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 Control Yes or No

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
This is a discussion about if gun control is acceptable, and to what extent, try to keep the personal arguing minimal.
I feel that gun control should be minimal, no SMG's, no miniguns, artillery, fifty calliber rounds, explosive rounds, or classified pieces of millitary equipment.
I feel that most weapons should be registered.




posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by JDBlack
This is a discussion about if gun control is acceptable, and to what extent, try to keep the personal arguing minimal.
I feel that gun control should be minimal, no SMG's, no miniguns, artillery, fifty calliber rounds, explosive rounds, or classified pieces of millitary equipment.
I feel that most weapons should be registered.


no restrictions on weapons for any person, in any country, for any reason.

anybody anywhere should be allowed to own any weapon he chooses, including nerve agents, germ warfare compounds and high-yield thermonuclear devices with intercontinental delivery systems.

i am completely serious.

p.s. to the above list, I would add scalar weapons and hypervelocity "mag-lev" type rail guns.


edit on 28-1-2011 by MMPI2 because:



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be INFRINGED"
No gun control, no registration, any citizen should be allowed to own any weapon.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
No gun control.

Registration is something very iffy with many gun owners. Every gun control measure that has had historic implications have been preceded by the abuse of registration lists. The Nazis did this very thing to the German Jews.

I'm not required to register my firearms in my state and I do not.

In my state things like .50 cal rifles are not illegal and are treated like any other weapon. California banned them outright despite the fact that .50s have never been used in a crime where the rifle itself was used to commit the crime.

There's been plenty of crimes committed where a Barret .50 was found at the scene, but as of yet, in this country, none have been used in a violent crime.
edit on 28-1-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by JDBlack
 

They probably want to make everyone who owns a gun basically an FFL (C&R anyway) and treat all weapons as if they are class 3 (title 2 of the nfa or DDs as designated by the AG). Some gun control is necessary but dont forget that the criminals will not comply. The best gun "control" is a trigger safety and magazine release.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be INFRINGED"
No gun control, no registration, any citizen should be allowed to own any weapon.


They put it succinctly for the idiotic attacks that they knew would come...

They never imagined we would have idiots in office who would question:

"it depends on what the meaning of "is" is"......





p.s. this is not a mater of demo/rep they both are doing it!!!

edit on 28-1-2011 by pianopraze because: typo



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   
When the word CONTROL enters the picture, and the government is involved....we're going to have a problem.

Control is the first step to confiscation. When weapons are confiscated, then anyone with a gun will be considered a criminal.

There should be no problems registering ones guns, and that should be kept at a state level on computer and shared only when necessary according to individual state laws. Classes should be taught on the love and care of one's guns. It should include the amount of responsibility required and the safety factors to be a gun owner.

There will be NO gun control. The owner of the gun(s) should/will be responsible for their own weapons.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Definitely Gun Control Advocate here: Use both hands if possible, aim carefully, and squeeze don't pull the trigger when some scum of the earth tries to threaten you or your loved ones.
Protect what is yours and if so inclined share those things with your neighbors and loved ones if they are in need. If some POS wishes to take what is yours by force then follow line 1 of this post!

Gun Control!

Incidentally, I am a law abiding citizen, I wish no harm on my fellow man just so long as they mean no harm to me or mine. That said why should some politician decide that a semi-auto is ok, but not a full auto? A .30 cal rifle is fine but not a .50 cal? Different types and or brands of ammunition? Do any of these pencil pushing city boys have a clue what they are talking about or is the criteria "if it sounds scary ban it"? We have all heard of AK-47's for example, sounds like a real scary gun, better ban it. Don't hear much for a ban on a 7mm mag semi-auto deer rifle though. Will do as much or more damage than the AK. If the politicians really want to be in the business of gun control then first priority they should be educated in firearms so they know what they are talking about. The scary part about that is though is that once educated and they learn how many inner city shootings are by "throw away" saturday night specials then that will simply rush to a ban on all guns, hello UK, and Australia.
P.S....Like my Avatar?...LOL
edit on 1/28/2011 by texas thinker because: to add



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
What he said. Gun control means hitting your target. And just for giggles, "a well regulated militia" means the same as a "well regulated clock." It keeps the time properly the same way you and your neighbors, who compose the militia, are capable of working in a coordinated fashion between yourselves to accomplish your goals.

