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.


US gun owners get the shaft

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 26 2003 @ 02:49 PM

Originally posted by Lysergic
I didn't go to the site, your ALL CAPS assault was more than enough for me to avoid it. It was an attempt at humor. As for guns, a hand gun isnt made or anything else than to really kill humans, I own guns, I think we should be able to always bear arms. How about you take your little attitude and shove it up your arse. Have a nice day.

[Edited on 26-4-2003 by Lysergic]

Humor, say again? What do you mean. Oh, and by the way, thanks for avoiding a site you've never even seen due to me typing in CAPS. Hand guns weren't made to kill humans. They were for protection, sport, oh and get this, HUNTING.

Thanks for telling me to shove something up my 'arse'. Showing real maturity there.

posted on Apr, 26 2003 @ 02:51 PM
And by calling me a jackass you are the prime example of maturity, hypocrit go be self righteous some where else.

posted on Apr, 26 2003 @ 02:53 PM
Now that there is nopoint in arguing with you, since you post no validated points, I wont be reading this column anymore. Don't waste your time.

posted on Apr, 26 2003 @ 04:57 PM
The fact of the matter is that the more gun control, the more crime.

In england, where firearms are virtually banned, crime rates skyrocket.

In Switzerland where each family is required to have a fully automatic assault rifle at home at all times, violence is virtually nonexistant.

In Florida and Texas, where it was feared that the enactment of concealed carry of handguns would lead to wild west style shootouts on the street, the crime rates (especially rape, as the majority of CHL holders are female) has plummeted.

In NYC, Los Angles, Chicago, and Washinton DC, the cities in the US with the strictest gun control laws, the highest crime rates in the country reign.

Hey, dont think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out a trend here...

posted on Apr, 26 2003 @ 08:23 PM
Ever heard of huntin turkeys? You can do that with a handgun! You can target shoot with a handgun. And target shooting is just as good a way to make a living as oh, say a "professional skateboarder" or another player in sports that require more media coverage than anything else.

Being a hunter safety graduate, I know how to handle a gun. But that doesn't mean anything. I am not a gun-control advocate, but I do believe in knowing who has a gun, what they use it for, and what training they have. I think everybody buying a gun should take a class that teaches them how to care for their gun, how to use it, and the laws in their area. Take all the guns off the street, and have the government sell them to only people who have had the class, and who have a true reason for buying a gun.

posted on Apr, 26 2003 @ 10:55 PM
"Gun control is being able to hit your target"

"Its not about the gun, its about the operator"

posted on Apr, 27 2003 @ 12:04 AM
First off the person who said that you cant hunt with an assualt rifle is an idiot. I can go hunting with my sks when ever i damn well please. for you personal info an sks is the semi auto version of the ak-47. Secondly guns do not kill people the people using the guns do. If someone wants to kill another person they are going to kill them in any way they see fit. I must say that handguns are more ment for personal defense and target shooting and competitions than hunting.

posted on May, 1 2003 @ 11:57 PM
Capitol Hill ( - New Jersey's Democratic senators moved Wednesday to tie their long-standing gun control agenda to homeland security and terrorism fears. Second Amendment advocates compared the proposal to the actions of Adolf Hitler's regime in Nazi Germany.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) announced his plans Wednesday to introduce legislation he calls the "Homeland Security Gun Safety Act," along with fellow New Jersey Democrat Jon Corzine, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.).

Lautenberg claimed the proposal would close "loopholes" in current gun laws "that allow terrorists to access weapons and explosives inside our borders.

"As our government confiscates toenail scissors at airports, secures power plants, and increases domestic surveillance," Lautenberg said, "we're ignoring the most obvious threat that's out there, and that is the ease in [sic] which terrorists can access weapons in virtually any town across the country."

Under Lautenberg's proposal, any time the Homeland Security Threat Level rises to "elevated" or higher, law enforcement authorities would not be required to complete mandatory background checks on firearms purchasers within the current three-business-day limit. Unlike current law, which mandates near-immediate destruction of records of background checks if the sale is approved, Lautenberg's proposal would allow authorities to maintain the registry of new gun owners "indefinitely."

posted on May, 2 2003 @ 04:02 AM
Why is it so uncomprehendable what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the constitution for the united states of America? It will be ignorance that destroys this nation, nothing else. "They" are ensuring that knowledge is held back, and many posters prove that.

Why is it that some find the weapon inherently dangerous? Why, every night I sleep within 3 feet of an AK and I've never felt that my family or me was in danger from it. Bad guys, on the other hand, should be afraid, be very afraid. Everyone in my household is trained to use any of the weapons in the house. As the man of the house, I've insured this be the case.

Let's go beyond the common thief and look at the uncommon thief: The government. There is one thing that keeps the government in line; that is the knowledge that the citizenry can take the country back if it has to. I certainly hope that some of the posters in this thread are not U.S. citizens. If enough of the citizenry becomes lazy, ignorant and unwilling to acept their responsibility delegated by the Founders, it is only a matter of time before the nation will be lost.

posted on May, 2 2003 @ 05:46 PM
Why is it that some find the weapon inherently dangerous? Why, every night I sleep within 3 feet of an AK and I've never felt that my family or me was in danger from it. Bad guys, on the other hand, should be afraid, be very afraid. Everyone in my household is trained to use any of the weapons in the house. As the man of the house, I've insured this be the case. Posted by Thomas Crowne

I agree on this. Firearms are only dangerous if handled by the inexperienced and the irresponsible. Responsible firearms owners are responsible for just as much crime deterrence in the entire country as all law enforcement combined.

It is a proven fact that areas with strict gun control have higher rates of crime, and areas with less gun control have lower rates of crime.

Given the choice between living in an area where guns are not allowed, vs living in a neighborhood where I know my neighbors on both sides own AKs, I'll live with the guys with the AKs.

I also think the act of businesses posting "no guns allowed" signs in states where concealed handgun carry permits are issued is an incredibly stupid thing to do. That is essentially telling the criminal element "The guys you are really afraid of, the normal guy on the street that may be legally carrying a gun, wont be here... so come rob us! We wont hurt you!"

posted on May, 14 2003 @ 10:44 AM
Maybe we won't get the shaft afterall?

"DeLay sees assault weapons ban expiring in Congress"

Get ready to do some gun shopping!!

posted on May, 14 2003 @ 06:04 PM
"The votes in the House are not there to reauthorize it," said DeLay, a Texas Republican and staunch foe of gun control.

I am only slightly hopeful that Delay is right, but I cant help butthink that HCI and the other a$$hole anti-gunners will try to torpedoe this somehow.

It would certainly be nice, and if it does die, HELL YA, Im going shoppin!!!!!!

posted on May, 14 2003 @ 08:03 PM
Well, a bit of good news at least...

Jury: Gun Industry Not Cause of Violence
Associated Press

NEW YORK - Rejecting a lawsuit brought by the NAACP, a federal jury Wednesday cleared 45 gun manufacturers and distributors of allegations their marketing practices have stoked violence in black and Hispanic neighborhoods.

The jury deliberated for five days before reaching its verdict in the closely watched case that now goes to the judge for a final decision. The panel was unable to reach a verdict regarding 23 other defendants.

posted on May, 14 2003 @ 08:09 PM
Most Sweeping Gun Ban Ever Hits Congress:
Clinton Ban "Re-enactment" Targets Millions More Guns!!!
As we predicted, the anti-gunners have begun the push to further expand the Clinton gun ban of 1994. Not content with merely re-authorizing the ban, Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) have drafted legislation that bans millions more guns! It's a giant step closer to the goal stated by Clinton ban sponsor Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who said on CBS's 60 Minutes: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it." Toward that goal, Conyers/McCarthy would:

Ban every gun made to lawfully comply with the Clinton ban. The Clinton ban arbitrarily dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments that new guns could have. Manufacturers complied. New guns were made to conform to the Clinton restrictions. Now prohibitionists want to ban the new guns, too.

Ban guns the Clinton legislation expressly exempted from prohibition. This includes Ruger Mini-14s, Ranch Rifles, and .30 Caliber Carbines, and entire classes of guns, including fixed magazine rifles, as well as shotguns that hold under five rounds.

Ban guns widely used for target shooting. It bans the three center-fire rifles most commonly used for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A, and the M1 "Garand."

Ban all semi-automatic shotguns: Remingtons, Winchesters, Benellis, Berettas, etc., widely used for hunting, trap, skeet, and sporting clays, by banning their receivers (main component).

Ban guns for defense. Bans any semi-automatic rifle or shotgun any U.S. Attorney General one day claims is not "sporting," even though self-defense is a fundamental right and the federal constitution, the constitutions of 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states recognize the right to use guns for defense.

Ban 68 named guns (Clinton ban named 19 guns); Ban parts used to repair or refurbish guns, including frames or receivers; Ban importation of ammunition magazines exempt under Clinton ban; Ban private sales of millions of guns, their frames and receivers, and their parts; Ban semi-automatic rifles under 30" long (useful for home defense); Ban all semi-automatic rifles that can hold more than 10 rounds.

Ban guns rarely used in crime. State and local law enforcement agency reports have always shown that guns on the Clinton and Conyers/McCarthy ban lists have never been used in more than a small percentage of violent crime. The Congressionally-mandated study of the Clinton law concluded that guns it banned "were never used in more than a fraction of all gun murders." But even if they were, are the rights and liberties of law-abiding citizens to be dictated by the acts of criminals?

