Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Guns violate our inalienable rights, rather than protect them

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


I have tried, and failed to see the point in your vastly flawed argument, if that's all you have, the perhaps it's time to hang it up. At least until you can give a valid reason for such rhetoric.




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 10:03 AM
link   
It'll be funny when the crap hit's the fan, and the government militia is rounding every American up and throwing them into Fema camps, watch how many of these people who are against the 2nd amendment try and make friends with gun owners, or beg them to protect them and their family from the police state.

Same thing if we have a worldwide power outage, people with guns will be the only ones with a chance, and you'll see people like the OP'er change their tune right away when they realize they can't get anything to eat. While gun owners will be eating a nice fat Buck that they brought down with a hunting rifle.

OP'er you'll be begging for food in a SHTF scenario, you won't last a month without a gun, unless your a hardcore survivalist, and you don't sound like one. Your family and your possessions will be stripped from you, by the group of lunatics that make their way to your house like a bunch of zombies. You might want make friends with gun owners, not the opposite, because I have a feeling in 10 years or less gun owners are gonna be the only ones with half a chance of surviving , or getting out of the U.S. or living off the grid. Better yet you should buy yourself a couple of hunting rifles at least for yourself just in case.

People who are all for giving up our 2nd amendment rights what do they think will happen in an end days scenario? That the government is gonna take care of them? Yea, they'll take care of you all right.


They'll be turning you into Soylent Green.
edit on 6-1-2013 by Nola213 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


"datroof" of the matter is, is criminals are probaly licking their lips at the thought of a nation with grannie's to rape with no dire means to defend themselves. How many guns have saved lives? I'm sure many of the angry gun owners are angry because they or their loved ones have had their life saved by choosing to have a firearm. Take away that choice, you can't shoot down gov. drones, you can't stop gangs from taking you hostage, you can't defend yourself from corrupt power abusing cops and you certainly can't blow the brains out of your rapist. All natural given rights that should not be infringed upon.

I rue the day when these coward mother f*****s walk into a prison and open fire on murderers and child rapists, Just once I'd like to read "20 criminals shot dead for no bloody reason. School kids rejoice as world becomes safer place"



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:09 AM
link   
it's quite amusing to me that some are so critical of this thread, when it's philospical opposite is the "lets all bash one out on the biscuit" (british for a circle-jerk, for those who are unaware) thread of boasting how hard they are on the "why i need my ar/ak thread"... or many others of the same ilk
nice one op, i often enjoy your posts



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by DaTroof
 


When I point a gun at you, what do you lose?
provided i have one to point back at you, nothing.


When gunplay occurs, what usually ends up getting lost?
since 'gunplay' requires more than one person, usually the loss is a life.


The psychological effect of killing a man(in defense), what right does that infringe.
is this really a question?
if so, none.


1. OK, and supposing you don't?
2. Correct.
3. Yes, it is a question. The correct answer is that it violates your Pursuit of Happiness. Now you have to be worried about retaliation, and depending on how much family the individual had, you may have to confront his/her parents or children in court for a civil suit.
edit on 4-1-2013 by DaTroof because: (no reason given)

problem is ... all of those IFs occur AFTER the fact, IF they occur at all.
as for being without ... i have 4 assaults and 3 rapes in my history to help ensure i'm not.

and no, shooting an intruder hasn't violated my PoH one bit.
her presence requiring being shot certainly did though.

worry about retaliation ???? hardly ... bring it.
it's been 3+yrs and we're all in the same town and we do not cross paths, ever.
(and the above isn't by my own avoidance, either)






top topics
 
8
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join