One of which was rather they were more afraid fo the cops or armed citizens. More than 50% said they were more worried of running in to n armed citizen than a police officer. In the same study more than 70% said they avoided houses that were occupied because they were afraid they might get shot.

I think I'll keep my guns.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:08 PM
reply to post by pthena

Yes on the education model, but not just in the schools, in the community as well.

Really, we must shed the light on all these issues and teach our children how to be responsible American citizens. Do not get me wrong there is much that is good other in country's models that we can take and learn from, but at the end of the day we are Americans, loud, rebellious, freedom loving, mistake making in front of God and everybody Americans. Worldwide countries are thousands of years old, and us, we are not even three hundred years old yet. I think we are doing pretty good for our age.
edit on 19-1-2011 by angelwrangler because: was going to tighten up our country's age but thought better of it

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:11 PM
I want to ban Jeep Grand Cherokees and all other SUVs with four wheel drive. They can be, and have been, used by terrorist to target innocent students.

In March of 2006 Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar rented a four wheel drive SUV. He then drove that SUV to the campus of the University of North Carolina. He proceeded to enter an area known as "The Pit." Then he used his SUV to ram and run over 9 people. He later said he was trying to follow in the footsteps of Mohammed Atta.

So, SUVs must be banned now to avoid future terrorist attacks on our school campuses.

edit on 19-1-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:27 PM
reply to post by MikeNice81

That's the catalyst they would latch onto too. Not the 30,000 killed in accidents every year or the countless numbers who have used a vehicle to save themselves from the elements or to escape an attempted assault as ElectricUniverse pointed out.

They would latch onto the one time some nut went berserk and killed a couple of people.

Protecting the 30,000 is just too daunting of a task. Impossible even. Disregarding instances of protection is easy because "the police will do that." So they hit the spotted zebra. The one in a million. The thing that happens so rarely that even if their measures prove completely worthless and useless the incidents happen so infrequently that they can pretend the low rate is all the doing of their legislative changes.

Hamilton killed 16 and prompted sweeping bans and reforms. It was never supposed to happen again. Not that it even happened that often in the first place.

Hungerford and Dunblane were about a decade apart from each other.

So when that cab driver killed 12 last Summer, about a decade after Dunblane, they can still say the laws are successful because the incidents are so infrequent and peoples memories very short and peoples fears very great.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:43 PM

Originally posted by arbitrarygeneraiist
How about rather than a gun ban, which is an act of needlessly punishing responsible gun owners, we instead act to improve the economy, health care, and education system. That way we can have healthy, intelligent people receiving an income and being productive members of society. That would eliminate a lot of problems with crimes involving firearms.

Nice, pretty thoughts, but it won't quite work out the way you'd like, for couple of reasons:

1) just because the economy improves, it doesn't naturally follow that your average criminal type is going to suddenly wake up one morning and say "I think I'll start working for a living to day instead of being a predator on the labors of others".

2) Improving the educational system will naturally improve education, but that will have no bearing on intelligence. Intelligence is innate, inborn, a requirement to take effective advantage of educational opportunities presented. Education will not increase it, only augment it. Intelligence is there to one degree or another, education is what you do with what you have. They aren't the same thing.

3) All I need is better health for the criminal types around here. Yup, that's all I need. I'm sorely disappointed by their lack of physical ability to rob me. They present no challenge at all, and life is awfully boring on account of that. I need more excitement in my life, and I think free healthcare will fill that bill admirably. Yup, all I need is better health for the criminal types around here.

Sometimes, I wish I lived in the sort of world where "solutions" like that would work... but until then, I'm sort of stuck with the real world I have.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:59 PM

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

A week ago or so a woman was puting gas on her car and she didn't notice a burglar get into her car somewhere in Hialeah/Miami, she drove away with the burglar hidden in the back sit. He then stopped her, raped the woman and robbed her. If she was armed this wouldn't have happened.

