You won't see this Sandy Hook video from the MSM......WHY??

page: 7
162
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012
 


You know what I find MOST interesting about this video? Note his REAL emotion and how he nearly broke down and cried just thinking about his kid being in that situation. Now go watch some of the videos of the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook only a day or two after the tragedy. Whenever I point this out to someone I know, they always tell me I'm crazy for even saying that and they tell me "everyone grieves differently". Yeah... everyone does grieve differently, but I don't think it's far-fetched to think that a parent who had just lost their child would be a teary mess.


More disgusting statements from those who think these were actors. Difference? This is a month later. The grieving PROCESS is called a process for a reason. One day after the event people will still be in shock!. Heck, even a month after the event of your daughter being gunned down by a lunatic and you could still be in shock. Maybe everyone is telling you you are crazy for a reason.

You guys can stick to one video from a man hours after his daughter was gunned down, yet you demand evidence from us who say this wasnt a conspiracy. To remind you, the burden of proof is on you. Where's the evidence he's an actor? Aside form the asinine theory developed form a 3 minute video almost two months ago.




posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by unb3k44n7


Background checks are out of the question.
edit on 3-2-2013 by unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)


Why? Something to hide?


See how easy it is to infer something from nothing? Its what the ct'ers are doing with sandy hook



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ParasuvO
reply to post by Laxpla
 


Noone is talking about anyone, these are parents who have lost a child in a shooting, who

1.Do not care about how it happened (apparently),

2.All seem very much like people who are looking back on some long-lost memory.

3.Noone is angry.

4.Noone is shedding a tear.

5.All have shown laughter, and looking to the spouse for confirmation, in the "stories" they tell.

6.Would be investigated thoroughly for such behaviour in any other type of case.

7.No resentment or facts about the case are ever discussed by ANY of them.

8.ALL OF THEM apparently take this disaster the same way, unlike your claim of everyone being different.

9.Total lack of emotion or outrage, as if they have been prepared on what to say, and are holding back.

Combining these irregularities with the complete lack of details and photos, should lead any sane individual to a conclusion that someone is hiding something...but the excuse patrol is just too strong these days.

I feel that many people WANT the TV shows they watch to unfold, to confirm the programmed beliefs they have so they can watch TV for some more .

Criminal Minds is on, let us go watch !


You would think the evil powers that be would have hired better actors and wrote better scripts huh?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 03:42 AM
link   
edit on 4-2-2013 by palmalBlue because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by unb3k44n7


Background checks are out of the question.
edit on 3-2-2013 by unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)


Why? Something to hide?


See how easy it is to infer something from nothing? Its what the ct'ers are doing with sandy hook
reply to post by bknapple32
 


No, I'm afraid you're missing the point, it's okay, I did at first, too... The principle of the matter is that we have the "right" to bear arms. See, I fumbled around with my own viewpoints for a little while about this whole gun control thing, but I understand better now. The meaning of the word "right" didn't click right away when I was thinking about it, a right is something that we are entitled to that cannot be taken from us. Every citizen of the US has this right. It's not there to be infringed on, to change the meaning of, or to alter or add to it's meaning. Our forefathers made this an amendment for a good reason. We have the right to bear arms (WE, as in EVERYBODY) to protect ourselves and our families. We (the people) have the "right" to bear our own defenses.

Also, I didn't infer my response from this video alone, or the Sandy Hook incident. The guy in the video could have been saying these things in regards to ANYTHING. It's just what he said (all of it was great) was spot on with what is going on, especially acknowledging background checks, and that's why I replied the way I did.

Now you have the government wanting to control these guns and decide who can have them and who can't, which is unconstitutional since it is our "right" to have them in the first place.

It's not about hiding anything, it's about protecting our right and waiving against attempts to infringe upon them or abolish them.

You see if we don't say anything and agree to let the government make some changes to gun laws, they will think "well good they are letting us make a few changes to the 2nd amendment.......maybe we can make some more.... and more...and more..."

And then before you know it you'll have all sorts of infringing going on with our rights because we allowed them to infringe a little the first time around. And also, the government, eh, kinda does have a bit of a history in attempting (usually successfully) to dig their claws in deeper to just about everything in our every day lives, why trust that they will not infringe further, and abuse their power on governing who gets what and why or why not?


edit on 4-2-2013 by unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:14 AM
link   
WE just wont agree then. I do not believe the mentally ill have a right to own a gun. I do not believe criminals have a right to own a gun.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32
WE just wont agree then. I do not believe the mentally ill have a right to own a gun. I do not believe criminals have a right to own a gun.


Hey hold on, we still have a chance to find some common ground here.

Convicted felons already cannot possess firearms. That's already in place and agreed upon. I agree too...

