It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by PrincessTofu
Hurtado was among hundreds of Bay Area residents who dropped off their firearms at buyback locations in Oakland and San Francisco on Saturday, collecting $200 cash for their weapon, no questions asked.
Perhaps they should have gun buy-back programs like this in every city, every day of the week. I think that could get guns out of the hands of some bad people.edit on 20-12-2012 by PrincessTofu because: (no reason given)edit on 20-12-2012 by PrincessTofu because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by NavyDoc
I believe in leadership by example. Before Obama talks about any gun bans, he should disarm the secret service to show us all that we do not need guns to be safe. Any politician who talks about gun control while surrounded by bodyguards armed with machine guns and sniper rifles is a hypocrite.
Originally posted by Siberbat
So what's the answer folks? Those of you who are so insulted, what is the answer? Do we arm everyone and have an all out melee? You gonna forciblly remove the criminal element out of your communities? Let vigilanties roam the streets in the middle of the night? None of that is feasible. Weekend Rambos who wish to feel power in the palm of thier hands. Let's be honest, the propsed "assult rifle ban" is not about the 2nd ammendment...its about control freaks with egos as large as their magazine capacity, who want to keep their "toys" because its fun and they paid hard earned money for 'em. And by god, they gonna use 'em!
I don't think that is what the founding fathers had in mind. In fact, they may say, "My God what have we done." See many don't give a second thought as to what could happen if their weapons fall into the wrong hands. Where do criminals get these weaponse in the first place...by burglerizing law abiding gun owner's homes. So, we should ask ourselves, "Is it really necessary to have weapon which can empty a 30 round clip as fast as one can pull the trigger?"
If it is a matter of home defense, less is really more. Why use 30 rounds when 3 could do the job just fine?
I'm not anti-gun, and I believe in concealed carry to protect oneself and others. I just don't see the sanity of having a semi-auto rifle with high capacity clips. What's wrong with bolt action rifles and the trustly revolver?
Originally posted by Hefficide
The danger, now, is not just the debate over what constitutes an "assault weapon" - [color= red]but also what constitutes "mental health".
That statement is completely insensitive to the victims and their families. I think you need a mental health evaluation. /sarcasm. Slippery slope indeed. Corrupt Executive Branch? All three branches are corrupt.
Originally posted by Helious
I'd rather he directly address our failing economy, our repressive government and the complete and total lack of transparency in our corrupt executive branch. But hey, that's just me.
Originally posted by Boosted90
And after all of the gun threads in the past week, people still cant differentiate between SEMI automatic and FULL automatic. FULL automatic/assault rifles are already banned. ALL AR-15 rifles sold today are SEMI automatic. Semi - one trigger pull, one shot. Full - keeps shooting until you release the trigger or run out of ammo. "I support them banning automatic weapons" well good because it was already done.
Originally posted by littled16
reply to post by AxelAxel
While we cannot know the future, we can certainly make educated guesses about the possibilities. If the average citizen is no longer able to arm themselves in such a way as to defend against a military type takeover it would be much easier for any corrupt government that would attempt such a takeover to execute such an action.