Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Hello, I am against fire arms.

page: 7
8
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


it states that the illegal immigrant part is bogus and it being a girl.

the boy Todd fired 3 shots and one of the men was found dead at the scene by the police the other it doesn't state whether or not was alive in the front seat of the dat-sun. it was also a .22 rifle.




posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by AdamLaw
 




Question 1: In 2012, does the most militarized country in the world, with a budget of 700 billion dollars a year requires a well regulated militia with citizens armed and ready to protect the security of the State?


As has been said already. The military was established to protect the country from all enemies foreign and domestic, and that remains true despite the bastardization of that intent in recent years...

The second amendment stands as a protection of the right of citizens to protect themselves from just such a bastardization being turned on them.

So, yes, it does. With the definition of militia being the citizens being willing and able to protect the security of the country in which they live in.


Question 2: Is the 2nd amendment an individual’s right or a collective right?


Individual. But it applies to all individuals, so in a sense, it is collective. Only in certain circumstances is the right to own/bear firearms abrogated... A felony record is the only one that immediately jumps to mind. SCOTUS has reaffirmed that right in numerous cases brought before it.



Question 3: Should we conclude that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to possess rocket launchers, bazookas or tanks if the times we live in makes it militia relevant weaponry?


The Second Amendment says exactly that, in my not so humble opinion.

Now do I really want a bazooka/rocket launcher? Hell yes...I do. Not for any intent to use it to defend myself, but for the sheer perverse pleasure I would take from the double takes it would receive from certain anti-gun people in my life when they saw them hanging on my wall...

Do I need one? No. I don't.


Question 4: Should the United States Of America take an active role in preventing criminal crimes by revoking the right to bear arms to American citizens?


No. Because it would cease to be a United States that I want any part of, and would become a battle ground in many places. The sheer stupidity of such an idea usually leaves me speechless. I pity the poor LEO, or group of same, that attempts to enforce this sort of idiocy... Because few, if any, will have. There'd be lots of funerals. LEO and citizen alike... Not to mention the fact that many formerly law abiding citizens, such as myself, will suddenly become felons. Because I will not, under any circumstance, turn over my firearms.

Yes, I'm a gun nut. ...and as hard as you will fight to take 'em away? I'll fight just as hard for peoples rights to keep them, and to utilize them for legal purposes, or illegal should it come to pass that our own govt. turns on them.

So there you have my answers to your questions. I can't quote/won't quote Founding Fathers, or Supreme Court decisions at you...you're fully capable of finding them for yourself.

I know the intent behind the Second Amendment, which I consider the most important of the ten, as the writers wrote it.

Agree or disagree as it pleases you.


I disagree but I am glad you took the time to answer all questions. I was hoping that most answers were against my ideas so I could understand better how one could advocate for the proliferation of guns in America.

Thank you.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


That one is a hoax. True enough.

But there are hundreds, if not thousands, of stories that aren't. I've got one. My nephew was home alone, he's a young twenty something, playing on the computer as is his wont, when he noticed out the window a young male standing by the gate into the backyard... This kid came into the yard and tried the back door, my nephew, being the quick thinking lad that he is, pulled out the loaded double barreled shotgun that lives in the closet, and showed it to the kid. Not aimed it, merely showed it... The kid took off down the street.

Nephew put the shotgun away, and went back to his video game.

How might the day have ended if he'd not had access to a firearm? No one can know, save nothing good. Someone might have been hurt, in fact that seems likely. A firearm saved a lot of pain for someone, perhaps two someones.

Happy ending all 'round.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by AdamLaw
Where do you guys think illegal firearms come from? The millions of illegal firearms currently in the United States did not get here by boat by Gun Lords.

15% of crimes with firearms were committed from stolen legally bought guns.
27% of firearms legally bought will have a crime associated with it in the following 2 years.



Your really basing your arguments on such tiny statistics? Think of it this way,

85% of crimes with firearms were Not committed from stolen legally bought guns.
73 % of firearms legally bought will Not have a crime associated with it in the next 2 years.

Those seem very good and acceptable to me.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


That one is a hoax. True enough.

But there are hundreds, if not thousands, of stories that aren't. I've got one. My nephew was home alone, he's a young twenty something, playing on the computer as is his wont, when he noticed out the window a young male standing by the gate into the backyard... This kid came into the yard and tried the back door, my nephew, being the quick thinking lad that he is, pulled out the loaded double barreled shotgun that lives in the closet, and showed it to the kid. Not aimed it, merely showed it... The kid took off down the street.

Nephew put the shotgun away, and went back to his video game.

How might the day have ended if he'd not had access to a firearm? No one can know, save nothing good. Someone might have been hurt, in fact that seems likely. A firearm saved a lot of pain for someone, perhaps two someones.

Happy ending all 'round.


Could you in all intellectual honesty really tell me that Guns save more lives by dissuasive actions than they claim lives in this Country?



