Hypothetically speaking, if assault weapons are banned what liberties will you be losing?

page: 12
9
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Hypothetically speaking? All of them.

If a group can impose its rule without meaningful repercussions then there are no rights, only privileges.




posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by POPtheKlEEN89
Hpothetically speaking, if assault weapons are banned what liberties will you be losing?


The liberty lost is as follows:
The freedom to purchase/own the gun of my choice.


Originally posted by POPtheKlEEN89
I am generally interested in hearing your personal views on how these laws will affect your individual liberty, so far i haven't been able to stomach this debate no matter where i see or hear it, so indulge me with an intelligent response giving me your reasons for or against the looming assault weapons ban.


This is bad because:
Once you set precedence with the govenrment to take one of your choices, they may (likely will) use it to take all of your choices.

Quite simple really.
edit on 17-1-2013 by defuntion because: Just because....



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 





Who is coming to take your gun? None of the proposed laws have any aspect even close to gun confiscation. You can still purchase guns, ammo, and accessories, you can still protect yourself.


They are making it harder and harder for the average citizen to purchase guns. Even all this gun registration and wait times and so forth, it is a sublte discrimination that says govt gets to dictate who can and cannot have a gun. So it is not just affecting assault weapons but who gets a gun at all. The reason they are doing this is because they are Totalitarian Statists. To truly have a Statist Police State, the populace has to be unarmed. This is what they want to achieve.

So the real answer here is not that I want the right to hunt or keep a burglar out(or in my neighborhood a bear or coyote) but that the disarming of the populace will affect my choices in general, as the plan is to institute a Totalitarian GLOBAL One World Govt which will control all aspects of our lives including having private property and what we can do on that property, the food we eat, how much water and electricity we consume, etc. Sheryl Crow may not have been too far off when she joked that we should regulate how much toilet paper we get to use.

They have been already working on the UK and Australia and other places to institute gun control and they knew it would be harder to control the US due to our having fought the Revolutionary War as rebels against a tyrannical monarchy.

And it will affect all of us, not just me, so don't even go there.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by POPtheKlEEN89
Well Obama has fully revealed his position, now if congress acts in favor of his laws i would like to know what liberties you will be losing and why you feel that way.

I am generally interested in hearing your personal views on how these laws will affect your individual liberty, so far i haven't been able to stomach this debate no matter where i see or hear it, so indulge me with an intelligent response giving me your reasons for or against the looming assault weapons ban.

Keep it civil, if you foam at the mouth please clean up after yourself.


Typically most right wingers think I'm a left leaning nut with how I love the environment and the 4th amendment, hate big oil, have no faith in any of the jokes, AKA religions, sold to people as "truth".

Typically most left wingers thing I'm a right wing nut for my love firearms and my disdain for gov't restrictions on personal behavior.

With that out of the way...

What liberty will we be losing with a ban? Liberty in itself, or at least the illusion of liberty, is lost.

Do we ban cameras because child pornagraphers use cameras to take pictures? No.

Do we ban cars because drunks might drive a car? No.

Do we ban booze because someone might drive drunk? No. Now don't give me but "they regulate booze in response" as guns are regulated far more than booze. Don't believe me? You can be a known drunk and still buy booze if you're not drunk at the time of purchase. Someone could allege that you are violent and lotsa luck legally buying a gun.

Docs kill more people than guns a year, do we ban them as you're statistically more apt to die from a doc than a gun? No.

There is this "enlightened" opinion that somehow guns are the evil, and w guns banned there'd be no evil acts. That is as far from wrong as the 'Verse is wide.

Ne'er do wells will still get guns and use them, against an unarmed populace and that unarmed populace is then set up to be run roughshod over by a gov't if that gov't decides to do so. '38 Jews were banned from owning guns, didn't workout too hot for them did it?

Derek



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   
I love how people choose to focus on "assault weapons" and some how think this is where it will end. Have none of you learned anything over the last 12 years?

