It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Money Bomb for all US Reps that vote against 2013 Gun Ban

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I think there should be a money bomb that contributes to the reelection funds set up for just about every US Representative. Not sure how it would be coordinated but if for instance a liberty PAC could set up a web presence and from the time the site is set up until the vote is done it would take in funds and when the vote is cast the total is split among all of the US representatives that voted against the bill. Straight into their reelection campaign coffers. It would make the news for sure and perhaps sway some of the votes. What do you folks think of this idea? Think it would fly or fall on its face?




posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by exitusstatuquo
 


Why would we reward a politician with more than they already have for doing their job?

SEems to me we should probably claw back most or all of these people's benefits and bring them back down to the common person's level.

~



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Sounds a helluva lot like illegal bribes........not that the practice isnt going strong in Washington already......but i think its more discreet



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
you can never ban guns, just make them harder to get.

but then again, what if the senators amended the constitution or repealed the second amendment like they did the volstead act.

then what. if you swore to uphold the constitution, you would uphold the repeal.

then you can potentially have civil war with "out of my cold dead hands" crowd.

you could be considered a domestic danger and threat to the constitution if you did.

would you really die so you can have an 100 round semi auto light machine gun.

that would end up being your choice.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
The NRA already pays them why should anyone else.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by exitusstatuquo
 


I love it. I always said we needed to buy ourselves some politicians if we want to get our foot in the door to BEGIN fixing this mess.

You sir, are a smart cookie. Not only would it work, but it would be the biggest thing to happen to US politics since digital voting machines.

EDIT:
That is what I would do if i won the lottery. Buy my self some politicians on certain issues. As much as I could afford to maybe have them vote locally against agenda 21, or nationally against what ever issue I could afford. I would bargain shop....but I would so do it.

I would also set aside some dough for a Presidential campaign I could contribute to and think it worth it.

With what was left over, I would go back to school.


edit on 4-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Absolutely sickening


Trying to buy votes regardless of what it is goes against the whole idea of your "supposedly" loved constitution.

Can you imagine the uproar if something like this was set up for the opposite reason.
All of you saying this is a good idea would be the first ones screaming bloody murder and saying how unAmerican it is.

I swear to god it almost seems like owning a gun lowers your IQ by at least half



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Indeed,sir. They are getting a little too big for their britches. They need to understand that the people they are betraying are their employer! Somehow the government has forgotten that it is for the people, by the people and of the people.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


The NRA does not work for the gun owner, they work for the firearms industry. The GOA on the other hand is growing like crazy since talk of the gun ban in this new bill. That guy Pratt had the nerve to get on Chris Mathews and say that the people of the United States need to be ready to fight against a government gone off the deep end. That will make membership explode. I predict that GOA membership will grow bt 5-10 million before this thing comes to a vote and that if a money bomb like this goes off to the tune of 5-10 million FRN and the reelection coffers of all US reps that will fight for our 2nd amendment rights there will be a message sent that can not be ignored..

1 US gun owners are armed to the teeth.
2 US gun owners have huge resources
3 US gun owners have huge numbers

The NRA wants to have the government put armed guards on the federal payroll into schools. That is big government conservative talk. GOA is telling it like it really is.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
How about a money bomb for the next victims of a school shooting?



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Guess what?

Banning firearms and limiting magazine capacities is BIG GOVERNMENT LIBERALISM.

The creation of "gun free zones" that are not so gun free is also the work of Big government liberalism.

Paying politicians not to screw the people?

Hell no.

Oh and BTW the NRA is the creation of BIG government liberalism that is how all lobbyists are created.

As the size and power of government increases the more money those politicians get the more power they take the more money they get.

SO I got a bomb for those US reps the F bomb for not doing their jobs and their jobs are not to play god no one elected congress to play god.

All rights we have comes from the creator not congress, not political pundits, and not what my next door neighbor says I can own.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
It's a good proactive idea but you'll never have the cash power of the corporations. Any money you'd raise would be pittance compared to what usually exchanges the hands of lobbyists.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Crowd sourcing works for everyone. Victims of murder are often given a lot of donations because it makes the news and people pour out their hearts through their wallets. If people care they can show it with their shared resources to the effort.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SteveR
 


The money is only part of the message. The other part is the show of support and the news it would generate if it was even modestly successful I think.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by randomname
 


If the founding fathers included it then it's important. I will be more than willing to die for what they believed in than what the current goverment is doing. Would you rather follow minds that laid the foundation for one of the greatest natios on Earth or the minds that are destroying what they built. Again like you said that's on you.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
Guess what?

Banning firearms and limiting magazine capacities is BIG GOVERNMENT LIBERALISM.

The creation of "gun free zones" that are not so gun free is also the work of Big government liberalism.

Paying politicians not to screw the people?

Hell no.

Oh and BTW the NRA is the creation of BIG government liberalism that is how all lobbyists are created.

As the size and power of government increases the more money those politicians get the more power they take the more money they get.

SO I got a bomb for those US reps the F bomb for not doing their jobs and their jobs are not to play god no one elected congress to play god.

All rights we have comes from the creator not congress, not political pundits, and not what my next door neighbor says I can own.


the right of freedom of religion does not come from the creator, and for that matter, some of the ten commandments strictly prohibits our various freedoms in our bill of rights.
besides, a creator would have more choices than "obey everything he says, or you will suffer eternal damnation in life and in death"...not much freedom there.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


Your argument seems absurd to me. This would work like any PAC contribution. Individuals and corporations can donate to a PAC. The PAC says in its advertising site that it will give these donations to the reelection of our representatives that will work to secure our rights. The PAC is rewarding behavior that is in the interest of the contributor. Nothing illegal about it.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


No one was talking about religion was in reference to these 2 documents:


When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.



We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed


The creator.


We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


secure the blessings of liberty.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Starred for copious use of the Declaration of Independence, I like to see it referenced in the 2nd amendment debate. It gives the argument some historical perspective that the video gamed out TV addicted lazy non thinkers with little understanding of from where their liberties flow will miss. Most just do not understand, but the history reading, thinking, concerned for their liberty crowd understand completely.

edit on 4-1-2013 by exitusstatuquo because: added some punctuation



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
what if the senators amended the constitution or repealed the second amendment like they did the volstead act.
then what.


The People approved the 18th amendment to the constitution BEFORE the Volstead Act in 1920 which was named for the Representative sponsoring the legislation (NOT the Senate) and provided enabling regulation to enforce the already existing18th amendment. Your argument is both uninformed and deficient - a moot point.


Originally posted by randomname
would you really die so you can have an 100 round semi auto light machine gun.


As stated, your comment is both oxymoron and nonsequitur - "semi auto light machine gun" is a contradiction in terms on its face.

ganjoa
THi



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join