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.


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

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:26 PM

Thanks for asking I would say that half of the hunters I know use the AR platform for hunting
Most people look at them and cause they are black (tactical looking ) think assault rifle
If you took the same rifle or similar and put a wooden stock on it (the part that goes against your shoulder)
Wouldn't think assault rifle they would think hunting rifle

The pic below is a similar weapon but shows the variations in color and stocks hope that helps a little

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:26 PM
reply to post by Carreau

Ok that clears it up for me I don't think they should ban semi automatic weapons then I was misinformed.

I've never even shot a gun but when I get the hell out of this city I will probably want one for protection.
Can you have guns in Canada?

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:31 PM
reply to post by geocom

Thank you Geocon that link is extremely helpful to the discussion.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:38 PM

Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by kennylee

You should go try and buy a large amount of the stuff Timmy used. And then you can explain yourself to the feds when they show up. Fertilizer was changed after that. And any thing that has chemicals that can be used for a bomb is tracked and monitored.

Ammonium Nitrate Security Statutes and Regulations
edit on 18-12-2012 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)

I live in farm country where numerous farmers get hundreds of pounds of ammonia nitrate each year for their tobacco fields.

It would be no trouble at all for me to go to one of these many farms and take what I needed for a bomb if I wanted to make one, so what good did the laws restricting ammonia nitrate do if I can still get my hands on it? Just like semi automatic rifles. If you ban them, I would still be able to get them. The person is the cause of the carnage, not the object.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:44 PM
reply to post by kennylee

You would be brave to walk onto a farm. I was a foreman at one and I would of shot you as a poacher. I lived there and people poaching would never know where the house was and one shot and it could be my kid they hit not just a deer or pig.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:48 PM

Originally posted by cripmeister
Hunting with a bolt action rifle takes more skill in my opinion than hunting with a semi-automatic rifle.

Not more skill...just less kills.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:41 PM
Criminals are less likely to do a mass shooting if there are armed individuals who will be firing back. All it would have taken is one person with a concealed weapon on the premises and that dirtbag would have been pushing up daisies before one kindergartener got ventilated. Lambs to the slaughter for not having adequate defenses. Gun control is the issue, too much of it. If every man and woman were required to be armed to the teeth, licensed and trained, sooner or later these clowns would go extinct, leaving their polluted genes out of the genepool. Calling the cops doesn;t help when it takes them 3-5 minutes to respond, by that time everyone is already beyond help, so it makes sense to shorten the response time by allowing said citizens to be able to defend themselves with firearms.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:50 PM
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Best argument for gun control is asking why these psychos always choose to shoot up schools and movie theaters and not police barracks. Could it have something to do with the fact that these places have defensless people in them with no guns to defend themselves?

Commies want to take all our guns away and make all of America a mass shooting ground!

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:57 PM
If someone is going to commit murder, they are breaking the worse law, any other law is meaningless to them. Gun free zones, didn't stop him. He had to murder his own mother to get the weapons, what law could have stopped this? Make all firearms illegal? Heroin has been illegal for how long in this country? It isn't grown here, it isn't processed here and yet it can be found in every state. So if it's impossible to rid the country of heroin, how would banning firearms stop someone from getting a gun and killing people?

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 11:35 PM

Originally posted by LarryLove
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.

Every gun was designed for "war"
So it's okay to give someone in control a gun that is capable of taking out multiple threats, but a common man shouldn't have access to such defenses? No thanks. If it's available for one, it needs to be available for all.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 05:24 AM
Yes I heard this same phrase repeated on the news; "How we can make sure a mass killing never happens again." One of the most ridiculous statements I've heard. No one can actually believe it's possible to stop every nut-job from going through with similar acts. Mass killings have occurred all throughout history, and this recent one although tragic, is tiny. This is the unfortunate truth. Statistically speaking, logically speaking. For one there's no way guns can be removed from society, let alone from the hands of criminals. And even if there's no mass killings here in our country, it's occurring somewhere around the globe -- on a grander scale. Except nearly nobody cares. Thousands if not millions of children are dying in different countries & they get no sympathy. No outcry from the public.

This recent tragedy seems more and more like a media ploy, to divert attention as well as exploit the peoples emotions.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:54 AM
I agrre I have no idea what that means Calgarian.
It's kinda cryptic NRA speech .
They better watch it though, I think they were so quick
to bring up mental health after the shooting thinking it would protect
their precious gun sales to a public that's already armed to the teeth.
But what can happen may be worse for their sales than certain guns and clips being banned.

