It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Kentucky Sheriff to Obama: No Gun Control in My County

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 09:51 AM
i always find it strange why a person who is termed "liberal" is somehow against the 2nd amendment. that's like saying all conservatives are against abortion. the term "liberal" on ATS, is now being used just like it is on FOX NEWS. ATS has in it's title DENY does not mean embrace it. and yet, embracing ignorance of what liberals believe, and catagorizing as "THEM", "THEY" seems to have risen sharply, since i became a member back in 2007.
edit on 12-1-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 10:16 AM
Even though the matter does not really concern me for i am not american,
but i have to agree with the concept of gun control.

Let me explain.

In my country, if you shoot a robber or even your attacker in self- defence,
it is YOU that´s going to jail.
The villain gets compensations, because he was hurt and blah blah blah.
This annoys me, badly. We are NOT allowed to protect our property or family.
Instead we are expected to run, call the authorities and wait for them to deal with it.
Unfortunately, in some remote regions it will take up to an hour
for the police to arrive at the scene.
Need i say, THIS SUCKS!
I would seriously like to own a gun so i could at least try to protect my loved ones.

Controlling WHO actually gets to own a gun, that´s another matter, and i support it.
There is nothing wrong with responsible, stable people owning a gun or fifty,
but many people are not so, on the contrary.
Even a child can drive a car if told how it operates, but if not told HOW to DRIVE it,
the game´s over pretty quick, probably in the worst possible way imaginable.

My humble personal opinion.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:16 AM
From what I have read and heard, the whole gun control debate going on now is basically discussions about enforcement of existing law...
All sources I have read is that..and the loony right demanding they are comin to take your guns or whatnot...but I have not seen any credible federal consideration on this.

I might be missing something of course...but this, to me, is just crazy people just being crazy in such talks..winning political points off those gullible enough to think Piers Morgan is the president and his views will somehow effect federal politics.

So..well done Kentucky gun control that violates constitution...also, while your at it, why not make a controversial stance of saying you won't have people force implanted with brain control chips and other crazy conspiracy theories..

Again, I could be missing something...can someone show me an actual bill or order from the potus discussing removing guns to enlighten me?

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:27 AM

Originally posted by WIKDHOTSNOMAN
Great responses to Piers' tactics. I just wish that at the end of the video when Piers says something along the lines of I commend you for protecting your freedom. The marine even looked like he wanted to say I FOUGHT FOR THIS VERY FREEDOM OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT ALONG WITH THE OTHERS... jack wagon limey douche.

They fight for more than the 2nd amendment...they also fight for the 1st..the right to speak your mind.
I find it ironic that people scream out against Piers speaking his thoughts, to the point of wanting him because he has issue with the (murky) 2nd amendment, people demand to corrupt the 1st and persecute people because of their thoughts.

I find it far more dangerous that people want to put federal consequences on thoughts than wanting to make tougher gun laws. tougher gun laws don't effect me (not a gun owner), but totalitarian thought control does threaten me directly and in a big way.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 03:03 PM
reply to post by LionOfGOD

Unfortunately, in some remote regions it will take up to an hour
for the police to arrive at the scene.

If you are really that far out in the boonies you should just shoot em and then bury em. No point in calling the cops.

Some places in the US do have that requirement, "duty to retreat" they call it.

Best to move somewhere where people think as you do, like Indiana, which has a relatively new castle law.

Castle law link


Today most states have some kind of castle law. The stronger laws do not require homeowners to attempt to retreat before using force to protect their domicile, and there are a select few states that have very strong stand-your-ground laws allowing citizens to use force in their car or at work without first trying to retreat.

States like Texas allow citizens protecting their homes, car, or place of business or employment to use force – including lethal force – when an intruder has unlawfully entered or is attempting to enter using force; is attempting to remove someone from the home, car, or workplace by force; or is attempting to commit a crime such as rape, murder, or robbery. An attempt to retreat is not required before a citizen is justified in using force against the invasive party in Texas.

The state of Florida has such a strong Castle Doctrine that the dwelling being protected does not need to have a roof; can be mobile or immobile; and can be as temporary as a tent.

Other states with strong Castle Doctrine and stand-your-ground laws include: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington.

As a criminal the only real question to ask yourself if you are a considering breaking into an unsuspecting victim’s home is, “Do I feel lucky?” Well do ya, Punk?

I fit in here so much better than CA or MI...

Indiana law here

edit on 12-1-2013 by kawika because: corectolated spel'n err

edit on 12-1-2013 by kawika because: add quote

edit on 12-1-2013 by kawika because: added link

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 03:11 PM

Originally posted by PsykoOps
So he supports illicit images of children? I mean it's free speech after all. Posession and distributing that is. Not making. How bout nukes for the people too? Those amendments have been adjusted to modern times for good reasons.

The people should have the exact same weapons as the feds. That being said no one including governments should have nukes.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 06:13 PM

Originally posted by Helious
I was going to forward it to my local sheriff but then I remembered in live in Chicago.

