Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Gun laws in the USA,,,

page: 12
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infi8nity

Originally posted by EqualizerUK

Originally posted by Infi8nity

Originally posted by EqualizerUK

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 



Originally posted by EqualizerUK

Originally posted by madenusa
lets outlaw all guns then box cutters they were used in taking down two buildings then what. what about stronger penaltys you kill and convicted you die not get to watch cable TV & get rich with a life story on 2020 let the familys of the dead deside his fate


No one wants to outlaw all guns....just the guns that have no place in a home,village,town,city in peace time...!

E


And well just open the magical gun crate during times of war then?



Times of what war ???? you have been watching red Dawn to much ...if there was a real war...get yourself a fall out shelter...not a gun.

E


Yea be a coward and hide, dont defend your land. You act like we should expect to get nuked, America is a very large country. They cant nuke every thing. Fall out shelter pffft should I duck and cover as well?


What else you gonna do shoot the nukes down with your AR if you were in a war????


Your so bad at this.

No im going to die...
We are not talking about guns vs nukes we are talking guns vs people.


No people are gonna invade america FACT!!...they may nuke the place to bits....but no one cares enough about your country to try and invade!

Your not very good at living in the real world are you ......got back to researching big foot and area 51....

Ohh and say hello to Elvis from me if you see him




posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 






Originally posted by EqualizerUK

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


Fallout shelter huh? And should I just live their for the rest of my life, cause by your logic their would be nothing left of my country when I ever came out.

And fallout shelters are so attainable also.


LOL well by your logic your gonna "go navy seal " and take out the enemy yeah ?? lol



And by your logic, you would go down on him hoping that maybe he would let you live.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Well, ladies and gentlemen, this is why discussing gun laws on ATS isn't a good idea, thank you and goodnight.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 






Originally posted by EqualizerUK

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


Fallout shelter huh? And should I just live their for the rest of my life, cause by your logic their would be nothing left of my country when I ever came out.

And fallout shelters are so attainable also.


LOL well by your logic your gonna "go navy seal " and take out the enemy yeah ?? lol



And by your logic, you would go down on him hoping that maybe he would let you live.


Strange how your profile image is hitler ...a white supremacy fool...and your comment was about me going down on another man.....you got something you wanna tell us....you like leather to don't you ...lol

E



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hopeforeveryone
Well, ladies and gentlemen, this is why discussing gun laws on ATS isn't a good idea, thank you and goodnight.


Yep, I agree. Thanks to the troll EqualizerUK, this thread is trashed.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
The only law I would like to see passed on guns, if anyone tries to pass a law, they get to have a fight with an armed person while they have only their fists.
I am all for fully auto, silenced, short barreled, forward gripped, extended magazined, anything.
If I was worried about an inanimate object killing people, I'd start by outlawing cars and scissors.
Just a side note to the idiots, this guys 100 round magazine in the recent shooting apparently jammed.
More is not always better, many of us practice combat reloading and could have done much worse with 30 round magazines, that would NEVER jam.
I respect the anti gunners right to be scared, they should at the very least respect my right to not be scared.
My guns are for killing tyrants, the hunting, target shooting, Etc. are just a bonus.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Juggernog
 


Well he did start the thread. So it was his thread to trash.

Thats what usually happens when the folks in the UK like to lecture American citizens on gun control.

If they feel so passionately about it, they should take it upon themselves to do something about it.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


You claim you were in the British military, but you say a 5.56mm is ultra powerful? You are severely misinformed and have no clue about weapons. If you were military all you did was push a pencil. Do some research and get off the US about our gun laws. Keep your opinion in Europe.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by rockledr
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


You claim you were in the British military, but you say a 5.56mm is ultra powerful? You are severely misinformed and have no clue about weapons. If you were military all you did was push a pencil. Do some research and get off the US about our gun laws. Keep your opinion in Europe.


You have no clue what your talking about you hobbyist!



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by rockledr
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


You claim you were in the British military, but you say a 5.56mm is ultra powerful? You are severely misinformed and have no clue about weapons. If you were military all you did was push a pencil. Do some research and get off the US about our gun laws. Keep your opinion in Europe.

Agreed, the 5.56 or .223 are actually severely underpowered, especially compared to something along the lines of 7.62x39.
As for the OP's wish that there were limits on number of guns owned and amount of ammo owned, he must not realize we are not video game characters that can carry 15 guns in our inventory with unlimited ammo for each gun, he also does not understand that humans have only 2 hands and dual wield is almost always a bad idea.
I certainly hope he is not the average Brit, the ones I have met are generally sharp individuals.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by EqualizerUK

Originally posted by rockledr
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


You claim you were in the British military, but you say a 5.56mm is ultra powerful? You are severely misinformed and have no clue about weapons. If you were military all you did was push a pencil. Do some research and get off the US about our gun laws. Keep your opinion in Europe.


You have no clue what your talking about you hobbyist!

Actually, I would be the hobbyist here.
I am fat old and retired, the only recreation I have is hobbies.
Any guess at which one is my top hobby?
You bet, and it gives me plenty of time and rounds to compare.
I know a 5.56 is barely just enough to get the job done as compared to many of the choices.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by EqualizerUK

Originally posted by rockledr
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


You claim you were in the British military, but you say a 5.56mm is ultra powerful? You are severely misinformed and have no clue about weapons. If you were military all you did was push a pencil. Do some research and get off the US about our gun laws. Keep your opinion in Europe.