I love the thought here, but I have to differ over the cause. I think in that situation, the primary problem was not whether he was armed or not, it was her lack of situational awareness. A firearm may have prevented it, or it may have just gotten her killed. Her lack of situational awareness, that there was an intruder hidden in her back seat, is the primary cause of this incident in my mind. Had she known he was there, she obviously would have been in a better position to either use force or run like hell and never get into the car to begin with.

That same lack of situational awareness, combined with her being armed, could have led to even more disastrous results. First things first - know what's up. THEN arms are so much more effectively employed, and situations are more easily avoided if arms aren't available. Situational awareness is the key. It increases you options, and augments your ability.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 03:36 PM

Originally posted by ATSmediaPRO
reply to post by mizbeach40

I found your closing paragraph interesting. What would happen if a tobacco like tax was placed upon ammunition?

Again, social engineering.
No thanks.
What is the tax money used for?
Why does the government get to benefit from this?

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 03:38 PM

Originally posted by XLR8R
Here in Canada, any long guns with pistol grips are prohibited. Fully automatic weapons are banned and if you need amunition you need a permit to buy any kind of bullets. Gun control in Canada are kind of strict but I like it that way. Too many people are given credit when most are not suited to fire a weapon. But all that doesn't matter. If I ever go nuts, do you think I will care if my gun is redistered or not? Of course I wouldn't and neither would anybody else. If they want to shoot someone they will shoot someone.
edit on 19-1-2011 by XLR8R because: (no reason given)

That is great. Hurray Canada. Stay there and keep your laws. I don't care what the law is there and don't care if you change it or not. Your country, your problem.

US is my country, so at the end of the day, it is my say, not a Canadian's.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 03:59 PM

Originally posted by Terms777
reply to post by

I feel guns should be banned. I don't own one and never will. Why you ask? They are evil. I know by 2020 they will be banned planet wide. Any one found with one will get manny years in international jail. This is my prediction!
edit on 18-1-2011 by Terms777 because: (no reason given)

Amendment II

"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"

Read it, Learn it and Deal with it, you have no right to try and take my rights away and millions of other law abiding gun owners as well because you think they are evil which they are not evil, its the human factor that has evil intentions not the gun.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 04:36 PM
reply to post by nenothtu

Of course you have to use common sense. Common sense also tells us is very probable he didn't have his gun on her all the time. he had to get out of the car, get her out of the car and put her wherever he did the hienous act of rape. If she had been armed I am sure she had at least one or more times when she could have gotten the upper hand if she was armed.

The situation is also that a lot of people just get extremely nervous when they see a gun, and I understand there is a shock when some stranger puts a gun to your head, but you have to be able to collect your thoughts and act as calmly as possible, which most people do not get ready in anticipation for such an event because they believe "it will probably not happen to me."

This could happen TO ANYONE.

There is an old Zen Buddhist, and in other branches of Buddhism, method of thought training exercise where you are supposed to see in your third eye every way that you could die, and every possible situation that could happen to you, so that when it happens, or something similar happens, you are at least a bit prepared.

It really does work.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 05:18 PM
I can't wait until the United States bans Meth cause then we won't have to worry about those crack-heads causing all sorts of trouble. Oh wait.... That ban seems to have worked so well.

While on the topic of ridiculous need for banning things...

Straight from the CDC, how big is the problem?

* In 2007, there were 3,443 fatal unintentional drownings in the United States, averaging ten deaths per day. An additional 496 people died, from drowning and other causes, in boating-related incidents.
* More than one in five fatal drowning victims are children 14 and younger. For every child who dies from drowning, another four received emergency department care for nonfatal submersion injuries.
* Nonfatal drownings can cause brain damage that may result in long-term disabilities including memory problems, learning disabilities, and permanent loss of basic functioning (e.g., ., permanent vegetative state).

Quick we need to ban water... (sarcasm)

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:32 PM

Originally posted by skeptic_al

I think the World already went down this track in the 60's,70's.....80's mmmm 90's
Only it was called Mutually Assured Destruction. If all countries had Nukyellar Bombs the world would be a much safer place.

MAD seems to have worked out pretty well. I didn't get blown up by any nukes. Did you? I didn't get invaded by a foreign army, either. Did you?

At least the Public in Oz are not scared of their own Military, unlike the US, which is only reason for having Guns in the US Constitutiuon in the first place.

It's only the folks on the left side of the equal marks who are "afraid of their own military" here, the same folks who want to ban guns. That ought to tell us something.....

BTW, the US military has nothing to do with the Constitutional guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms here. Matter of fact, a standing military isn't even authorized in the Constitution. It wasn't a factor at all when written, as the notion of a standing army in America, much less a need to defend from one, was unthinkable.

No, that guarantee is in place as a safeguard against a despotic government - which would of course create a standing army as a first move... hmmm....

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:46 PM
Wow.. I am glad this weeks video has generated this much talk!!
I would like to thank all of you for watching and engaging the topic.
I have received private messages asking to be on the show, however cannot guarantee what the topic will be or where we will be interviewing.. Well until it happens.
If you do happen to see us please don't be shy and say what you have to say!
Thanks again.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:55 PM

No matter what individual states do, guns will be everywhere. Case in point NYC. No guns for sale in the city, and one of the most shootings in the US. Here's the deal: Guns, Marijuana, Gay marriage, it all needs to be governed nationally, not locally. If you can buy it in one state, damn sure it will eventually end up in another.


1- If you unequivocally murder some one, or several people, in plain view of multiple witnesses,
your ass needs to die ASAP. No bull# psycho defense. No taxpayer paid trial. DEAD

2- If you obtain and are caught with an unregistered firearm you get a 10 year mandatory imprisonment.

3- If your a felon with a firearm, you go back in for life. Felons have no business with a gun.

4- A 90 day wait on all purchases and a more extensive psych evaluation. Some states have none.

5- Life for an illegal sale.

6- Death for an illegal sale to a minor.

if the risk isn't worth the reward.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:30 PM
reply to post by Howtosurvive2012

None of my weapons are registered and none EVER WILL BE.
I'm not a criminal and I don't think government needs to know what type of weapons I have or how many.

10 years for an unregistered gun.. Give me a break.

Life for an illegal sale? You ever hear of the 8th Amendment? Probably not huh? Death for sale to a minor? Ok, seriously, GO READ THE CONSTITUTION AGAIN. There's more to it than the first two amendments.

"Psyche evals" can be manipulated and any douche bag can say anything about you and have you committed. Draconian measures are also not a good policy no matter what we're talking about. 90 day waiting period is just plain stupid. What's the point? Criminals don't have "waiting periods"...Why should people like me who can pass a Brady check in minutes? Waiting periods

You are guaranteed a trial by jury in this country. Period. End of story. Non negotiable.
edit on 20-1-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:14 PM
I live in Australia and we used to be able to buy guns pretty much anywhere without much hassle but one day they put a Gun Ban in place and now you cannot easily buy guns without an actual good reason to have one (Security license, etc...).

Everyone said what's the point as you can buy one from the street but after many years of not being able to buy one at a Shop and most being confiscated by police it is actually more difficult to buy one so if a neighbour gets pissed at his neighbour and decides to hurt him he will look at what he has and what he can get and as he cannot easily get a Gun he will decide to fight with something else which might hurt the guy but will more than likely not kill him and will probably not be able to hurt more than 1 person in his rage.

Don't compare getting banned drugs as drugs can be concealed on a person when flying with small amounts or through baggage but someone trying to bring 50 guns into his country will find this a lot more difficult than bringing in drugs hidden in freight as metal does tend to stand out in x-rays.

Yes there are still guns in Australia and always will be but our homicide rate is pretty low compared to other countries and we don't have mass killings per year.

I hope one day the U.S Government ban guns from the normal household person and even if it will takes many years after that before you start seeing the change as you already have way too many guns floating around, I think after that you will find people feeling safer and no school kids killing other school kids because they called them names.

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in