Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New signed bill currently in process banning...

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Apparently, on January 13th of this year, a group of 5 people stormed inside a hospital with rocks.

They assaulted 5 nurses, 2 doctors, 13 patients, and 2 officers at the site.

7 people were brutally murdered.

The 5 men were later found dead in a dumpster.


As a result of this, the president took immediate action. He signed a bill that was created 3 hours after the scene. The bill states that it is required that anyone with a possession of a rock, to be taken into custody and given 5 years in federal prison. That officers have the right to check vehicle and homes if they feel that the person has possession of such lethal and fatal weapons. If the person with possession of the object refuses to let go of it, officers have permission to open fire.

Basically: Rocks have been banned and will be confiscated from anyone of any age in possession of rocks. Anyone refusing to turn in the object with be a threat and can be killed if officers feel that their life and the life of others is in danger.

The U.S military and other NATO country are establishing new Anti-Rock military and security personal around their nations in order to control the use of such a deadly weapon.
Security at public places have been warned and given the proper equipment to deal with such catastrophic inhumane weapons. School security guards have also been given flamethrowers in order to protect all students from anyone that is in possession of a rock. Rock detectors have been established as well. Anyone passing through them that has been detected to have a rock will have pure sulfuric acid dispensed from the detector to the person face.




(Note: This is just a joke. The point was to mimic the way that the media and governments around the world are acting (exaggerating) towards the use of weapons (Knives, Guns, etc).




posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Sorry to tell you but this is not the first thread like this and the others I seen just ended up with people arguing.

It is adding nothing to either side of the weapons debate.



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
There is humor and jokes forum



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Bravo sir, bravo



In all seriousness, this does show how people can and will freak out. This is the type of powder keg that would set in motion something as you describe. Just change rocks to guns, and make the event happen tomorrow, and we'll all say bye to our guns...



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
While rocks and knives can indeed be and sometimes are used as weapons, that is not their intent and purpose. Rocks are... Well rocks, they aren't anything. Knives are tools with varying purposes. But this day and age they are designed as cutting tools not for the most part as weapons. Same with cars - cars can be and are used to kill people. But their function is transportation.

While yes guns on the other hand ARE a tool, they don't really have any other purpose except to kill things. So when someone tries to use the knife, rock, car, or many other tool metaphors with guns it simply does not work. It's an argument quite frankly I'm tired of seeing. Apples and Oranges.



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Terrormaster
 

Guns have multiple uses. They can be used to disable a person for defensive purposes. Or to protect another innocent.

But the best use doesn't even require owning one. Just having the right to have one can prevent home invasions.

I'm not sure why this misconception even exists
edit on 14/1/2013 by Planet teleX because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Terrormaster
 


reply to post by Planet teleX
 



(Note: This is just a joke. The point was to mimic the way that the media and governments around the world are acting (exaggerating) towards the use of weapons (Knives, Guns, etc).




Catastrophic casualties reported, more expected.
edit on 14-1-2013 by Dispo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   
edit on 14-1-2013 by Dispo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Dispo
 

How patronising. Did you really think no-one on this thread realised that this was a hypothetical story?

By the way, don't try to come off as impartial as your 'troll' graphic doesn't hide your bias.



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Planet teleX
 


What bias?



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Dispo
 

You don't agree with the OP's stance.

Do you mind not derailing this thread now? You've been off topic, you've posted one-liners and had the gall to make 'troll' accusations when you are clearly the only one falling under that definition.

Now that you've baited me into this ridiculous argument I won't be helping you to derail this thread any further.



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Planet teleX
 


It's a joke thread. There is no "stance."

Chill.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 12:16 AM
link   
it's not going to be a joke when i make my first post about what they "really did" ban.






top topics



 
2

log in

join