It may start now with assault weapons, but it will not end here. Fact is, semi automatic handguns kill far more people than assault weapons have. How long before you think this ban will extend into that area? When you give Government an inch, they eventually will take a mile.

Need "proof"? Let's start with "warrantless wiretapping" which we were told would only be used to listen in on conversations between suspected terrorist and calls overseas. Maybe it started that way, but now we all know it is used to listen in on calls on all of us, intercept our text messages, our emails, and spy on us all. We gave the Government the latitude to infringe on the privacy rights of a select group (terrorist) and instead it was extended to everyone.

What makes you think guns will be any different? Are people really this naive?


So what liberty will I be losing? I will be losing the right to keep and bear arms. Not fully... at least not yet, but it is one small step in what will eventually be many steps that will follow. History has shown this to be true. Not even ancient history, but our recent history.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by greenfox83
Well for one, no more fresh duck or deer meat at my house. This will take away my husbands freedom to go in the woods and hunt for food for his family. It's not all about "thug life" and crazy people. What about the people who are hit with hard times and survive off hunting for their family. Ever see that show about people in Alaska who literally survive off this and growing their own food.


Ehm.. If you actually go hunting with an assault rifle f.ex. an AK47, then I suggest they take away all your guns..

They won`t take your R E G U L A R hunting rifle, the ones N O R M A L people use to hunt.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nerbot
 


The greatest weapon is your mind, use it.
i am, that's why i stocked up on arms



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   
www.jagerpro.com...

We have taken Georgia trophy boar hunting and high volume feral hog hunts in Georgia to a new level. Each hunter will be issued a Remington R-25 semi-automatic rifle in .308 caliber topped with a $13,500 military grade thermal scope. These are the same scopes our Soldiers are using in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Be a gunner on the JAGER PRO Task Force during our nightly hog control missions.

(emphasis mine)
Anyone up for hunting wild boars with a 12 gauge shotgun or pistol?



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
www.jagerpro.com...

We have taken Georgia trophy boar hunting and high volume feral hog hunts in Georgia to a new level. Each hunter will be issued a Remington R-25 semi-automatic rifle in .308 caliber topped with a $13,500 military grade thermal scope. These are the same scopes our Soldiers are using in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Be a gunner on the JAGER PRO Task Force during our nightly hog control missions.

(emphasis mine)
Anyone up for hunting wild boars with a 12 gauge shotgun or pistol?


Give the shills slingshots and baseball bats.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
the term 'assault weapon' is a completely false characterization of these .22 cal. rifles that have been gussied up to look intimidating with a whole bunch of hard plastic adornments to "appear' as Awesome weapons featured in the multitude of WAR/Assault interactive Video Games...
And confused with the very intensely engineered and tested Actual Assault Weapons produced exclusively for the USA Military/Armed Forces... these civilian crafted rifles are under-powered facimile copies of the real originals !


the crap done under the banner of "Fast & Furious" has by far produced more human suffering than the incident @ SandyHook with only 22+6 +1 innocent murders total...

... is upwards of 1000 innocent lives! but the Media is MUTE

go figure


exporting massive murders tomexico triggerfingers AND working feverishly to DISARM law abiding citizens.... this guy is is something else


edit on 17-1-2013 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
Hypothetically speaking? All of them.

If a group can impose its rule without meaningful repercussions then there are no rights, only privileges.


Best post this year by far.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by D377MC

Originally posted by Afterthought
www.jagerpro.com...

We have taken Georgia trophy boar hunting and high volume feral hog hunts in Georgia to a new level. Each hunter will be issued a Remington R-25 semi-automatic rifle in .308 caliber topped with a $13,500 military grade thermal scope. These are the same scopes our Soldiers are using in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Be a gunner on the JAGER PRO Task Force during our nightly hog control missions.

(emphasis mine)
Anyone up for hunting wild boars with a 12 gauge shotgun or pistol?


Give the shills slingshots and baseball bats.