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

Originally posted by AdamLaw
Where do you guys think illegal firearms come from? The millions of illegal firearms currently in the United States did not get here by boat by Gun Lords.

15% of crimes with firearms were committed from stolen legally bought guns.
27% of firearms legally bought will have a crime associated with it in the following 2 years.



Your really basing your arguments on such tiny statistics? Think of it this way,

85% of crimes with firearms were Not committed from stolen legally bought guns.
73 % of firearms legally bought will Not have a crime associated with it in the next 2 years.

Those seem very good and acceptable to me.


It is not acceptable when you realize that at the end. All gun used were purchased legally before being sent to the underground market.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


Simply said.... Yes!



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by j230ns

Originally posted by kingmonkey

Your knowledge of the UK is on a par with this guys grasp of the English language.

There are no 'enclaves' in his country, Muslim or otherwise.

I guess this is a debate for American's only as it seems to be an extremely contentious issue. I do wonder however why more pro-gun/2nd amendment American citizens do not aspire to have a country where there isn't a need to defend oneself?

Good luck.


what makes you think those who "support" the second amendment "do not aspire to have a country where there isn't a need to defend oneself?" is it because they aren't willing to give up their firearms to do it? i can tell you right now per capita US has lower crime rates overall than most any country without civilian firearm ownership. And oft it is the states with heavy firearm regulations (NY, NJ, Cali, Illinois) that offset and cause our rates to greatly increase as a nation. These are the same states that feel the need to further regulate firearms because of the increased crime.

They blame it on people going out of state to buy firearms, but legally they more often than not can't as the state they live in has regulations on doing so and surrounding states have to follow that regulation. this is much the same as mexico blaming the USA on their firearms problem when the majority of the weapons down there used by the cartels are fully automatic which are prohibitively expensive here in the USA and nobody is going to give up their $10,000 or $20,000 AK or M-16 to go to the cartels. I know i have gotten slightly off the specific topic but it is in fact all related.


I'm sure many people do. But when I read the numerous similar debates here on ATS, the common 'pro' argument seems to involve being able to fend off would be gun wielding attackers.

S&F to the OP though, for once a well constructed debate on the subject

edit on 1-10-2012 by kingmonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Hello my name is NEO

I support someone elses right,my fellow Americans right to keep and bare whatever arm they so choose,

Someone once said: :


Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.


It is peoples right to choose to become a victim, and it is peoples right to become the victor of circumstance,

Your choice, but you must choose wisely that is what the second amendment.

Choice not edict.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


Because you do not take into account the number of lives saved by guns. I know i know it is an inconvenient truth that you do not want to discuss or even think about.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


whether or not they have dissuaded more people than have been shot in self defense is irrelevant. a self defense act done through dissuasion will not be recorded in any of the numbers you read even if reported to law enforcement because nobody that matters is asking. and even if someone is shot in self defense, nobody has the right to remove anybody's property by force, weapon or not, threats of violence if they do not comply, or their life. if someone is intent on removing life or property in this way then the person is able to defend themselves through any means necessary with no repercussion in many states.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmiec
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


Because you do not take into account the number of lives saved by guns. I know i know it is an inconvenient truth that you do not want to discuss or even think about.



There is no inconvenient truth that I wish not to debate.

This is my question exactly, are dissuasive actions that result in a life being saved more frequent than crimes committed with guns? Ban guns and you decrease the amount of guns, decrease the amount of guns criminals have access to, decrease the amount of dissuasive actions needed to be taken by the law abiding citizen.
edit on 1-10-2012 by AdamLaw because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


That's a question that's unanswerable. Most people who dissuade a probable criminal action don't report it. Like my nephew did, they put the gun away and go about the rest of their day. They've no desire to further complicate their day by bringing in unnecessary officialdom.

No one, from either side of this issue, can claim such. With any sort of honesty. I would venture a guess, and that's all it is... That the numbers would be fairly close. But there is no way of knowing.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


That's a question that's unanswerable. Most people who dissuade a probable criminal action don't report it. Like my nephew did, they put the gun away and go about the rest of their day. They've no desire to further complicate their day by bringing in unnecessary officialdom.

No one, from either side of this issue, can claim such. With any sort of honesty. I would venture a guess, and that's all it is... That the numbers would be fairly close. But there is no way of knowing.


Of course there is no way of knowing, and that is why such incident should not be used as debating arguments since they are only of speculative nature.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


Anecdotal evidence of the usefulness of a firearm in the prevention of a criminal act is very valid in a debate such as this.

No official stats exist to bear out what is obvious, firearms in the hands of prepared individuals have, do, and will, prevent crime. Doesn't make it any less true.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


i'm going to go ahead and pull this from a post i made in another thread. it is also one of the major reasons i am for firearm ownership now more so than ever. Mods, may you find it in your heart to forgive me for such a large quote of my own text.


