It’s Time for Gun Confiscation in America

page: 1
159
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+177 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   
I think it is time to confiscate guns in America….at least from a certain group of Americans.



Let’s put this situation into perspective. If the intention of stronger gun control is to make the country (and the world) a safer place then government is the obvious place to start, right? If anyone needs to be disarmed it’s the most dangerous, murderous group in the world that has the most advanced weapons and the most blood on its hands…the US government and the military industrial complex.

Law abiding citizens don’t kill innocent people with guns…tyrannical governments and lunatics do. Aren’t those the people who should be disarmed? Do we want guns in the hands of people with a record of violence a mile long? Do we want guns in the hands of narcissistic thugs who kill innocent civilians out of greed? I prefer guns in the hands of honest, hard-working people whose only intention is self-preservation. Isn’t that what America’s founding fathers had in mind? Weren’t we warned about this potential threat?

Is it a coincidence that the most heavily armed, violent group in the world wants to take away your right to self-defense? What might their intentions be??


If guns aren’t an effective crime deterrent and good method of self-preservation then why does the government use them?



Let’s be honest…if you were a bad guy, which sign would you rather see?



I think I know which sign the government wants to see…the question is WHY?



+3 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
If tyrannical governments are the ones who's guns should be taken away
If the purpose of civilians possessing firearms is to oppose tyrannical governments....

Why are you sitting there at your computer talking about it?


+30 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedog1973
If tyrannical governments are the ones who's guns should be taken away
If the purpose of civilians possessing firearms is to oppose tyrannical governments....

Why are you sitting there at your computer talking about it?


Well....obviously because I am a keyboard warrior, right?


Move along...nothing to see here.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 
They want to shame us into blind submission via political correctness. The radicals are using passive aggressiveness in a way that was completely unthinkable even as recently as 15 years ago. If they are successful the only ones lawfully able to possess firearms will be the ones pushing the agenda, and they will use the politically correct MSM hypnotized sheep to do their dirty work for them!



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
It is starting to look like they should raise the age to buy a gun, at least in northern states. Reading through many stories it would appear that a certain age group think that a gun is only for killing people in mass. In the south we are taught gun safety and are taught that they are tools for filling the freezer. I am generalizing of course. I am positive the northern states do the same,at least in rural areas that hunt with them. The 20-30 generation are increasingly painting targets on their foreheads as potential terrorists. Take it easy, i am generalizing. The fact that 99% of them are fine does not negate the fact that this age group is the one playing Charles Manson.


+13 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



I prefer guns in the hands of honest, hard-working people whose only intention is self-preservation. Isn’t that what America’s founding fathers had in mind? Weren’t we warned about this potential threat?


Quoted for truth.

S & F

This should be an interesting read.


+9 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by littled16
 



They want to shame us into blind submission via political correctness.


And the gullible, uninformed or willfully ignorant are lapping it up.



If they are successful the only ones lawfully able to possess firearms will be the ones pushing the agenda…


And then what??



Have we not learned from the actions of Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, etc? We know what happens next!



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
you make an interesting point, maybe the politicians should lead the way and show us how well a gun ban would work. disarm all the secret service agents no more armed security for any politician.
it`s time for these decision makers to put their money where their mouth is and start walking the walk and stop just talking the talk all the time.


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmiec
 



It is starting to look like they should raise the age to buy a gun, at least in northern states. Reading through many stories it would appear that a certain age group think that a gun is only for killing people in mass. In the south we are taught gun safety and are taught that they are tools for filling the freezer. I am generalizing of course. I am positive the northern states do the same,at least in rural areas that hunt with them. The 20-30 generation are increasingly painting targets on their foreheads as potential terrorists. Take it easy, i am generalizing. The fact that 99% of them are fine does not negate the fact that this age group is the one playing Charles Manson.


What will raising the age solve? What would an appropriate age be to prevent lunatics from killing people? Do people become less likely to snap when they get older?

Maybe we should raise the drinking age to 31, too. That should decrease the rate of fatal car accidents, right? I wonder what else we could do with this logic???

BTW…the government not only gives 17-18 year old kids guns, they also teach them tactics to effectively use guns (and even deadlier weapons) to kill people. Maybe we should raise the military enlistment age to 35?



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by spacedog1973
If tyrannical governments are the ones who's guns should be taken away
If the purpose of civilians possessing firearms is to oppose tyrannical governments....

Why are you sitting there at your computer talking about it?


Well....obviously because I am a keyboard warrior, right?


Move along...nothing to see here.


Pretty much what I expected. Can you answer the question or not?
Why don't you defend your rights with your second amdendant firearms. Or is that a ridiculous question. Not that you're a keyboard warrior, but you like others here, talk big, but do nothing in the face of the oppression that you claim your guns are needed for.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tardacus
you make an interesting point, maybe the politicians should lead the way and show us how well a gun ban would work. disarm all the secret service agents no more armed security for any politician.
it`s time for these decision makers to put their money where their mouth is and start walking the walk and stop just talking the talk all the time.


Wonderful idea!!

The most vocal anti-gun rhetoric comes from the biggest hypocrites. I think they should go first.