Shills - 0
Hogs - 1



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by POPtheKlEEN89
 


I'm tired, so I might have the places wrong, but the scenario still works. In places like Libya and Syria, weapons had to be shipped in so that civilians could defend themselves while working at overthrowing their corrupt governments.

When the time comes (and I hope I don't see it in my life time, but that time WILL come) are you willing to wait for weapons, that might not come, to protect yourself and defend your country against the entire might of the U.S. military? This is the ONLY reason why people should still have the right to purchase war-time weapons.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 

BHO made that same point answering a question on gun control at the town hall debate last year....stating that "where I come from, Chicago,...handguns are used more often than an AK-47" (probably paraphrased).



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by POPtheKlEEN89
 


I'm tired, so I might have the places wrong, but the scenario still works. In places like Libya and Syria, weapons had to be shipped in so that civilians could defend themselves while working at overthrowing their corrupt governments.

When the time comes (and I hope I don't see it in my life time, but that time WILL come) are you willing to wait for weapons, that might not come, to protect yourself and defend your country against the entire might of the U.S. military? This is the ONLY reason why people should still have the right to purchase war-time weapons.


In places like Syria and Libya, weapons were and are being shipped in to the CIA-sponsored terrorists tasked with shooting civilians and assisting in the balkanization of the country. You need to polish your knowledge on current middle-eastern affairs.

Here, try these:

landdestroyer.blogspot.com
syria360.wordpress.com...



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by POPtheKlEEN89
Well Obama has fully revealed his position, now if congress acts in favor of his laws i would like to know what liberties you will be losing and why you feel that way.

I am generally interested in hearing your personal views on how these laws will affect your individual liberty, so far i haven't been able to stomach this debate no matter where i see or hear it, so indulge me with an intelligent response giving me your reasons for or against the looming assault weapons ban.

Keep it civil, if you foam at the mouth please clean up after yourself.


Hypothetically speaking if assault weapons(which none of them are) are banned the liberties that we wouuld lose will be ALL THE REST.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by POPtheKlEEN89
 


I have read the original post and wanted to respond, even though I know there have been numerous responses already.

The choice of words you started this thread with is misleading "what liberties will you be losing".. Not that it 'isn't all about 'liberties' but directing the train of thought and limiting it to the definition of liberty as well as the implications of a ban on assault weapons basically is such a far limited conversation that it should never define something as important as the 2nd amendment.

Plain and simple the right to bear arms means the right to have the fire-power to fight back against the government forces, if need be. How can we fight military government forces who have assualt weapons - if WE don't? ( in that sense you could say that that is how all liberties of being a free American will be lost )
edit on 1/17/2013 by indigothefish because: (no reason given)
edit on 1/17/2013 by indigothefish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Everyone should try this.
Use ATS search for "What if China invades America?"
A bunch of threads will appear that are generally related to this type of situation.
Most of the answers say that this could happen, but so many citizens have guns, that they would make it a difficult take over.
What would be the answer a year from now? Are we supposed to stave them off with potato launchers stuffed with rocks and flammables?
Or should we rely on our troops who are mostly stationed in other countries and out at sea in training exercises?
Or maybe our local police forces that are being weedled down as we speak because towns are bankrupt?



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by D377MC
[

In places like Syria and Libya, weapons were and are being shipped in to the CIA-sponsored terrorists tasked with shooting civilians and assisting in the balkanization of the country. You need to polish your knowledge on current middle-eastern affairs.

Here, try these:

landdestroyer.blogspot.com
syria360.wordpress.com...



Oh yeah, I AM way out of touch with this. I thought the weapons were shipped in from the U.S. (along with other countries) to arm the civilians.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
All I have to say is Sandy was a false flag in conjunction is a new type of M.K. Ultra project to start to slowly to take always our guns. So the elite will be one step of world domination so they think. But they will be slaves to the aliens and at there mercy. Since the elite won't tell us of all the safe places from the worlds coming disaster that are already in aka Area 51 Phone call on radio show
www.youtube.com...





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join