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.

 

"I have executive powers over guns..." - It's starting...

page: 7
116
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordGoofus
It's hilarious how much some Americans are over-reacting to gun control. My predication? The bill will be passed, assault rifles and a few other guns will be banned, gun lovers will bitch and whine and moan for a month or so, then be forced to shut up when crime stats show no unusual increase in homicide rates 12months after the ban is put in place. Life goes on and we all continue waiting for the government to go all 1984 on our hines as the economy slowly trickles into a long overdue recession...


Shame on you, I see you are from Australia, you should know better than anyone everything you just said was BS.

www.snopes.com...




posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 03:40 AM
link   
americans are more happy than other countries?

I dont think you have been to scandinavia than or to switzerland, to the netherlands.
America in some parts look like a third world country.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 


Thanks for finding that.

After I get some sleep I want to look into prohibition just to see how they did it. I know it's not the same because alcohol was not originally in the constitution, but I think it will give us some insight.

As far as Scalia saying our right is not absolute, looks like Supreme Court rulings on the horizon, because the second amendment is absolute.


Amendment II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


P E R I O D.
edit on 15-1-2013 by timetothink because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-1-2013 by timetothink because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by chiefsmom
The only good thing about this, and I don't like it, by the way, is if he does sign an EO, at least the next president can get rid of it right away.

Whatever he decides to do.


Unfortunately, the Republican party is self-distructing and I don't think they are capable of backing a candidate who can beat a Democrat. Just look at how weak the last two were, and they haven't learned a thing. I think this is by design, but that's another subject.

Add to that, the next agenda after gun control is going to be "comprehensive immigration reform", which really means amnesty. No doubt he will use EOs to force that through also. This means at least 11 million more votes for the next Democratic presidential candidate.

I honestly don't see things getting better after the next election, no matter how you look at it.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Mugen
 
Yeah, he wants to abolish term limits too....not good.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:04 AM
link   
You all need to take a step back and see that this is a good thing. For years the rest of the civilized world has looked on in horror at the rampant gun violence in America. You CANNOT sustain a society whose inhabitants are all pointing guns at each other. And that's the truth of it. For one thing it creates an arrogance, that uniquely American arrogance that says "I have a gun and I could shoot you and kill you if I liked".

I for one will salute Obama when he disarms the American public. Perhaps it will teach American society a little humility - it'll be a new concept to many of them but I'm sure they'll get used to the feeling.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


You are welcome, and I agree. I think it will come to a court room battle.

Get some sleep! Me too, lol.

I look forward to what you have to say.




posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by flyandi
 


In my mind the biggest question is why do people not understand that the 2nd Amendment clearly states that the citizens shall have the right to bear arms necessary for military action. That means military style small arms like pistols, shotguns, rifles, machine guns, etc. Any weapon a soldier would carry against you, you shall have the right to carry in defense of that misguided soldier.

The new laws that Biden and Obama are talking about would do nothing to stop a theater shooting, a school shooting, or any other shooting. The new laws are just incremental steps towards a total ban on arms and defense. It is obvious that there is a small non-representative faction of political operatives that are attempting a total disarmament of the United States from the ground up. We the People do not want to be disarmed and helpless. The message of the Newtown school shooting is clear. The message is that the aforementioned small and persistently invasive faction of political operatives wants to see a pile of small arms.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by flyandi
 


As it stands now, you have had Supreme court rulings on what weapons are covered under the 2nd. So in effect, they have already done the same thing in the US. The US military can have rocket launchers, RPG's, and other weapons that public civilians cannot have. The US supreme court case that I am referring to was in 1939, one year after Hitler's law.


I do hope you are not referring to United States vs. Miller, because that argument is not supported in that case, nor in the subsequent references to it in SCOTUS rulings.

All of the SCOTUS rulings pertain to weapons not normally found in a military inventory, and are held with a view towards maintaining a "well regulated militia" by means of preserving the rights of the People to keep and bear military grade weapons. Assault rifles and the like are most definitely covered in that view, but in the Miller case, it was ruled that a sawed-off shotgun is not, since that was not normally a piece of military equipment at the time.

"Short barreled" shotguns (as opposed to the "sawed-off" variety) ARE a normal piece of military equipment these days, used for door breaching and entry, but the question has not been revisited in light of the changes made in "normal military equipment". Assault rifles and many other weapons are also currently in the normal military inventory, but it will take an incident where their possession may or may not be justified rising to the SCOTUS before that can be ruled upon.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by IBelieveInAliens
You all need to take a step back and see that this is a good thing. For years the rest of the civilized world has looked on in horror at the rampant gun violence in America. You CANNOT sustain a society whose inhabitants are all pointing guns at each other. And that's the truth of it. For one thing it creates an arrogance, that uniquely American arrogance that says "I have a gun and I could shoot you and kill you if I liked".

I for one will salute Obama when he disarms the American public. Perhaps it will teach American society a little humility - it'll be a new concept to many of them but I'm sure they'll get used to the feeling.


Well, here is something that completely contradicts what you think. It isn't the American Public that has a problem, it is the rampant criminals that have been allowed to roam with lax laws and prosecutiion because the jails are overcrowded and budgets are spent on welfare and food stamps, instead.