Haha Cook Co here as well. It's interesting, county sheriffs actually reign supreme in their county, and can essentially boot the FBI right out, as I understand it. They really do have a great deal more power than most realize. But yeah, we'll never get one of those good ol' boy redneck sheriffs here unfortunately!

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:17 PM

Originally posted by PsykoOps
So he supports illicit images of children? I mean it's free speech after all. Posession and distributing that is. Not making. How bout nukes for the people too? Those amendments have been adjusted to modern times for good reasons.

Then freedom of speech and press only apply to things spoken in old English, and written with quil pens

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 09:07 PM
I wish I could give Sheriff Peyman a flag & star, but I guess the OP will get them instead.

Well done, Sheriff.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 10:30 PM

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by scrounger

arm 2 (ärm)
1. A weapon, especially a firearm: troops bearing arms; ICBMs, bombs, and other nuclear arms.
2. A branch of a military force: infantry, armor, and other combat arms.

Source. Say again?

reply to post by Alien Abduct

You quote me but you didn't read what I wrote?
edit on 12/1/2013 by PsykoOps because: (no reason given)

Wow I thought the theme here was "deny ignorance".

If you sir continue to claim that a gun is the same as a ICBM and that the second amendment in its pure form justifies owning both as "the right to bear arms" then I am stumped.

I (and others) have given clear evidence, historical context, and practical definitions on this topic,

You continue to stretch anything you can find in a clearly feeble attempt to justify ignoring one of the bill of rights, but one that the framers found to be so important as to make it NUMBER TWO of the ten amendments.

So again tell me how the NRA, the supreme court, and the average person on the street can see that a rifle (even a bushmaster) and a nuke/tank/napalm/ect are not remotely the same thing or covered under the second amendment but you cannot?

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 10:47 PM
reply to post by PsykoOps

about your first post....what kind of people do you wish to control.....with statements like that.....stop thinking like a small person, I want you to think like a big

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:17 AM

Originally posted by DarKPenguiN

Originally posted by Tazkven
reply to post by DarKPenguiN

I got hit by two road blocks in the past 3 weeks, one in Tompkinsville, Ky and the other in Fountain Run, Ky (yea I get around
) both at night with many police and troopers present, they asked for my driver's license and proof of insurance asked me where I was headed which was Louisville, Ky and sent me on my way, No stop and frisk, no searches, was just inconvenient ... I was making good time

In fact my entire life living here and hitting rural roadblocks I have never been searched ...

*Knock on wood*

I got pulled over in London, Ky by a Trooper for speeding, was rolling back to, you guessed it Louisville, KY from Gatlinburg, Tn He was super cool, wrote me a ticket but lowered the speed and disregarded the seat belt thing.

With the stuff you went through here I would be angry to. I am sorry that crap happened to you and don't blame ya bro I have never even heard of anything like that or the dancing law either ... consider me wowed.
edit on 11-1-2013 by Tazkven because: (no reason given)

LOL- Yeah it was pretty insane.

We moved there and found out it was a "moist" county and thought- No big deal. We drove to Richmond and bought about 10 cases of beer and a Half Gallon of everything and went about setting up a "home bar". (not that we are huge drinkers but since it would be a 2 and a half hour trip to buy anything we figured we would get a years supply at a time.

Later I learned we committed a Felony. So by merely driving to a place in the SAME STATE and buying a legal product I COULD have lost my right to vote AND own a Firearm (plus I kind of do not like the idea of having a Felony and possibly going to prison)-

Yeah, scary State. We took a loss on our home and my wife took a lower (by far) paying job to get out of there. Lasted about three years.

But man, was the State beautiful. Loved going out to my yard and looking into the foothills and just...Jaw dropping. But I felt like we were in an open prison. =(

The law is 7 cases of beet per person over 21 in the vehicle. Well, I"m not sure anyone really knows for sure. I was in court several years ago for a traffic thing and listened to a case where they said they had a conviction for 8 but had to let them go at 6 and the person in court had 7. He was released with no charges. As to the other stuff you have brought up...I've lived in Pulaski and Rockcastle Co for 21 years. I have traveled to many other counties and have yet to be caught up on a road block. I did hear of one close to me on new years morning about 2AM several years ago but did not see it. I had heard about a road block close to me not long ago looking for some jail escapees but again didn't see it. Maybe this happens more in the west part of the state. I really don't get out there much.

I have never heard about this dancing thing except on TV. Pulaski County was dry for years and had several dance halls. They sell package alcohol in Somerset as of this summer and the boogie barns are still doing just fine.

I live very close to the sheriff in the OP. The SO in my county has said the same thing about all the gun stuff.

In the part of the stare this sheriff is in I"d say he is no tan Oath Keeper. But he can still be attached to some other organization.

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:24 AM

Originally posted by beezzer
So someone expresses their rights, expresses their right to keep their rights and it is met with hyperbole?

Has that what the debate has come to?

Yes...When their logic is lacking, they begin character attacking!!!

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:41 AM

Originally posted by DarKPenguiN

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by exitusstatuquo

Awesome. Hats off to this man.