Originally posted by j230ns
While we are here I'll add my own story that wont be added in to statistics. I was at the local pharmacy picking up a prescription which they only filled half of because that is all the insurance company would cover. I told them to fill it up the rest of the way and I would pay the difference, and let it slip what it was... Ambien. Now i had noted the creeper standing around doing more or less nothing but listening but didn't pay him too much attention. So i stand at the counter for a few because there is nobody else in line, get my filled scrip, pay and go on about my way.

As i'm walking to my car, lo and behold creeper comes out behind me and says "Hey man, you want to sell me some of that?" To which i reply "Nah, i need it. Nearly don't sleep as it is." With that he mumbles "you think you need it" and starts walking towards me folded pocket knife in hand. Instantly i throw my meds in the open window of my car and my right hand rockets in to my jacket and grabs the grip of my pf-9 and he stops right where he stands. I give him an upwards head nod, he turns and walks off. I tell the pharmacy what happens word for word and they call the sheriff for me and that pharmacy has not seen hide nor hair of that dude since (he apparently was hanging around all day that day).

I'm happy i didn't have to draw but was surprised to find out how ready i have gotten myself just from basic practice. And i was amazed how many calculations go through your head (or at least mine) so quickly when that stress level piqued for a moment when i saw the knife.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


Anecdotal evidence of the usefulness of a firearm in the prevention of a criminal act is very valid in a debate such as this.

No official stats exist to bear out what is obvious, firearms in the hands of prepared individuals have, do, and will, prevent crime. Doesn't make it any less true.



Good enough.

I am starting to have trouble dodging all the bullets. wish I had at least one more person on my side.




posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by j230ns
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


i'm going to go ahead and pull this from a post i made in another thread. it is also one of the major reasons i am for firearm ownership now more so than ever. Mods, may you find it in your heart to forgive me for such a large quote of my own text.


Originally posted by j230ns
While we are here I'll add my own story that wont be added in to statistics. I was at the local pharmacy picking up a prescription which they only filled half of because that is all the insurance company would cover. I told them to fill it up the rest of the way and I would pay the difference, and let it slip what it was... Ambien. Now i had noted the creeper standing around doing more or less nothing but listening but didn't pay him too much attention. So i stand at the counter for a few because there is nobody else in line, get my filled scrip, pay and go on about my way.

As i'm walking to my car, lo and behold creeper comes out behind me and says "Hey man, you want to sell me some of that?" To which i reply "Nah, i need it. Nearly don't sleep as it is." With that he mumbles "you think you need it" and starts walking towards me folded pocket knife in hand. Instantly i throw my meds in the open window of my car and my right hand rockets in to my jacket and grabs the grip of my pf-9 and he stops right where he stands. I give him an upwards head nod, he turns and walks off. I tell the pharmacy what happens word for word and they call the sheriff for me and that pharmacy has not seen hide nor hair of that dude since (he apparently was hanging around all day that day).

I'm happy i didn't have to draw but was surprised to find out how ready i have gotten myself just from basic practice. And i was amazed how many calculations go through your head (or at least mine) so quickly when that stress level piqued for a moment when i saw the knife.


You do realize that even if he had kept going you would have been charged with murder right?



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


not in this state i wouldn't. in this state it is in the hands of prosecution to prove it was not self defense, which in this case it would have been. and even if i had to prove it, the pocket knife with his prints on it would have been enough.
edit on 1-10-2012 by j230ns because: edited to add last sentence



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamLaw
 


I will assume that you are actually looking for answers to your questions - although, with a headline like "I am against fire arms", I am guessing you already have your mind made up....but here goes: you speak initially about the Constitution being more than 200 years old, and therefore somehow irrelevant. I ask you - the Quran is more than 1400 years old, are the passages contained in it now irrelevant because its old? Is the Bible, or the Torah? Why then would this founding literature be any different?
Answer to question 1 - first, a history lesson: nearly 20 years ago, there was a Country which rivaled the United States in Military power - and they had many states under their control. That Country was the Soviet Union....they too had military might and spent heavily on weapons to keep their people safe, and they did not allow their people to own guns. The government became tyrannical, and they ruled their people through fear. Thomas Jefferson (founding Father) once said, "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" (-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334)
Queston 2: The answer is BOTH - individually and collectively, "WE THE PEOPLE" have this Right guaranteed to us.
Question 3: Of course not - common sense
Question 4: absolutely not - witness please the Country of Switzerland, that REQUIRES by law that every able-bodied male over the age of 18 have a GOVERNMENT ISSUED Weapon IN THEIR HOME. Switzerland has the lowest gun violence statistics in the free world. Compare this to Chicago, New York and Los Angeles (which have all passed laws banning guns) which have some of the HIGHEST gun violence statistics in the world. More people have been killed by people shooting other people in Chicago last year than died in Afghanistan and Iraq COMBINED.

Lastly - a gun is an INANIMATE object, left to its own it will never kill ANYONE.





new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join