Here is another truth for you to chew on:

politicalvelcraft.org...

December 12, 2012


The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia‘s ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.


The city’s population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.

And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn’t. The fact is I can’t remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?

The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.

The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city’s crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn’t force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don’t have a death wish.

There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired.




posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by flyandi
 


I hope that is all talk, too controversial for him to actually ban guns. Obama is a wise man I suspect he wouldn't try to impose a slew of folly regulations. Liberals like the idea of gun control, he's probably just playing politics and people are making a big deal out of nothing.

I guess we'll see what happens this last term, I'm speculating here not counting my chickens before they hatch of whatever the saying is.

By the way regulating assault weapons shouldn't bother anyone, there's nothing good that can come out of civilians loading up on assault weapons.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Good perspective, insight and factual information.

I get sick of the fear mongering.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:14 AM
link   
It seems to me that government Intel is getting everything they need to effectively counter any new argument that concerned Americans come up with. I do not own a gun - but now I wish I did. My family and my liberties are so important.

What I've been seeing pushed online now is that the 300 year old Constitution is "too antiquated" and was written when guns only fired one shot at a time. Ridiculous. It may have been written long ago but it was written for a reason.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:25 AM
link   
reply to post by flyandi
 


Explanation: S&F!

Here is the ONLY morally valid remedy any Potus can apply ...

Tree of Liberty (by President Thomas Jefferson)


What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion?

And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

Let them take arms.

The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them.

What signify a few lives lost in a century or two?

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

It is it's natural manure.


NOTE: The REMEDY has absolutely ZERO to do with gun control and or limitations at all.



Personal Disclosure: Can't fool me ... I am already stupid!


So Mr. Potus ... Please STOP being poisonous to the constitution as its unconstitutional ok!



Apply the REMEDY OK!



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Your guns cannot stop the weapons the military has now.

You could have all the guns you want and not a a single one can stop a hellfire missle fired from a mile away. To think that a hand gun or a rifle is gonna protect you from a jet flying several miles above you is idiotic.


Logical fallacy. Firearms are not meant to be employed against that sort of equipment, so the comparison itself is idiotic. Firearms are employed against the personnel who use that equipment, not the equipment itself. Tactics and ingenuity are how you separate the two, so that you can deal with the one and ignore the other.

Your argument is no different than saying "you can't stop an AK with an AK" - the idea is not to combat the equipment, it is to combat the people misemploying said equipment. Who the hell fights inanimate objects? If your opponent had the same concept of fighting, you'd be safe - the hellfire missile or the drone would be trying to kill your barbecue pit (it's got a heat signature, y'know?), would which leave YOU in the clear.



If Obama starts talking about how much he loves god and says that the unbelievers must be placed in camps or murdered for jesus then we have a problem. Hitler was a catholic and his reasons for killing the jews were religious. Have you seen his painting of Mary and baby jesus... its quite good for a psychopath.


Yeah.

By the time that "problem" rolls around into your world, you'd have the rest entirely disarmed and unable to combat it. SO - if you fail to support them in their efforts to deal with their current "problem", there will be no one left able to help you out with YOURS.

Funny how that works. Liberty isn't only being violated when it's YOUR head on the plate - other folks have theirs to deal with, too. If you're trying to eliminate theirs now, why the hell should they support YOURS when it's your own turn on the chop-block?



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:39 AM
link   
maybe people should stop saying fals things like you try now.
please listen to this video compleetly
Youtube Video
edit on 15-1-2013 by WhySoBlinded because: youtube link did not work



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by theAnswer1111

What I've been seeing pushed online now is that the 300 year old Constitution is "too antiquated" and was written when guns only fired one shot at a time. Ridiculous. It may have been written long ago but it was written for a reason.


The part of that "back then they had muzzle loaders" argument that is all so conveniently being left out is that their opposition military was ALSO armed with single shot weapons.

It's about parity, not rounds per minute. The folks against the Constitution REALLY hope no one sees that, though...

Edit: An RPG is ALSO a single shot weapon, oddly enough loaded at the muzzle. It's a single-shot muzzle loader, so it SHOULD be ok, under their argument, right?




edit on 2013/1/15 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by WhySoBlinded
 


I have no idea what that video is, but I'm trying to help you out here so I can find out.

EDIT: Embedded it in the thread for ease of use. The salient portion runs from 28:23 to 32:40. The only comment I have on it, really, is that entire journeys are composed of single "steps", and he's talking about doing some steppin'.




edit on 2013/1/15 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:50 AM
link   
The Government PSYOP mantra as of now goes as follows:

The constitution is too old and there are far too many mentally ill gun nuts and it has to be stopped.




“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.





It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by kauskau
americans are more happy than other countries?

I dont think you have been to scandinavia than or to switzerland, to the netherlands.
America in some parts look like a third world country.


Your right about that.
The problem is that they think they are ahead in all and are the best in all.lol
Most of the americans only had US history in school and realy dont have a clue how it goes in european countries



new topics

top topics



 
116
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join