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.

 

Obama's first steps towards gun restrictions?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bodhi7
reply to post by chadderson
 


Yeah i don't really see how he "isn't taking a stance" with statements that obvious.




"On Wednesday, however, Obama emphasized a need for background checks and the prevention of "mentally unbalanced" individuals from obtaining guns. He faulted opposition in Congress for lack of progress made in reducing violence.

"These steps shouldn't controversial. They should be common sense," Obama said, though without elaborating too specifically on measures of enforcement.

"We should leave no stone unturned and recognize that we have no greater mission as a country than keeping our young people safe," he added."



How exactly would there be a reasonable way to determine whether a person is mentally stable enough for a weapons? Psych evaluations for every buyer? I just don't see how what he's asking for can be accomplished short of taking away all guns.
edit on 25-7-2012 by Bodhi7 because: (no reason given)


You could easily evaluate someones mental stability without having it be a long drawn out process. The easiest way to do it would probably be to have someone fill out a questionnaire and medical history form, which is then given to a mental health professional who would examine your questionnaire and ask questions to measure mental stability. It would be just like getting a physical but for your brain.




posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Bodhi7
 


He is wanting to use these quotes, as we get nearer the November election..

His crew is already attacking Romney on this very issue..

By making these statements now, his campaign will have plenty of "clips" to use should there be strong positive response to his speech..

The President's campaign will use EVERY opportunity to make this election about issues other than his record.

The more they can get folks focused on single issues, the better their chances..

Their biggest boost yet, is having Romney as their opposition..



posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Bodhi7
 


Why shouldn't people have AK's? You have 3 armed people invading your home and I assure you you will wish you had more than 6-9 bullets. They are good hunting weapons too. I mean AKs are only legal in sem- auto, you can get a pistol that spits just as many bullets out, just as fast. Say two or three armed men are after you in your home or business, you need a combat multiplier to even things up.

Most importantly we should just be able to have them because we are a free people.
edit on 25-7-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by acmpnsfal
 


But it would have to be a constantly changing test so people couldn't just share the "right" answers with others. Not to mention i'm sure there are plenty of people hellbent on killing that would still be able to answer a questionnaire without sounding crazy.

Or, the other alternative is that they could make requirements/tests that virtually no one could pass. That way nothing has technically been banned, but it would be near impossible to obtain.



posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


I'm not saying i disagree with the right to own them, just that i didn't see any practical use in self defense. I'm sure plenty of people do, but personally i'd be more comfortable with a pistol than having to grab for a big clunky rifle in a situation where every second counts.



posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Bodhi7
 

Well of course the test would have to change, all tests do when better questions or methods are designed. But it would not have to change because people are sharing answers. You could be dishonest on the questionnaire but the mental health field doesn't function on absolutes, so there are never really any wrong or right answers. Like the person doing the exam would not be diagnosing anything just measuring your level of stability.



posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
I think these signs should be available at hardware stores.



See how anti gun they will be then.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bodhi7
Personally i don't see how an assault rifle would ever be needed in a defense situation, but i'd like to hear any/all input.

edit on 25-7-2012 by Bodhi7 because: (no reason given)


Could you go out and buy an assult rifle right now?

Good luck...

These 'ak47's and 'AR15's that you see at gunshops are nearly look alikes to real assult weapons. They are just semi-automatic rifles. If you ban semi-auto rifles, why should it stop there? Next they ban semi-auto pistols....

AK47's and AR15's can be used in a defense sitution, such as a riot or mob trying to torch your house. A gang decides they are going to overwelm you with numbers.

We need not worry about assult rifles, because so few people have them its a moot point. Many people have guns, AR15s, M16s, AK47s, but not automatic assult rifles.


People that don't know anything about guns, shouldn't speak towards controlling them. It makes more sense to call for more people to carry.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Irish614
Pretty soon they will make it illegal to own a gun that carries anything more than a single bullet. It's absurd. Every gun hater always states that the 2nd amendment was created when they only had muskets. Sure that's all fine and well but imagine if the founding fathers had a machine gun at their disposal, does that mean they wouldn't have created the 2nd amendment? The answer to that is no. They knew the government would become too powerful and eventually come for peoples weapons. If we give them up we lose America.
edit on 7/25/2012 by Irish614 because: typo


Very true...

And to counter their arguement, the government only had muskets at this time. So the citizens had the same military technology as the government.

