Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NRA: We're prepared "to help make sure this never happens again"

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

CNN Breaking News

NRA, in its first statement after the Newtown shootings, says it is prepared "to help make sure this never happens again"

www.cnn.com



This could mean anything, seeing how their stand point means "more guns = more safety." One is less likely to shoot someone, if hundreds others around him/her are also armed.

However, this could mean a beginning of large talks.
It's the National Rifle Assosciation, not the National Assault Weapon Association.
edit on 18-12-2012 by CALGARIAN because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
The NRA has sold us out before.

It wouldnt surprise me if they pull some stunt like offering their own version of an AWB as a "compromise."

What good is a right if you compromise it?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

What good is a right if you compromise it?


Things change.

Do you think if the founding fathers of the USA had Assault Weapons that can shoot in excess of 150 rounds a minute, they'd write the 2nd amendment word for word as it's shown on the constitution?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


I would assume this means they will support Guns for children...

Every child in every classroom will have a gun...

Signed by moses himself



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

What good is a right if you compromise it?


Things change.

Do you think if the founding fathers of the USA had Assault Weapons that can shoot in excess of 150 rounds a minute, they'd write the 2nd amendment word for word as it's shown on the constitution?


That's ridiculous. The implement used is irrelevant. If some nut ran into a one room school house with a musket and blew away a teacher in 1770 the 2nd A would still be in the BOR.

I'm sure there are people in government chomping at the bit to use that same weak reasoning to shut down blogs and alternative news sites. In fact that whole bit about CT cops prosecuting bloggers for reporting events is right in line with thw whole "do you think our founding fathers envisions a globally connected information grid where anyone could say anything to anybody?"

Then there's the simple fact that the BOR is just a piece of paper. My property is my property. Shred the Constitution tomorrow and it's still my damn property.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
They can regulate all they want, criminals do not follow the law. whats so hard to understand about this? ban certain guns all u like, that only means law abiding americans will not have those weapons, only criminals willing to shoot a large mass of unarmed, defenseless people will have these. Do not take away my 2nd amendment, i choose to protect myself thank you very much.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by roaland
 


Yeah but if you ban them today in like 1000 years all those evil guns will begin to decay and rot and then they'll be out of circulation forever.


/how a gun grabber thinks



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


The NRA aren't the lobby for American gun owners, they're the lobby for the "traditional" American gun industry. They want nothing to do with tactical firearms or assault weapons, they just want Bobby-Joe to be able to keep his .30-30 for hunting deer. Hell, the NRA have already shown how little they actually care about gun owners by allowing the Clinton import bans to pass.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


You think they were stupid enough to believe technology would not progress, and remain stagnant forever? That in 200 years people would still be shooting muskets? I see this argument all the time, and it's still as invalid as it ever was.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by roaland
They can regulate all they want, criminals do not follow the law. whats so hard to understand about this? ban certain guns all u like, that only means law abiding americans will not have those weapons, only criminals willing to shoot a large mass of unarmed, defenseless people will have these. Do not take away my 2nd amendment, i choose to protect myself thank you very much.


If Nancy Lanza who, according to her friends was both a law abiding citizen and a responsible gun owner, didn't have all those firearms those kids would probably be alive today. Also there is a new type of "criminal" in your society today. He is the one no one suspects, not even his parents. Things have changed.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 


No they wouldn't be still alive, because someone who wears body armor, Intent on a shoot out with police( who else was he expecting to have a gun in the school), doesn't just commit suicide when the coppers show up. That lacks logic.
edit on 18-12-2012 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Also there is a new type of "criminal" in your society today. He is the one no one suspects, not even his parents. Things have changed.


Yeah, lots of people knew this kid was a violent nut. Including his mother who had to hide the sharp silverware and create an at home "lockdown" drill for when the kid threw fits.

This shouldnt have been a surprise to anyone that knew the family.

Mom dropped the ball by not properly securing her gear or even locking the kid in his room at night. She lived with a monster she couldnt handle and lots of people paid the price for it.

Well, she might have dropped the ball. We dont know what her storage methods were or if the kid worked hard to circumvent her precautions.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by cripmeister
 


No they wouldn't be still alive, because someone who wears body armor, Intent on a shoot out with police( who else was he expecting to bae a gun in the school), doesn't just commit suicide when the coppers show up. That lacks logic.


Come again?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by cripmeister

Also there is a new type of "criminal" in your society today. He is the one no one suspects, not even his parents. Things have changed.


Yeah, lots of people knew this kid was a violent nut. Including his mother who had to hide the sharp silverware and create an at home "lockdown" drill for when the kid threw fits.

This shouldnt have been a surprise to anyone that knew the family.


Really? How reliable is this new information?
edit on 18/12/2012 by cripmeister because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 


Any human willing to murder innocent people in cold blood will find a way to do it effectively, whether its a gun or something else. Look at the idiot in china who killed 25 kids in a school, he didnt use a gun, he used a knife. And lets look at the numbers since people like to point out gun crimes. How many people get killed in vehicle accidents every year compaired to gun? the vihicle deaths are higher then guns. What i see happening is a bunch of people getting murdered in places where firearms are not allowed. I'm not saying every teacher carry guns, what im saying is there is no one there to defend themselves. So you have a bunch of unarmed defenceless people hiding while the cops arrive, and still 27 people got killed. I personally would of liked to see one person able to fight back, just maybe, maybe the deaths would of been lessened. What about cities like Chicago where they have very strict anti gun laws and how many people get killed by gun there? Criminals do not follow laws, if they want a gun or some other means to kill lots of people, they will find a way. Im not trying to change your mind, i dont really care about changing peoples minds, but this is how i feel. Given the chance of someone shooting at me or attacking me trying to kill me, i wish to have the freedom to arm and protect myself. Dont you dare take away my right to defend my own life. live your life however you like, but do not take away my right to save my own life if that time ever comes.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 


Who wears body armor to a gun fight with supposedly the police, nobody in the school had a firearm it's not allowed, only to go oh # the coppers are here, and shoots himself. Dead people don't and can't talk. But let's throw out how a clumsy 20 year old autistic/aspergers, acts out a scene from rambo after never firing a gun before. And if he was as unstable as you guys are claiming, why would his mom have taught him to shoot? This doesn't make sense!!! And if you follow Judge Judy, if it doesn't make sense it's not true.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
NRA in 2011.
www.nytimes.com...



“Why should I or the N.R.A. go sit down with a group of people that have spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment in the United States?” said Wayne LaPierre, the longtime chief executive of the National Rifle Association.

He named Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has almost no role in gun-related policies, and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.

“It shouldn’t be a dialogue about guns; it really should be a dialogue about dangerous people,” Mr. LaPierre said, adding that his group has supported proposals to prevent gun sales to the mentally ill, strengthen a national system of background checks and spur states to provide needed data.


The dangerous person Adam Lanza was refused the right to buy a gun at Dicks Sporting Goods.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 


Read the reports, he was wearing body armor. To protect him from who? The police? Cool. Then why kill himself? Better yet, how did he kill 27 people with a rifle that was found locked in the trunk? Did he kill them all, go lock it in the trunk, and then come back to shoot himself? I can't believe anyone would believe this #.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadeWolf
 


Most people will agree that a rifle to hunt or a hand gun for self-defence should continue to be the right of American citizens, but possession of weapons designed for war is another thing altogether. If someone wants the toys of a soldier, then enlist; if you need or enjoy hunting then a rifle will do and if a hand gun is still the go-to deterrent and self-defence tool for the police, then a hand gun will do for you.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by LarryLove
 


You do know that the weapon in question (Bushmaster AR15 is a SEMI-auto rifle just like a "hunting rifle" you say is ok to own?

Do you just not like it because it RESEMBLES a military weapon?





new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join