ROCK. I love my country.

We are now becoming what we needed to be. Real Americans. Less flags and fire works and more defiance to imposition and fascism.

I love this country.

I am feeling great! I cant wait to get home!


edit on 11-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

..You do realize that Jackson Co. Ky will throw you in jail for having more than 2 cases of Beer in your home? Not "real American" sounding to me.

I am really laughing now that I know this is a Jackson County Sheriff- (They have it worse than laurel County which is a Police State if there ever was one)- This "Sheriff" doesn't mind handing out Felony's to ADULTS drinking at home - Where they forever lose their right to bear arms and vote (Felons cannot vote in KY)- So its okay to take someones Voting rights away and their right to forever own a firearm for...(get ready) possessing some legal BEER-

Yup that is one mighty "American" Sheriff. I suggest you move there- Or read the jackson County Topix for information about that "Flag supporting" County.
edit on 11-1-2013 by DarKPenguiN because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-1-2013 by DarKPenguiN because: (no reason given)

No they will not. The law in that dry county much like many others is you can not sell or buy alcohol. You can not drink in public. But your home is not public and there has never been a case in mu 20+ years in the state pertaining to alcohol volume in a home unless the person was selling it.

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:03 AM
reply to post by PsykoOps

That argument is worthless, and you can trust that the founding fathers had enough intelligence and foresight to assume that weapons would advance. You are also forgetting the Militia act.

The fact is they intended for us to be able to keep whatever guns were issued to the military. They would not have adjusted it. If they were alive today and viewing what was going on with the government they would support people having the weapons we do now (maybe even more), and would probably be very opposed to the direction the government is taking.. since you know, it's exactly what they warned against.

You are dead wrong on this issue.

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:13 AM

Originally posted by PsykoOps
So he supports illicit images of children? I mean it's free speech after all. Posession and distributing that is. Not making. How bout nukes for the people too? Those amendments have been adjusted to modern times for good reasons.

starting off with a straw man fallacy, "illicit images of children" is in no way covered under free speech, but many families have naked pictures of their kids when they were little. anyways, not sure how you even thought to bring that up O.o

nukes cannot be used in a defensive manner, nor can most explosives without causing large amounts of collateral. they require special training and equipment, guns don't.

banning guns increases crime, and allows the government to become more corrupt over time.

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:34 AM
My SO lives in Japan and I spent two months there over last summer. Firearms are *illegal* in Japan for everyone, except the military. Cops can't have guns, no civilian can have guns, nothing. Japan has the second lowest crime rate in the world. Coincidence? Are they a "socialist globalist dictatorship?" Well, their government is crappy, but I'd say its actually above average for the developed world. The country with the lowest crime in the world is Singapore, and its extremely difficult to get a gun there. You have to write an application for a gun, explain which gun you want and what you are going to use it for. If you say "self-defense," your application is tossed in the trash. Guns are only allowed on a case-by-case basis and under extenuating circumstances.

So why do people get so defensive about have guns in the US? It seems that without worker unions to defend you at work, with wages that have been stagnant or declining since Reagan (30 years), and an increasingly corporate-dominated government, people feel like they have no control. Gun people want guns because it gives them a feeling of power and control. We need to get rid of guns, but we also need to address the problems that cause people to want guns- lack of control over their lives. Get everyone free or cheap universal healthcare (like Japan has). Cut CEO salaries and pay the workers more.Curb the power of corporations, and tax their profits to provide services for us all, like cheap, hi-speed transportation (like Japan has). Etc.

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 06:43 AM

Originally posted by PsykoOps
How bout nukes for the people too?

The right to bear arms equal to those brought against you.

The right to bear arms is not limited to the purview of the Governing body seeking to Dictate you.

Sorry, your argument holds no weight.

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 07:32 AM

Originally posted by nihonjin
Firearms are *illegal* in Japan for everyone, except the military. Cops can't have guns, no civilian can have guns, nothing. Japan has the second lowest crime rate in the world. Coincidence? .


Many of these countries would have low homicide rates even if you flooded the public with firearms. Its a difference of attitudes and cultures. Mexico and Russia have strict gun laws. What are their homicide rates? Canada has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world after the US. What is their homicide rate?

You see it here in the US, too. Several US states have homicide rates that are roughly in line with Western Europe, but have gun ownership rates as high as you'll find anywhere. And, of course, most of our cities have huge problems, despite having gun laws that are far more strict than the rural areas. Nationally, the homicide rate has dropped about 50% over the last 20 years, despite the fact that over 100 million new guns have been sold in the same time frame, most of which are probably handguns and 'assault' rifles.

The point is, in many cases...and its certainly true in the US...there is no direct correlation between gun ownership rates and the homicide rate.

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 10:06 AM
reply to post by nihonjin

Japan was disarmed many years ago. What they ended up doing is developing martial arts with bare feet and fists, maybe a farm implement or two. I would not say those people are not armed, they do not have guns,or swords, but they are certainly armed and as dangerous as someone with a metal weapon if they get close to you.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in