Imagine how much they'd lose if you now couldn't purchase a weapon
if you've been on an anti-depressant? Or been to rehab? Maybe you drink too much?
Drug tests? Restraining ordered ever filed against you?
The NRA better watch out on how they play this or it'll bit them in the ass
just like the Tea Party bit a chunk out of the Republicans approval rating.
edit on 19-12-2012 by sealing because: Sp

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:04 AM
for all you who would beg to be controlled, this is pretty much the case. like she says, the 2nd amendment is for the people to be able to arm themselves as well as their government to keep them in line from being tyrannical. your gun control logic is lacking in logic

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:49 AM
reply to post by Hardstepah

So you stand with us take the military equipment from the police. The police don't need a tank or assault weapons either. And the military is not allowed to be armed when they return to base only overseas. That is how the shooting at the military base happened. And they had their own MP police force for the base that stopped the guy.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:53 AM
reply to post by CALGARIAN

From an email I got this am:

Hunter's with guns

Interesting slant on things

The world's largest army...America's hunters!
I had never thought about this...

A blogger added up the deer license sales
in just a handful of states
and arrived at a striking

were over 600,000 hunters
this season in the state of Wisconsin.
Allow me to restate that number:

Over the last
several months,
Wisconsin's hunters became the eighth
largest army in the world.

More men under arms than in Iran.

More than France and Germany combined.

These men deployed to
the woods of a single American state,
Wisconsin, to hunt with
firearms, and no one was killed.

That number pales in comparison to the
750,000 who hunted the woods of
Pennsylvania and Michigan's
700,000 hunters,
all of whom
have now returned home safely.
Toss in a quarter million hunters
in West Virginia
and it literally establishes the fact
that the hunters of those four
states alone would comprise the
largest army in the world.
And then add in the total number
of hunters in the other
46 states.
It's millions more.

The point?

America will forever be safe
from foreign invasion
with that kind of home-grown
firepower .

it's not just
a way to fill the freezer..
It's a matter of
national security.

That's why all enemies,
foreign and domestic,
want to see us

Food for thought,
when next we
consider gun control.
Overall it's true,
so if we disregard some assumptions
that hunters
don't possess the same skills as soldiers,
the question would still remain...
what army of

2 million
would want to face
30, 40, 50 million armed citizens.


On a personal note:

I agree that MORE guns equate to MORE safety! "IF" the teachers and school security had been TRAINED to PROTECT the children as any free person in the modern world would when faced with a psychotic/sociopath determined to endanger and kill human beings, this would have been nipped in the bud. Period.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by antar

You are not taking into consideration how many travel there from another state to hunt. Just take the army of the NRA. The NRA only has 4 million members. That is 1%. Yes another example of how a industry tries to act like they are the huge army,Then buys what they want with money for the politicians from the gun industry,
edit on 19-12-2012 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:06 AM
There were nearly 927,465 deer tags for firearms season in Missouri for 2011
899,020 of those were residents of Missouri

MO dept of conservation

An estimated 270 million firearms in the U.S. and who knows how much that increased over the weekend
Where record sales were all across the country

edit on 12/19/2012 by geocom because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:22 AM
reply to post by geocom

Looking at the link you have.

Methods prohibited (in use or in possession) Self-loading firearms with capacity of more than 11 cartridges in magazine and chamber combined Ammunition propelling more than one projectile at a single discharge (such as buckshot) Full hard metal case projectiles Fully automatic firearms Any sighting device that casts a beam of light on the game Electronic calls or electronically activated calls Portions

You can't use a 30 round magazine for hunting. So why sell them and say it is for hunting?

And I think the total number of licences for hunting is flawed because they give out 1 or 2 free licences to anybody who owns a large enough piece of land. The total number of deer shot was only about 25% of the total licences gave away or bought.

What about deer harvest? Of the 236,973 deer taken during the firearms deer season, 225,404, or 95 percent, were taken by resident hunters.

edit on 19-12-2012 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:03 PM
reply to post by geocom


posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:04 PM
reply to post by geocom

I have to add that only counts those who chose to be counted, figure for each Missouri hunter he has at least 3 buddy's with him who are not registered...

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in