You have no clue what your talking about you hobbyist!


No, I think he does.
The 556 round really is under powered, soldiers have complained about it since the Viet Nam war.
and btw, the 762x39 round is also under powered. The round is to big compared to the amount of powder it holds.
Ive shot both but if I had to chose, Id go for the 762 round.
edit on 20-7-2012 by Juggernog because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by sparky31
 


I don't need guns to kill a lot of people. I don't even need gunpowder. I could do it with a few household chemical that anyone can buy at any store.

Besides, guns aren't that effective. This guy shot 81 people. Only 12 are dead. That is a pretty poor hit/kill ratio right there. If he was as mart as they say he was, he would have snuck out and brought in a couple bombs with cell phone detonators, went home and made a phone call. Then there would be 100 dead and he would not be in jail yet. Or he could have rigged his apartment on a time delay detonation and not told the pig-thugs about it and got 20 pig-thugs to go with the innocent people he'd killed.

And this guy was a doctoral student? They will let just anyone go to medical school these days.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by EqualizerUK
 


I usually don't bother with these threads. They go no where. I am however curious why so many are started by folks who live in the UK ? I really don't get that, why do you give a crap ? This may sound cold but I also could care less about the folks that were killed or wounded. Don't know them, no need to send my condolences. I legally carry a Sig Sauer full size 1911 EVERYWHERE ! I've never seen a bullet resistant gas mask. He would be DEAD and I would of left with everyone else, gone home and slept like a baby. If that offends anyone OTHER then the whinny UK guy I apologize in advance.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
the question isnt what will happen to crime and murder rates if guns were banned.

the question is, what will happen to government if guns are banned.?

first it would take 100 years to eradicate guns completely.

second, we would loose all of our rights outlined in the constitution.

third, we would look a lot like countries in europe. broke and socialists

fourth, our sovereignty would be challenged.

i call for a gun ownership mandate, or pay a tax.
hows that sound lefties?



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 01:28 AM
link   
I have given this quite a bit of thought the past several years and I have come to the following conclusions;

1. There is a Constitutional Amendment that says I can own a gun for my protection and the protection of
MY Country.

2. The only defense against a gun, is another gun.

3. A gun is an INANIMATE OBJECT, a person must load it and fire it. A gun will not load and fire itself.

4. People will kill other people no matter if they use a gun, knife, bomb, or their bare hands.

5. The Police cannot protect you and your family, and a Baseball Bat will not be enough.

6. People talk about not needing a gun with a high capacity magazine but that's if no one is coming for you
or you're not involved in a shootout.

7. Speak to someone from London, ask how the average person protects themselves.

8. Killing someone with a gun is are pretty personal, see a person, shoot a person. Killing lots of people with
a gun takes time, gotta aim pull the trigger, reaim....Explosives are not personal, wanna kill lots of people?
Just push a button, it's done

You see, people can be violent and kill, everyone knows what people can do. We just don't know to how far each
person will go, when they decide to kill. If, you were to eliminate ALL guns, people would just use something that would perhaps kill many more that they originally considered. Think about Iraq, explosives a plentiful so they're most often used with many unnecessary deaths. In the U.S., explosives are hard to get, guns are easier
to get. If there were no guns.......Well......I really don't want to think about it

My viewpoint is from a Self Defense prospective, I have a Concealed Handgun License and I refuse to become a victim.

edit on 21-7-2012 by pistolerooo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 01:38 AM
link   
reply to post by sparky31
 


I was very pro.gun control but I have shifted drastically my position. Gun controls is about control of power, to restrict the power of use deadly force to the state or guarantee that the state has the upper hand in any confrontation.

Then lets examine it (as some have already stated guns are a tool and not a particularly hard to make tool, it is tube that can discharge a chemically propelled ballistic object), you can create a gun extremely easily). Like any other tool that are many other different tools that can be used to the same outcome, so the problem that should preoccupy society is not the tool but the tool user.

The question why people kill (not specially with guns) should be the focus of our attention, and people kill because our society is flawed, unjust and generally oppresses the human spirit. It is today possible to detect and help all psychopaths and address all the causes of human violence.

The question is then what use is there in having access to guns, the simple answer is to guarantee your own sovereignty to the point that it could be used to forcefully fix society.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 03:09 AM
link   
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

In addition: If anyone there had had a gun then maybe a lot of those injured and killed people would have been saved. If anything this event demonstrates that more people need to be carrying guns and be trained in how to use them. "Bad guys" will always have guns and other weapons no matter what is made illegal!
edit on 7/21/2012 by 0001391 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   
This liberal thinks if everyone in that theater had been armed and... had the gunmen lived in a society where he could count on most people in the theater to be armed, this may have had a different outcome or possibly not happened at all. These guys are cowards. That's why they dont open fire at a police station. They go where they dont expect any resistence.

Crazies will get guns. Good people deserve protection.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by sparky31
 


It's also worth noting at the moment in the UK Murders are at their lowest for 30 years. I can definitely understand why one would want a gun for defense or a SHTF scenario, but it seems a little crazy that you can just walk into a shop and buy a high powered assault rifle.

I'm not really seeing the logic that I keep reading on ATS that more people need to be armed. If more people were armed then someone could have shot the shooter. But where does this logic end. Should all children carry guns just incase there is another school masacre?





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join