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.


My Gun Prediction. (You heard it here first)

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:24 PM

I was theorizing the other day about the possibility of making registered gun owners pay a extra fee for health insurance.

A discount, they are not the one getting hurt in their house by burglars. You could have the crooks pay for all the health problems their crime causes.

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:28 PM
Here's the answer to everybodies concern.

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:28 PM
That's not a prediction, that's information that not be published. If the government hadn't thought about those ideas yet, they are now drooling with anticipation from your thread. Shhhhhhh

edit on 27-7-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:31 PM
I'm fine with gun ownership and protecting what's yours. But, there should have been some flags raised when this person decided to acquire a lot of weapons/ammunition and go postal. Survivalist - do you need that much amo - fire power in a short timeframe?

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:36 PM

Originally posted by CB328

I was theorizing the other day about the possibility of making registered gun owners pay a extra fee for health insurance

That's a good idea since guns cause so much meaningless death and injury gun owners should pay more.

Really? This is ridiculous on so many different levels. Let's ASSume gun owners cause "so much meaningless death and injury" to others than they do to themselves. So it would be the shootee and not the shooter who sustains all this "meaningless death and injury," thus it's the shootee and not the shooter who has to put a claim in for health insurance, hence, this "extra fee" is purely punititive. You are of the mindset and philosophy that esoteric fees should be punitive in nature, and not based on quantitative and objective evidence and fact. Additionally, who is to say that every gun owner even has health insurance? You shouldn't jump behind the first idea that "kinda" sounds good that really hasn't been thought out well in reality.

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:48 PM
reply to post by roadgravel

I made the same point. It counterintuitive, I just don't think the poster realizes it.

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 07:01 PM
Anyone whose a high volume shooter knows whats comming - Russia will comply with the UN small arms ban and all of the cheap ammo from wolf, golden bear, tula, silver bear and anything else made in the com-bloc will dry up. DHS has been buying up a large number of rounds lately so the chances of a domestic ammo shortage like in 08 are extremely high - then it simply is a matter of being to expensive to shoot and before long most people arent. And what happens when no one is active in something it goes out of fashion and more people will go along with regulation and expulsion.

edit on 27-7-2012 by circuitsports because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 11:18 PM
reply to post by MaleCABayArea

Please provide information on what national laws have been passed that restrict your 2nd? I would most certainly buck any law that countered our rights.

I'm setting myself up here. At least one person is going to point out he can't own TNT or uranium.

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 11:29 PM
reply to post by danny7147

I would rather be shot than stabbed to death or beated with a club.

Visiting the UK isn't on anyone's list by the way.

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 11:54 PM

Originally posted by CB328

they will do anything to ban guns.

Does that anything include nothing? Because that what Obama and the democrats have done, but yet people keep lying, I mean claiming that they are coming for everyone's guns tomorrow.

"Democratic senators offer gun control amendment for cybersecurity bill"
druge report tonight:

Nothing to see here libby's...
Whaaat? that ground tilting under your feet (its nothing)... Why No! Its nothing at all like a "slippery slope"

Funny: you can't even spell "liberal " without an "LI"

edit on 27-7-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-7-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-7-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-7-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 01:03 AM

Originally posted by ClintK

Originally posted by DamTyD
I guess I just don't see it. I don't see any reason why the national government would care that you own a gun. I mean, if you really think the only thing prevent the government from declaring martial law is the 38 under your pillow, you need to check out what the military walks around with.

Most regulations are placed on the state level, and those typically change back and forth. I can see them adding additional taxes to gun purchases, and even concealed permits, but in Florida you don't need a permit unless you plan on keeping it on your person.

Again, maybe I'm a blind sheeple, but I don't see any laws the national government has passed that show they are in the direction of taking your guns away.
edit on 26-7-2012 by DamTyD because: Typo

Agreed. It's unfortunate, but the main reason we can't have a rational discussion about the gun issue is exemplified by the OP. One side is just completely paranoid.


The military is a couple million strong (with 33 percent minimum being cooks and supply and other rear with the gear folks).

There are tens of millions of US citizens with guns. No amount of Tanks or LAWs or SAWs can make up for the numbers.

Estimates are upwards of 80 million Americans owning 258 Million guns. The military, by contrast, has shy of 10 million really cool guns. However, there are 70 million more people with 200+ million more guns than they have cool guns.

That, is why they fear an armed citizenry.
edit on 28-7-2012 by Bakatono because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:39 AM
reply to post by DamTyD

So still yet more "rights rights rights" and not a single person can answer one simple question?

"If you knew that it would have prevented Columbine, would you have given up your rights to own guns?"

It's not THAT hard to answer seeing as you've got an answer for everything else is it?

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:43 AM
2 words

rahm emmanuel

If we play our cards right, the man's plan will backfire, and it will be centuries before 'they' disarm the US, based on rahm's reputation alone. He is also busy trying to license anything that moves. The cameras are hungry!

Thanks, rahm! We know where you're coming from.
edit on 28-7-2012 by davidmann because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 06:30 AM

Originally posted by triplereiki
It is 4 a.m. and I wake up and had to post this that came to my mind.

I don't need to post the days go by, you will see the links you will be clicking into as things build up and finnally come about.
I don't need to post pics either...just imagine ignorant folks falling for the same game play by those who will create laws on the public, but yet they themselves are exempt from the law or are above the law.

