First round of Obama's Executive Gun Control laws announced

Originally posted by Threegirls
reply to post by butcherguy

 

Why would that be such a bad thing?

I have never understood the American attachment to to the right to bear arms, what positive benefits has it brought to you when compared to the many disadvantages? This is serious question, I only wish to understand. I know of plenty people in Britain who have guns and adhere to the very strict gun laws. Do you not have the same laws governing your right to arms, if not why not?

This country was built on the right to bear arms. Pretty sure Paul Revere helped that one out on his horse. Other benefits would include deciding to harvest your own game to eat healthy lean meat instead of the prepackaged tainted disgusting walmart nonsense garbage "meat", protecting your family and squashing political upheavals. I couldn't imagine living in a country where firearms were banned. I honestly don't think it will ever happen. That would be the last straw for this country.

That and its fun to shoot watermelons with a 30-06.

Originally posted by Threegirls
reply to post by MentorsRiddle

 

Hiya MentorsRiddle,

Thankyou for your reply. Your Presidents acts without consulting or regarding congress, does he not?
I suggest you are not so far from dictatorship as may be thought. We have the same problem. You have a point about invasion however even without such a defence UK has not been invaded and is not as likely to happen to UK, we have nothing anyone wants.

I understand defending oneself against invading criminals in a common "home invasion" in the U.K. with so much as a butter knife ( or"cricket bat"?) is considered a heinous act by the law abiding homeowner. When you can explain that one to me; I'll attempt to explain our mindset re: firearms ownership."if I have to explain the outrage of your laws you just wouldn't understand ours.".

Originally posted by Threegirls

Guns will not defend US against bio weapons or terrorists or nukes which would be the preferred method of attack it seems.

Heard it before: our second amendment protects us citizens from a tyrannical rogue government. maintaining absolute power. We have a well funded highly trained military to keep biological attacks from our "homeland" ( hated that word from the very beginning ).

Originally posted by Threegirls

About bad people, occasionally, bad people get guns in UK and the results are horrific. How can you guarantee that you would have a gun on you for defense?

There are absolutely no guarantees of safety in this world. But having some bureaucrat remove the option of having access to a firearm does not change that; it only limits the law abiding from having an equalizer athand.

Originally posted by Threegirls .

Most victims of crime do not. Having guns so widely available as in US makes them easier for criminals to get. They are far more likely to use them, the crime we have in the UK is far more survivable due to lack of guns. I am not convinced therefore that you have an advantage.

Sorry if you are not convinced. I am willing to risk a "less survivable encounter"(your words) to maintain freedom from a tyrannical govt.and the chance of defending myself and family..

Originally posted by Threegirls .

edit on 12-7-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-7-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-7-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-7-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

reply to post by MentorsRiddle


Good summation. I agree that if more Americans had guns there would be less crime. The bullies who run around robbing and stealing do so because they know they won't be met with any resistance whatever, and they most likely won't go to jail if caught, so, yes, we should have been carrying guns all along and a lot of innocent victims might still be alive.

The main point of this whole controversy is that we have been conditioned to believe that everyone is a potential criminal and if you put more guns in more hands, more bad stuff will happen. This doesn't make sense in any logical way to me. If we could stop a criminal by pointing our gun, why is that wrong?

Ok, let me get this straight.

1. Obama and Holder conspired to steal 10,000,000 dollars from the american public for operation gunrunner (AKA fast and furious. A code name for the same program) by adding it on to the stimulus package which was as transparent as a brick wall.

2. They run guns to mexico to pump up the cartels and weaken the mexican govt. 30,000 or so who has a clue? they weren't counting...

3. They get caught when a border agent gets killed with their illegal guns purchased with stolen money from the public, via deception. Yes theft by deception is a crime.

4. Holder gets grilled by congress and lies on tape about his involvement. Obama lies to the public as well. and now multiple times for each as they keep getting asked.

Is this starting to sound a little retarded?

Reply to post by Threegirls

Let me direct you to the link in my signature.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by Shadowalker
Ok, let me get this straight.

1. Obama and Holder conspired to steal 10,000,000 dollars from the american public for operation gunrunner (AKA fast and furious. A code name for the same program) by adding it on to the stimulus package which was as transparent as a brick wall.

2. They run guns to mexico to pump up the cartels and weaken the mexican govt. 30,000 or so who has a clue? they weren't counting...

3. They get caught when a border agent gets killed with their illegal guns purchased with stolen money from the public, via deception. Yes theft by deception is a crime.

4. Holder gets grilled by congress and lies on tape about his involvement. Obama lies to the public as well. and now multiple times for each as they keep getting asked.

Is this starting to sound a little retarded?

Retarded as in WTF were they thinking?
Or Retarded as in "It's not really what's going on"?

You're all welcome to come and get my guns. We'll be waiting for you.

Originally posted by pyrodude
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

This is an outrage! Woulldnt the rest of the world love a disarmed america. Well come on down to the south, I wont be disarmed!

If i lived near you i will be standing right next to you with my AR-15 awaiting for them to try and take my guns

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by pyrodude
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

This is an outrage! Woulldnt the rest of the world love a disarmed america. Well come on down to the south, I wont be disarmed!

If i lived near you i will be standing right next to you with my AR-15 awaiting for them to try and take my guns

And there you have it - the exact reason why no foreign or domestic tyrannical threat will ever take over the USA.