It put the people on a level playing ground to guard their liberties.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bodhi7
reply to post by chadderson
 





"On Wednesday, however, Obama emphasized a need for background checks and the prevention of "mentally unbalanced" individuals from obtaining guns. He faulted opposition in Congress for lack of progress made in reducing violence.




This shows what an absolute idiot the jackass Obama is. Under the Brady Bill anyone purchasing a gun through an FFL licensed gun dealer has to submit to an NCIC background check already. Also if a person has been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital or diagnosed with certain mental illnesses they are barred from owning a gun under the Brady Bill.

The NCIC check is tied in with the FBI database and it will most definately show and diagnosed mental instability or treatment in a psychiatric facility. The only exception to the background check are those who possess a valid and current CCW permit because when you apply for your CCW a federal background check is performed on the applicant, and even then in some states they still have to have a background check.

Obama stating that we need background checks and prohibition on ownership to mentally unstable individuals is an attempt for him to trick those whom don't own guns into thinking that anyone can go out and buy a gun with no checks performed. It is another instance of King Barry being dishonest to achieve his agenda.

As far as assault weapons are concerned, there are plenty of guns out there that are nit classified as an assault weapon that are just as deadly and often times more deadly than "assault weapons". My Remington semi auto .223 is just as dangerous as an AR, in fact it is the same exact caliber as an AR, 5.56x45 the only difference is that it is not built on an assault weapon frame. My Model 700 Remington in a .300 WinMag is much more deadly than any assault weapon out there, while it is a boot action rifle its 1800 meter range means I don't need 30 rounds in the clip, I can sit off 2 miles away and pick targets off like flies if I wanted to and most likely never get caught.

Most people who are uninformed on and have no real knowledge of guns automatically assume an assault weapon is fully automatic, they are not and a full auto gun is a severe violation of US Code 18 unless you have an FFL permit or license with a class III tax certificate. TheGun Control Ac made it illegal to own a full auto weapon without jumping through some serious hoops and having your background scrutinized.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Bodhi7
 


He's only trying to stimulate the economy. Earlier today, I was hanging at my friends gun store. We used to be able to compare what was new with our vivariums. I don't believe he even stopped to eat today. Customers didn't seem too particular with their purchases either.

If the same is true throughout the country, bama just bought us a few more weeks.
edit on 26-7-2012 by tamusan because: failed to mention type of store i was hanging out in



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Bodhi7
 


wow that's really sick. Let getting everyone to try and forget about the 2nd amendment and what it means. They wanted everyone to have a gun to protect them from the g-v. So he's talking as if he's like to go try and confascate all of them or something. Then the people would have no way to protect themselves. Even a gun gives a person hardly any protection anymore.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Also, in related news, here's Romney flip flopping on the issue (big surprise) and even lying about owning a gun in a pathetic attempt at getting NRA support.

Link



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:31 AM
link   
Hey all. This is why civil war could start as early as tomorrow.

Don't worry about that though, there will be gun grabbing campaigns once this is pushed through, once the gun grabbing campaigns start, those people can not be everywhere at once to take your guns.

Just be ready.

This is why the lone wolf does not survive.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   
the prevention of "mentally unbalanced" individuals from obtaining guns. hmmm..
I guess when him and Eric Holder gave those guns in fast and furious to the cartel members, it didn't count, of course..
Those individuals are the most mentally unbalanced people in existence, they would cut off someone's head and use it for a hood ornament.. Because of Obama and Holder giving guns to unbalanced people, a federal agent died, and he has the gall to say this now about giving unbalanced people guns and assault rifles...



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by alienreality
 


The I guess you should say that Holder is mentally unstable and he shouldn't be trafficking guns to cartel members to brainwash people and make them have a negative outlook on the 2nd amendment.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:49 AM
link   
Like i stated earlier, i really don't see how it would be possible to make sure guns aren't given to "mentally unstable people."

One possibility could be that to avoid technically banning guns, they could require tests that they basically don't allow anyone to pass. That way it's not "banned" you just have basically no chance of getting approved. Seems like that could be a big loophole around the 2nd amendment.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


Yes, that would be a good start, although I don't think Holder or Obama would take this advise..
Obama feels that advise like this was not meant for him or his friend Eric Holder, because they exist on a level above everyone else.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Bodhi7
 


Thats where the gun grabbing begins.

They want to disarm us.

So they will call you unstable. They will use open handed tactics, like destroying you financially at first trying to get gun owners to comply.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by alienreality
 


Don't worry one of the most important rules of war is never to underestimate the enemy.

Underestimating is one thing they do well.

So do the the antigun assgrabbers on this site.




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join