Begin "backdoor" registration. Requires manufacturers of banned guns, frames, receivers, and parts to report the names of their dealers, and requires dealers to report any of those parts they have in stock. The next step is obvious-demanding the names of gun owners who buy those parts.

Please contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 224-3121 or by using the "Write Your Representatives" feature and urge them to oppose any attempt to keep alive the Clinton gun ban.

posted on May, 15 2003 @ 07:39 PM
Gun Dealers Question Impact of Bill Tightening Ammo Purchases
By Robert B. Bluey Staff Writer
May 13, 2003

( - Rifle and shotgun owners in New York City are facing the prospect that they will soon have to supply more information about their firearms in order to buy ammunition.

Under a bill introduced by Democrat Councilman James Sanders Jr., ammo for long guns would be subject to the same restrictions as handgun ammunition. Sanders said the bill would end the disparity between the different types of firearms and cut down on crime.

Gun-rights advocates, however, dismissed the bill as another example of legislation that would have little impact on criminals and instead punish law-abiding gun owners.

posted on May, 15 2003 @ 07:53 PM
If you ever need someone to talk to I'll give you my number(no, I'm not looking
), can call at any hour. I really hate to see someone carry on a one sided conversation. Four posts in row LoL.

Has the HAARP been getting to you again?

[Edited on 16-5-2003 by ADVISOR]

posted on May, 16 2003 @ 06:02 AM
I rather have a gun and not need one, than need a gun and not have one.
Elmer Keith - noted author on firearms

posted on May, 29 2003 @ 07:50 PM
For the first time in history, the White House is telling the Supreme Court that the Second Amendment guarantees the individual’s right to bear arms.

Exclusive to American Free Press

By James P. Tucker Jr.

Gun control advocates became hysterical when the Bush administration told the Supreme Court that the Second Amendment guarantees your right to own firearms. It was the first time, since gun laws became an issue in the 20th century, that an administration said the Constitution guarantees the individual’s right to own firearms.

The administration rejected the claim by many federal judges that the Second Amendment reference to “a well regulated militia” means only soldiers and policemen can own weapons.

The Justice Department stated the administration’s position in briefs filed May 6 by Solicitor General Theodore Olson in two cases the high court is considering for review.

Acknowledging that the briefs present a revolutionary shift in government policy, Olson said that, when the two cases came before separate appeals courts (during the Clinton years), “the government argued that the Second Amendment protects only such acts of firearm possession as are reasonably related to the preservation or efficiency of the militia.”

But, Olson said in the briefs, “the current position of the United States is that the Second Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to possess and bear their own firearms.”

posted on May, 29 2003 @ 08:40 PM
"Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) announced his plans Wednesday to introduce legislation he calls the "Homeland Security Gun Safety Act," along with fellow New Jersey Democrat Jon Corzine, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)."

Quite interesting how Senator Corzine was at this year's latest Bilderberg meeting, isn't it?

In terms of the DC sniper-- this an adult who was trained by the United States military, and a juvenile who was allegedly trained by the adult. The case for gun control in this instance, is weaker than is the case for appropriate military selection procedures.

posted on May, 29 2003 @ 08:55 PM
It's laughable to think that the average American would need an assault weapon.

As if a .50 caliber semi-automatic handgun wasn't enough, the true patriot gun owner needs an M4 Carbine to really protect his apple pie, and bring down his deer. Although the venison is a pile of mush by then but hey, them's the breaks.

And educating people isn't the answer either because you cannot control what people do not matter how much education there is. Guns are a tool for killing--plain and simple.

Even though I like guns myself, it doesn't make them a good thing. It's a catch 22. Guns fight our battles, on some occasions protect our loved ones. On the other hand, guns are used to do horrible things to many many innocent people.

Put into comparison the number of murders that are commited to the number of self-defense shootings there are, and I bet you criminal gun slayings will eclipse the self-defense slayings.

You have to admit that the gun policy in this country is out of control. Read here if you don't think so...

The gun industry gets immunization from pending and future lawsuits

Illinois State Rifle Association Supports Bill to Protect Gun Traffickers

Ashcroft Justice Department Protects Terrorist "Gun Rights" While Putting Americans at Risk

How criminals get guns

I can understand one's right to guns, however, why shouldn't there be strict regulation on them? The constitution can evolve and be amended into oblivion, all except that Holy Gun Amendment.

Cigarettes are stricly regulated (or so it would seem). Marijuana is even illegal, but doesn't do nearly the damage guns do...why? On one hand, you have people that are anti-abortion, but a great deal of those "pro-lifers" are gun advocates, does this make any sense?

Gun education doesn't work, so why not try stricter regulations and create a gun database? What would be the harm in this?

The latest on gun travesties can be found here...

Gun Guys

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in