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 seeker1963
reply to post by sxt004
Please stop calling them liberals.....They are far from liberal and I think "progressive authoritarians" is much more appropriate and accurate when it comes to describing them....
Look around, do you see the people? Are they formed in any manner close to properly? Seems it's not so much a properly formed citizenry as a group of self absorbed vigilantes who are making the most noise.
Article I, the part of the document dealing with the duties of the legislative branch:
Section 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.
In other words, the government could not ban the importation of slaves for 20 years after the adoption of the Constitution. And as the designated year 1808 approached, those opposed to slavery began making plans for legislation that would outlaw the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
The Whiskey Rebellion, or Whiskey Insurrection, was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791, during the presidency of George Washington. Farmers who used their leftover grain and corn in the form of whiskey as a medium of exchange were forced to pay a new tax. The tax was a part of treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton's program to increase central government power, in particular to fund his policy of assuming the war debt of those states which had failed to pay. The farmers who resisted, many war veterans, were fighting for the principles of the American Revolution, in particular against taxation without local representation.
Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by WP4YT
Truth is, they did have automatic weapons back then called gatling guns which were far more deadly than any automatic weapon that can be purchased legally today!
The Gatling gun was designed by the American inventor Dr. Richard J. Gatling in 1861 and patented November 4, 1862
Even if they would have had them back then, they were not highly portable weapons.
Originally posted by pacifier2012
Yes, but the people didn't have an Army then, they were the Army. Now there is an Army.
So privately armed citizens no longer protect the country from invasion, therefore they no longer need guns for that purpose.
Originally posted by Sounds_of_Silence
You don't need an assault rifle to go hunting deer, you don't even need a 10 magazine clip to hunt one...but a privately listed company such as Mondanto can have their own private army...
"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson
Originally posted by howmuch4another
Originally posted by ADVISOR
Originally posted by jademegjosh
americans want bigger and better
Not true, I own a .45 pistol.
No other firearms.
You have heard what they say about a feller who only owns one gun, right?
"Beware the man who only has one gun. He probably knows how to use it!"
i love that quote but I will add one..
"the only reason to have a pistol is to fight your way back to your rifle" :lol
"the only reason to have a pistol is to fight your way back to your rifle"