The idea that "militia" means "National Guard" is pure poppy cock. There was no such thing as a "National Guard" when the second amendment was formulated. The idea would have seemed nonsensical. People didn't even want a standing army for fear it would take over. To have the "militia" under the control of government was anathema; it was for the opposite purpose.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by JDBlack
 


No, because to register all guns means THE MAN can find my guns when he take our 2nd amendment away. However as for the military guns, semi automatics, the big boys, I am not sure about those, I have half a thought they should at least be registered, but then again If and When NWo is in full force I personally will be happy to know people who own the big boys.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Every Law abiding sane adult should be allowed to own and carry on their person a firearm, anytime they feel the need. It is how I have always felt and will die with this belief.........However as far has having to "register" your guns ? Truth be told they are already registered. every FLL is required by law to keep in there possession a record of every gun they sell, your weapon will always be able to traced back to you,

Example: A weapon is discovered at a crime scene the serial number is traced back to the manufacturer the manufacturer then supplies the retailer the retailer then supplies the purchaser. Now, the gun may have been stolen, sold privately or whatever. But if you have purchased your weapon through a retailer your weapon is already registered and ATF will trace that weapon back to you.


edit on 28-1-2011 by bull621 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by JDBlack
Gun Control Yes or No


Control - Yes or No?

Feel free to add word like gun in front of the question.

Life ends one way or another.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by bull621
 


If you buy from a gun store in today's climate, you are asking for your guns to be confiscated.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Gun control?
YES
I don't believe governments or their employees should have them.

I believe that if everyone carried
then that would control the crimminals guns because they only like to pull their guns
when the other guy doesn't have one.
Thats why they are criminals.
or bomber pilots.

gun control works.
the better you control your gun the more targets you will hit.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by texas thinker
[moreI
It would be helpful in this discussion if we knew the real intent of the gun control advocates. Some are for an incremental approach to full confiscation (ie UNder the NWO agenda) and "registration" is the first step. It could be that an interim step would be full registration and taxation of all firearms and call-in of certain types (ie "assault" styled semi-autos) of firearms and then if you dont comply you are automatic classified as a criminal and then they will come to confiscate your guns, "criminal." What is ridiculous is the arbitrariness and capriciousness of the certain shotguns being designated as "destructive devices" during the tenure of the AWB which was sunset while the AGs designation on certain semi-auto shotguns based on their "not having a sporting purpose" was not. Since when was "sporting purpose" part of the language of the 2nd Amendment? And how did certain shotguns get classified as "destructive devices" along with exploding pens, hand grenades and anti-aircraft guns??



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 

In my opinion there is no good reason for registration, and plenty of bad precedent for what happens when you do.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 

Good point also. Search for the video called The Slaughter of the Innocents (another thread - about how despots instituted gun control before killing millions of their own citizens several times thru history).



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by JDBlack
 


Yes....

Emotion control
Grave threat evaluation
Positive target identification
controlled breath
steady squeeze
etc., etc.

That is gun control.

Everything else is just bickering of unconstitutional laws that will only affect the 2% of gun crimes that happen by registered owners anyway. Know amount of gun control will solve the other 98% of gun crimes, because those weapons are illegal already.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Have neither a need nor use for a firearm. For those who do feel such a need then they should undergo the followin..
1. Mandatory annual psyche evaluation.
2. Proper training and certification in firearms handling / safety.
3. Annual range training certification showing proper shooting skill / ability including low light , normal light , adverse conditions etc.
4. Training on the consequences of having to use / using a firearm on another human being.
5. Annual criminal background check. No ownership to those convicted of violent crimes .



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Expat888
Have neither a need nor use for a firearm. For those who do feel such a need then they should undergo the followin..
1. Mandatory annual psyche evaluation.
2. Proper training and certification in firearms handling / safety.
3. Annual range training certification showing proper shooting skill / ability including low light , normal light , adverse conditions etc.
4. Training on the consequences of having to use / using a firearm on another human being.
5. Annual criminal background check. No ownership to those convicted of violent crimes .

And how does that jibe with "shall not be infringed"?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join