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 milkyway12
reply to post by Observor
An Assualt rifle ban, if brought before the Supreme Court, most likely would be found unconstitutional. Every man in America is a soldier. A militiaman. Constitutionally any way.
The whole point of the second amendment is so the people can maintain a fighting force. A militia. Not just so we can hunt, but to fight.
If the first amendment applies to modern devices and technology, so does the 2nd amendment.
I know that guy killed 28 people, and i don't mean to sound heartless, but I didn't do it.
The only solution is to put armed guards in schools. Should we have too? No. We also shouldn't have to have submarines lurking around each others borders ready to annihilate millions upon millions of CHILDREN and women, but guess what? We do.
Originally posted by g146541
A war between the people who have guns and the people who don't...
Should be quick.
I guess there is something good about the US making so many wars around the globe, we have many battle hardened types discharged into the general public, aka the militia.
These men might be disarmed but, the grabbers just may run into some claymores as they are walking away.
Soldiers aren't dumb, them Afghans taught us something we forgot.edit on 28-12-2012 by g146541 because: No such thing as a fair fight
Originally posted by DataWraith
Just get America to stop producing ALL weapons PERIOD.
That way no innocent school child gets massacred at class, no young person will join a gang, no man or woman would be held up at a liquor store, no soldier would commit suicide, there'd be no threat of nuclear war.
But then war IS the biggest business for the US Elite's and every little helps fill their pockets.
I am not going to be able to read 8 pages right now to see if someone straightened you out, so....
Originally posted by MrSpad
Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
Originally posted by MrSpad
Originally posted by Xcathdra
All this bill is is a reauthorization of the Brady bill, which lapsed under President Bush and was not pursued by Democrats when they held the government.
Yes this the same law that was in place from 1994 until 2004. So if people who managed to live from1994 till 2004 could come forward and tell us about those dark years of civil war and FEMA camps it might tell us what will happen if this passed again. Those must have been dark days.
And what happened during those years? Columbine. And no, this is not even close to being the same thing. This is an all out assault on the second amendment and will lead to an eventual ban of ALL firearms.
No it is excactly the same law. Word for word.
Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by: Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test; Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
no need for high capacity magazines
all these guns really provide, in any practical sense, is the ability of the owner to fantasize about using them and to feel like a tough guy
and statistics show they will more lilkely be used by the owner on a family member, or agaisnt the owner than on an intruder
"happiness is a warm gun...bang bang shoot shoot"
Originally posted by fweezerburn
reply to post by TrueAmerican
Announced on coasttocoast am tonight, anyone posting or talking about this issue on FB will be banned. Remember Feinstein is from CA and so is FB.