When Schumer turns in his guns I will consider turning in one or two of mine.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I usually find the pro-Democrat camp are the usual ones who ask why don't you trust your government, don't you know they are there to look out for you.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmiec
 


i hail from the north, and was taught proper gun usage lets not divide us more than we already have been by the media and its tactics. we should be discussing how to keep guns for all Americans, and what what the plan for action is to keep those guns, we should be trying to find away to do this with words and diplomacy. but when the war machine comes knocking we should have a plan for that as well.


there is no north and south, there is no pro gun, anti gun. There is no left and right. There is no Tomorrow.

There only is us and them. And them tends to use there guns when ever they dont get what they want. Us will be effected when them impose there will.


+7 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by spacedog1973
 



Pretty much what I expected. Can you answer the question or not?
Why don't you defend your rights with your second amdendant firearms. Or is that a ridiculous question.


….Because nobody has knocked on my door and demanded my firearms - yet.

Are you advocating a preemptive strike? No thanks!!




Not that you're a keyboard warrior, but you like others here, talk big, but do nothing in the face of the oppression that you claim your guns are needed for.


And you know this about me based on my ATS posts in this thread?


WOW!


Troll somewhere else, please, before I lose my temper and start shedding ATS points.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by spacedog1973
 



Pretty much what I expected. Can you answer the question or not?
Why don't you defend your rights with your second amdendant firearms. Or is that a ridiculous question.


….Because nobody has knocked on my door and demanded my firearms - yet.

Are you advocating a preemptive strike? No thanks!!


Waiting for a knock at the door would be far too late and ineffectual and far too late to have any effect on any overall oppression. Personally, no i don't advocate a preemptive strike. I think the idea of protecting freedom on the end of a barrel is foolish.



Not that you're a keyboard warrior, but you like others here, talk big, but do nothing in the face of the oppression that you claim your guns are needed for.

Originally posted by seabagAnd you know this about me based on my ATS posts in this thread?


How have you used your second amendment guns to protect yourself from an oppressive government. I make no assumptions otherwise than assume your good sense. I expect you haven't used your guns to do this, because I suspect you're not foolish.


WOW!


Troll somewhere else, please, before I lose my temper and start shedding ATS points.


Lose your temper, throw the toys from your pram, throw a tantrum, be my guest. Or get over yourself and engage in discussion with someone you disagree with if you can manage it.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
I usually find the pro-Democrat camp are the usual ones who ask why don't you trust your government, don't you know they are there to look out for you.


That is humorous.

Since I am supposed to trust them with my life and the lives of my family members, I would like to ask the government to point to one instance where it truly had my best interest at heart or where it actually DID WHAT IT SAID IT WAS GOING TO DO.

Just ONE!!


+14 more 
posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by spacedog1973
 



Waiting for a knock at the door would be far too late and ineffectual and far too late to have any effect on any overall oppression. Personally, no i don't advocate a preemptive strike. I think the idea of protecting freedom on the end of a barrel is foolish.


You asked why I don’t “defend my rights with my 2nd amendment firearms.” I didn’t say I’m doing nothing right now. I said there is no need to use my firearms. Unlike a tyrannical government, I don’t believe in shooting first and asking questions later. I am much more prudent and rational!




How have you used your second amendment guns to protect yourself from an oppressive government. I make no assumptions otherwise than assume your good sense. I expect you haven't used your guns to do this, because I suspect you're not foolish.


There has been no need to do so!!

Stop trying to play ‘gotcha’ games…as if you have a point.

My question is simple…if getting rid of guns is supposed to stop murders then why should we not start with the government which is responsible for more death than all American citizens combined?



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I do not always agree with your posts, but I do always find them to be well thought out and intelligently presented. In this case, I do agree. I am old enough to remember taking my 22 rifle to school and keeping it in my locker so I could hunt rabbits on the way home from school. Nobody ran in fear when they saw me coming (not even the rabbits) and nobody raised a stink about it. We have had semi auto assault weapons for quite a while now, but in the past 30 years or so something has changed. It is not the weapons.

IF YOU WANT TO STOP PEOPLE FROM MURDERING WITH GUNS, YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE PENALTIES FOR DOING SO SEVERE ENOUGH THAT IT WILL DETER THEM!!

The biggest mistake we have made is to hand out stiffer judicial penalties for drug dealers than we do for murderers. We need to make the death penalty mandatory for people who have a gun in their possession during the commission of a crime or those who are guilty of murdering someone. Furthermore we should make sure that penalty is carried out within 60 days of sentencing. We have the high tech forensic technology to make sure that we have sentenced the correct people. We do not need to keep folks on death row for thirty years waiting for evidence to clear them.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by spacedog1973
If tyrannical governments are the ones who's guns should be taken away
If the purpose of civilians possessing firearms is to oppose tyrannical governments....

Why are you sitting there at your computer talking about it?


Well....obviously because I am a keyboard warrior, right?


Move along...nothing to see here.


That's a good idea. Let's arm ourselves with keyboards and bash some friggin' heads in!



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Double

Post
edit on 13-1-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)





 
159
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join


Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant
read more: Ora.TV's Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant