Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Forget Gun Control, Empower the People! Make It Mandatory, Every Head of House Must Own At Least 1 F

page: 2
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 11:48 PM
link   
I read where a survey was conducted in several prisons, and it was asked what is the sound a burglar hates the worst, The most popular answer was the cocking of a 12 gage shotgun.
edit on 18-1-2013 by candlelight because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by CB328



Let's MANDATE that every head of house, is REQUIRED to own at least one firearm!


Wow, the supposed fans of "liberty" want to push massively unconstitutional mandates. What a shock.


Not unconstitutional at all!! You see, this law gives you an opt out for several reasons! At least under this mandate, a person would not be fined if they did not uphold the mandate!! Can you say the same about Obama care!! I think not!! No tyranny there! Nope not at all! (Rolls eyes!!)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


Why does everyone forget about the many people who have no business with a gun?

Are you arming lunatics and criminals and people on handfuls of prescription mood altering drugs for spite?
Are you giving guns to abductors, carjackers and home invaders Just to get back at whomever called for "control?"

That's wrong anyway.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 



Mutually assured destruction. Countries do it.

Neither likes bombs but they each have one to use as a threat against attack by the other.

I think that is the theory behind everyone having a gun and I have actually suggested it but people who don't want gun control also don't want anyone to have a bigger gun than theirs.
edit on 19-1-2013 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   
double post
edit on 19-1-2013 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:24 AM
link   
Take a look at where owning a gun and knowing how to use it paid off! Ironically, this incident
Occurred about 10 miles from where I grew up!




seems as though real life examples of guns saving -- rather than taking -- innocent life go largely unreported (or flat-out ignored) in the mainstream media. Therefore, I have decided to post the following must-read story in its entirety (via Cameron Gray):

A woman hiding in her attic with children shot an intruder multiple times before fleeing to safety Friday.
The incident happened at a home on Henderson Ridge Lane in Loganville around 1 p.m. The woman was working in an upstairs office when she spotted a strange man outside a window, according to Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman. He said she took her 9-year-old twins to a crawlspace before the man broke in using a crowbar.

But the man eventually found the family.

"The perpetrator opens that door. Of course, at that time he's staring at her, her two children and a .38 revolver," Chapman told Channel 2’s Kerry Kavanaugh.

The woman then shot him five times, but he survived, Chapman said. He said the woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot the intruder if he moved.

"She's standing over him, and she realizes she's fired all six rounds. And the guy's telling her to quit shooting," Chapman said.

The woman ran to a neighbor's home with her children. The intruder attempted to flee in his car but crashed into a wooded area and collapsed in a nearby driveway, Chapman said.

Deputies arrested 32-year-old Atlanta resident Paul Slater in connection with the crime. Chapman said they found him on the ground saying, "Help me. I'm close to dying." Slater was taken to Gwinnett Medical Center for treatment. His condition is unclear, but Chapman said he was shot in the face and neck.

In February, Slater was arrested on simple battery charges, according to the Gwinnett County Sheriff's Office. He has been arrested six other times in the county since 2008.

Kavanaugh was the first reporter at the scene as deputies investigated. The victim's husband told Kavanaugh he's proud of his wife. He was on the phone with her as the intruder broke in.

"My wife is a hero. She protected her kids. She did what she was supposed to do as responsible, prepared gun owner," Donnie Herman said.

He said he's thankful for his family's safety.

"Her life is saved, and her kids' life is saved, and that's all I'd like to say," Herman said.


m.townhall.com...
times-to-protect-her-children-n1479445" target="_blank" class="postlink">townhall.com

What do you think this guys intentions were? Robbery? I don't think so! He hunted that family like an animal and they were his prey!! Pays to know how to properly use a .38!! And this is your constitutional right and responsibility!!!

Pax.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by EyesWideShut

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by CB328



Let's MANDATE that every head of house, is REQUIRED to own at least one firearm!


Wow, the supposed fans of "liberty" want to push massively unconstitutional mandates. What a shock.


Explain how that would be "massively unconstitutional".


I'm Pro 2a, but the government forcing you to do anything is closer to tyrany than liberty. I know PLENTY of people who shouldn't own firearms, and they don't by choice...because they're afraid of them...or afraid of what they'd do with them.

A lot of what the anti's do is projection, they don't trust themselves with firearms so how could someone else be responsible with them?


Then I guess tyranny is also:

Car insurance
Drivers' licenses
Income taxes
Homeowners insurance
Social security cards
shall I go on and on?

I guess those get a pass, though, right? Those aren't tyranny.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by candlelight
I read where a survey was conducted in several prisons, and it was asked what is the sound a burglar hates the worst, The most popular answer was the cocking of a 12 gage shotgun.
edit on 18-1-2013 by candlelight because: (no reason given)


Well that's sort of a no brainer but hard to pick that moment when the thief is at the door and listening, and hope he does not enter by surprise, armed himself, finish you off and take that gun. Many other scenarios OTHER THAN using the gun effectively for protection are also likely to play out.

I was told by a crime watch Police Officer a barking dog is effective unless you store some high risk items in the house and people find out about it like guns, drugs or money but otherwise a barking dog will make a thief visit another house.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


In the most recent shooting the Head of the Household, MOM had the guns. The person who should not have had access to them was taken to a shooting range to relieve his tensions. You have tensions you got no business with a gun in your hands. Tensions are not life threatening. Tension is an excuse for murder.



NOTE: the above is a reply to the post below.
edit on 19-1-2013 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by paxnatus
 


Why does everyone forget about the many people who have no business with a gun?

Are you arming lunatics and criminals and people on handfuls of prescription mood altering drugs for spite?
Are you giving guns to abductors, carjackers and home invaders Just to get back at whomever called for "control?"

That's wrong anyway.


No new covenant, you obviously did not read the links because this was covered!! Yes, there will be people who should not be in charge of a weapon. This thread has nothing to do with eligibility to own a head gun none of that
has changed!! That is why in my headline I specifically said "head of home". A person with a serious mental illness
most likely requires some assistance and would not qualify as head of the home! A "lunatic" sorry don't get you!

This is where a little common sense goes a long way! I wrongly assumed this was understood, but apparently I need to spell it out!



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by EyesWideShut

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by CB328



Let's MANDATE that every head of house, is REQUIRED to own at least one firearm!


Wow, the supposed fans of "liberty" want to push massively unconstitutional mandates. What a shock.


Explain how that would be "massively unconstitutional".


I'm Pro 2a, but the government forcing you to do anything is closer to tyrany than liberty. I know PLENTY of people who shouldn't own firearms, and they don't by choice...because they're afraid of them...or afraid of what they'd do with them.

A lot of what the anti's do is projection, they don't trust themselves with firearms so how could someone else be responsible with them?


Then I guess tyranny is also:

Car insurance
Drivers' licenses
Income taxes
Homeowners insurance
Social security cards
shall I go on and on?

I guess those get a pass, though, right? Those aren't tyranny.


Income taxes and Social security cards, yup I would call those Federal tyranny, the rest are State issues and heavily influenced by the insurance industry, but also tyranny.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by EyesWideShut

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by CB328



Let's MANDATE that every head of house, is REQUIRED to own at least one firearm!


Wow, the supposed fans of "liberty" want to push massively unconstitutional mandates. What a shock.


Explain how that would be "massively unconstitutional".


I'm Pro 2a, but the government forcing you to do anything is closer to tyrany than liberty. I know PLENTY of people who shouldn't own firearms, and they don't by choice...because they're afraid of them...or afraid of what they'd do with them.

A lot of what the anti's do is projection, they don't trust themselves with firearms so how could someone else be responsible with them?


Then I guess tyranny is also:

Car insurance
Drivers' licenses
Income taxes
Homeowners insurance
Social security cards
shall I go on and on?

I guess those get a pass, though, right? Those aren't tyranny.


Are they liberty?

ETA:
Car insurance & Homeowners insurance aren't federally mandated.
edit on 19-1-2013 by EyesWideShut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   
Ok let me make sure I've got this order correct.
That's 3 million guns for the Bronx in NY. Another 5 million
for surrounding burroughs and 6 million rifles to somewhere in East Los Angeles?
Ok....And uh, 7 million guns to Chicago? Oh yeah & 20 thousand to Joplin MO.
Ok got it..



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by sealing
Ok let me make sure I've got this order correct.
That's 3 million guns for the Bronx in NY. Another 5 million
for surrounding burroughs and 6 million rifles to somewhere in East Los Angeles?
Ok....And uh, 7 million guns to Chicago? Oh yeah & 20 thousand to Joplin MO.
Ok got it..


Let me simplify it for you.
21 Million legal Hunters, at least that many illegal and gang owned weapons.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


Now that you say that, I think you're right. I was on the fence. I don't own any firearms. I've shot them. I wish they were never invented. But they were bound to be created. And you cannot stop them from. Mandate.
edit on 1-19-13 by Mugen because: (no reason given)


Mandate, but it's not like you pass out guns to everyone. You do background checks.
edit on 1-19-13 by Mugen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


Is the Government going to provide these weapons to every head of household? If the answer to that question is no, then no.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by CB328



Let's MANDATE that every head of house, is REQUIRED to own at least one firearm!


Wow, the supposed fans of "liberty" want to push massively unconstitutional mandates. What a shock.


Wait a minute here. If a town wants to enact such a law it breaks no constitutionality whatsoever; on the contrary it follows it by adhering to the 10th Amendment, so long as there is no constitutionality against it in said state.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Evil_Santa
reply to post by paxnatus
 


Is the Government going to provide these weapons to every head of household? If the answer to that question is no, then no.


If such a law were passed there would have to be provisions to handle that situation as such. Given if were, a law of this magnitude would only be able to be effective and efficient on the most local level (a town, city or county; beyond that it becomes nearly impossible).



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ReVoLuTiOn76
I am 100% for gun ownership, but in my opinion, making someone buy a gun is just as bad as taking one away. While everyone should have the right to own one, no one should be forced to buy one, just as people should not be forced to buy health insurance. My health insurance expires on march 20th, my birthday, and I do not plan on buying anymore any time soon.


I agree with this completely (the gun part) - even if it is shown beyond a reasonable doubt to be beneficial for every household to have a gun, requiring it is as un-American as banning them. The very nature of our Constitution dictates imperfection - and that is a good thing. Imperfection breeds innovation and variety. Wekve all seen the movies or read the books about "dystopian" futures - the ugly side of forced "perfection." utopia doesn't exist because it can only ever be one man's (or woman's) Utopia. So - a great idea, except for being a requirement. An encouragement to do so would be better. "such and such town prides itself on nearly every household owning a gun." is about as far as we should take it.

And just as an aside - I'm all for your no-health-insurance, as long as you plan on either paying cash in the event of a serious injury or illness, or simply not going in for treatment. Most of the people who refuse to have health insurance simply expect everyone else to pay for them, either through taxes, or higher healthcare and thus insurance rates. The only way to do it right is to pay your own way for medical care, or refuse treatment.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


So you want to give every whackjob in the USA a gun?






top topics



 
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join