Prediction: As you see the build up of extreme violence, and hear of threat that guns may be banned, there is a ultimate plan...For the slime balls to milk yet more money out of EVERY single gun owner, by rquiring EACH and EVERY gun (any firearm) to be registered (pay fees) each year. Oh what the heck, I will also include the extra money grabbing expense of insuring EVERY firearm, requiring safety locks for EVERY firearm and even lock boxes for ammo. They know they will bite off more than they can chew by banning guns, so why not make fools of folks futher and rip them on off some more? People will be coerced into this BS. They will blindly pay what they are told in order to keep their guns (and their false freedom). Sheeple led to the slaughter...again and again.
The giant will never stop yelling "MORE!!!" at the goose that lays the golden eggs. Shut the giant up for good and put him in his place by standing your ground and saying "No. No. No more golden eggs for you. YER FIRED!!!"

Remember when you saved all that money and felt so proud to buy that nice car, paying in full? Nice, but you still have to fork over more money just to be "allowed" to drive it on a road, and more money to insure it and if you don't pay the piper, that nice car is confiscated from you.

The house you busted your arse trying to pay off? You still have to pay rent - erm - property tax and insurance for it. If you don't, a lein is placed on your home and the fun really begins. In the old days, if you owned a car, you drove it. If you totalled your car, that was your problem, you best drive better next time. If you injured/killed someone, something was worked out for you to make it up to the other parties or etc.
Same with houses. If they were not built right and came crashing down, folks learned to build better next time, etc, etc, etc.

Just had to get this out there about what I feel is the game being played out in regards to guns and the crap that folks continue lay down and put up with or vote for.

Now, I can hopefully go back to sleep and at the same time wake some folks up.....before THIS is too late, too.

There are so many things people are warned about out there, but obviously by the state of our world today, they either are too ignorant, or just down right ---- well, I will leave those comments up to the repliers to this thread.

Thank you everyone for reading about my prediction.

I think you are 100% correct about this....sadly, it is undeniably The American Way of doing things these days. Permits, "safety" classes, mental health examinations, background checks (read: "credit checks"), insurance for the potential victims of the gun, environmental clean-up fees (it never ceases to amaze me that GreenPeace hasn't jumped on the gun control bandwagon ranting about the bullets and shotgun BB's are unnecessarily sprinkling lead around in the food chain.), etc, etc, until merely owning a firearm is more expensive than owning a car.

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 07:21 AM
reply to post by danny7147

No I wouldn't. The incident was horrible, but I don't want to start thinking what rights I can give up in order to make us all safe. Another way to prevent a mass school shooting is to have the government take ownership of your kids when they are born and keep them in a nice cell, so no one can get to them. We would need to ban a lot of things if we start going this down this road.

And I don't have an answer for everything. Just an opinion like everyone else.

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:10 AM
this makes alot of sense. i wouldnt doubt seeing a rise in gun prices, ammo prices, and adding more fees and requirments to the whole process.

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:14 AM
i work hard for everythang i have,i pay my taxs so the man wont take it from me, i wear a seat belt so the man wont make me pay a ticket...when somebody els gos out and shoots people for what ever reason they choose is in there twisted brain i still live in a state where we are required to own a foid card,but when i hear more gun control im not thanking of a shoot out just useing my guns as a tool ,so i go buy more ammo just like gas for my truck, i cant wate untill the people were slaves to messup so bad that i can stay home and injoy my dear steak while the gun haters are in there food lines for bread and water if i thought it would help to buy a boozka there only$ 50.00 the ammo is $250.00 i would but it would make a mess out of my dear steak. ill just pay the giant untill he eats all the goldn eggs and throws up then set back and enjoy my dear steak and maybe your puppy dog ,lmfao

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 10:13 AM
reply to post by Cosmic911

That is how many people have registered totally not accounting for spammed accounts, fake accounts, deactivated accounts, lost accounts, and forgotten accounts. I will bet the total active population of ATS to be closer to 30,000 or less.

Proof to that in one week 4,503 members created 57,775 threads, that is approximately 12 posts per that 4,503 users! On that week only 9,947 returning members! That many posts for that few of members added with the returning members tells me the population data is erroneous.

Oh now you say but what of 1,163,799 guests? Well that could be just like the 12 posts per user duplicate page views as guests are not registers but only counted as page views. I work in IT we can make numbers do anything!
edit on 28-7-2012 by abeverage because: spelling

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 11:23 AM
People own guns for three reasons. 1. Hunting. 2. Self defence. 3. To make them feel empowered. People who hunt should have no problem with registering and ensuring safety. People who use them as self defence are only defending themselves because the entire nation has guns too, and it's the group who own them to feel empowered that are the group to REALLY worry about. Why carry a 357 Magnum when you you carry a .20 pistol? Just in case you have to shoot an engine block out? That 'right' was conceived in the time when cowboys ruled the towns and it was shot or be shot... It wasn't intended for the modern day. It's still my right to shoot a Scotsman in York after dark, carry a bail of hay in the back of my taxi and kill Welshmen on sight... But do I? Not this year... Times change, and America's gun laws are a relic of a long ago.

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 12:32 PM
reply to post by triplereiki
here ya go:

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in