The link gave no significant information about the "new" criteria, it was mostly a scare story meant to insight people who want to have something to rant about in my opinion.

I don't care if the government knows I bought a gun. They know when I buy a car. They know when I buy a central air system. They know when I buy a lot of things that have the potential for harm.

It doesn't mean they are going to jump on the UN train and take away my guns, and force me into FEMA camps and let the reptoid aliens steal fluids from my lymphatic system to use as cosmetics or aphrodisiacs.

ATS is the trampoline for which too many people not only jump to conclusions, but jump to conclusions that would be singularly unattainable without the gigantic trampoline under them.

Originally posted by Butterbone
The link gave no significant information about the "new" criteria, it was mostly a scare story meant to insight people who want to have something to rant about in my opinion.

I don't care if the government knows I bought a gun. They know when I buy a car. They know when I buy a central air system. They know when I buy a lot of things that have the potential for harm.

It doesn't mean they are going to jump on the UN train and take away my guns, and force me into FEMA camps and let the reptoid aliens steal fluids from my lymphatic system to use as cosmetics or aphrodisiacs.

ATS is the trampoline for which too many people not only jump to conclusions, but jump to conclusions that would be singularly unattainable without the gigantic trampoline under them.

SLOW EROSION OF THE 2nd AMENDMENT.

reply to post by Threegirls


My ancestors come from Normandy, they settled in England after the invasion. The muslims are also invading y'all again, gun violence also soared in your country after the ban. Edit to add: Also Rome invaded and who could forget the Vikings etc.. The real question is who HASN'T invaded England, that would be a smaller list.

This is just a tip to the iceberg that is absolute gun control. Making the average law-abiding citizen jump through hoops to get a firearm, while the criminal gets one through an illegal transaction in a back alley. Why penalize the people who do not commit crimes with their firearms?

to everyone on the "gun laws are good" wagon i ask a simple hypothetical

most people get the benefit of the doubt, and are good people. now if a majority of these people are armed, some may turn to crime, but the truth is that he is outnumbered 20 to 1 in numbers and weapons. so even if every criminal in the country could go out and buy a gun, the community is still able to defend itself.

this seems to be going on in arizona as well.. people take guns to areas where there are tighter controls because the chances of them getting shot back at drops considerably.

weve established that no matter what, the criminals get the guns, so why have laws that make a potential rampage like shooting fish in a barrel. everytime there is an armed public, and someone snaps, it ends quicker.

point is that there will always be shooting sprees. gun laws just affect how many people the individual kills before getting dropped.

funny thing is that the southern border is where we honestly need guns. gotta defend ourselves from the guns obama had shipped over. but dont worry, thats so they can track the gangs after they have killed a village, they'll get justice

HA

reply to post by MentorsRiddle


I agree with what you say on many levels. You are after all a nation built on a militia. However how can you say your gun laws prevent a dictator taking over when the Fed owns you lock, stock and barrel and your Constition has been diluted and twisted till the OP can claim.

All without Congress. Who needs Congress anyway?

reply to post by macman


I've seen the term 'Fast and Furious' alluding to the U.S. governments gun running programme and a sad thought hit me. It is also the title of a Hollywood film. It could lead some of us out here in the real world to question just how far the American political establishment is detached from reality. To give such a nefarious corruption the title of a fictional piece of work, one that involved theft and violence if I remember right, oh! wait it was a Hollywood film, no doubt I'm right, shows the seperation from reality that the whole nation seems to be undergoing at the moment. Who's zooming who in Aretha Franklin's words. Are you creating Hollywood or is the city of nightmares creating you?
Do they just need to come up with the right film or title now to teach you to surrender your militia meekly.

Originally posted by goldentorch
reply to post by MentorsRiddle

 

I agree with what you say on many levels. You are after all a nation built on a militia. However how can you say your gun laws prevent a dictator taking over when the Fed owns you lock, stock and barrel and your Constition has been diluted and twisted till the OP can claim.

All without Congress. Who needs Congress anyway?

edit on 12/7/11 by goldentorch because: spelink agin

As bad as things are, they could slide further down the mountain. I've heard many times that Europe and especially the UK is the "testing ground" for the new laws and methods of oppression the PTB want to implement World-wide (especially in America). I no longer doubt this after years of watching policies and laws move from the UK to the US ever so slowly.

We're not quite to the point where Americans demand laws to protect them from every possible problem or negative experience, though our left wing is working very hard for it. We still have our weapons and the right to defend our selves, families and property in most of the states. There are, however places where injuring or killing a criminal who is trying to injure or kill you is likely to result in you being prosecuted for assaulting the poor, helpless rapist / burglar / serial killer who will sue you for his troubles (or his family will if you managed to kill the bastard).

We're far from perfect, (just like everyone else) but things can always, ALWAYS get worse.

hm no guns wer all screwed it was a nice try trying to get away from england but i gess there is magik we just cant soon we will be slaves to what ever attacks us whit black dont matter wer defenceless no neet to stock up probly cometo your house and take it ill like red shackles or to die fast i realy dont want to live in a gods land government

So, is it time to bury/hide your excess weaponry -
then go into your local police station and report them 'stolen'?

reply to post by ecoparity


I suppose the question inherent in my reply was also 'how much more can America take'. As you are taken further and further away from your core identity (and as an outsider I don't neccassarily believe that means no alleviation of hardship I feel we are concerning ourselves with other points here), before something has to give. If so where does that leave you?