But some other criminals? What kind of crimes will exclude them from owning a gun? Not all criminals (depending on the nature of the crime) should automatically be excluded from gun ownership.. IMO..

But what I am leery about is the "mentally ill" aspect. Who decides what the grounds are to place somebody officially in that category? Is it... for example, is it a person with ADHD? Is it a person who had a mental breakdown once in their life? Is it a person who is bipolar? A person who has ups and downs often? Is it a person who binge drinks, or drinks more often than twice a month and is labeled an alcoholic according to a medical analysis?

So many every day, functioning people with jobs and families, or anyone else, could easily be placed in the "mentally ill" category unwarrented.

The definition of mentally Ill I just looked up means : Of unsound mind.

Who is the judge of that? What constitutes an unsound mind? What does that even mean and where does the line cross from having a sound mind?

Background checks would not really say if one is mentally ill, that is unless they include medical records.
Who is to judge what specifically on the medical records decides who is fit or unfit to own a firearm?

There is so much room for things to be twisted to suit who won't be allowed to own a gun.
edit on 4-2-2013 by unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-2-2013 by unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-2-2013 by unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by unb3k44n7
 


The poster I referred to said NO background checks... of any kinds..


As for mentally ill? I would think it would be any illness that would warrant a criminal defense to use the mentally unfit to stand trial. Whatever illnesses that warrant that criteria . If it deems you unfit to defend yourself in trial, then it deems you unfit to use a firearm.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012
 


how he dramatically pummels the table. such finesse such grace and raw power. Like a wild stallion.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
If they want to take away our guns, they'll get them, like they get everything else that's ours.

When the MSM starts showing us groups of 15-20 SWAT per street kicking doors in and showing a brute force against "criminal" gun owners, all the piss & fire coming from many people will be extinguished.

We are nothing like we were as a country 200 years ago. We are fat, lazy, entitled, spoiled citizens who kowtow to whatever 40,000+ new laws every year that are added, including ever increasing taxes & basic costs of daily living.

We as a country should have gotten pissed decades ago and nipped the corruption in the bud. Now it's grown too far & too deep for the lazy & fat ass Americans to get their arms around & take care of.

If they want our guns... they'll get them, because you all won't stand together!



If the majority of Americans shared your attitude, then i'd agree with you.

Your solution seems to be simply bend over and hope for lube mate, i'm not much for that kind of thing and neither are the majority of your countrymen..thankfully.

Yes the corruption has been allowed by apathy to get too out of control, but simply putting your hands up and giving in is not going to help. Americans realise this, they are genuinely waking up to the fact they are being taken for a ride and are coming together finally to not only stop the runaway train, but dismantle the engine while they're at it.

The spate of events designed to grab your guns and remaining rights, are going to backfire on the designers. The gun issue IS the step too far, and will serve the people's interests, not the governments.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012
 


After all the debates on gun control at the moment on ATS, this is one which gets my flag and star!!

I'm not in the USA and although I think it is a mistake to have all these people with guns in their homes, I have to admit that after recent events having to protect yourself should be a legal right but..... you know, you will still get those loonies who go out and massacre people for no reason.... its these people who need to be stopped and the question is:

How do you do that?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012
 


You know what I find MOST interesting about this video? Note his REAL emotion and how he nearly broke down and cried just thinking about his kid being in that situation. Now go watch some of the videos of the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook only a day or two after the tragedy. Whenever I point this out to someone I know, they always tell me I'm crazy for even saying that and they tell me "everyone grieves differently". Yeah... everyone does grieve differently, but I don't think it's far-fetched to think that a parent who had just lost their child would be a teary mess.


More disgusting statements from those who think these were actors. Difference? This is a month later. The grieving PROCESS is called a process for a reason. One day after the event people will still be in shock!. Heck, even a month after the event of your daughter being gunned down by a lunatic and you could still be in shock. Maybe everyone is telling you you are crazy for a reason.

You guys can stick to one video from a man hours after his daughter was gunned down, yet you demand evidence from us who say this wasnt a conspiracy. To remind you, the burden of proof is on you. Where's the evidence he's an actor? Aside form the asinine theory developed form a 3 minute video almost two months ago.


We all have opinions on what happened. Having watched all the mass shootings in the past as well as local broadcasts after somebody had been gunned down or run over by a car, this one simply doesn't sit right with me. I'd like to think that I can recognize genuine human grief. I'm not claiming that nothing happened at Sandy Hook and I'm not claiming that there were no real victims at Sandy Hook. All I'm saying is that from what I've seen from the interviews, there's something off about many of these people. If it had been just one or two families reacting in such a way, I might accept that it's a difference in the grieving process.

There is nothing wrong with and nothing crazy about questioning any situation. With so many lies and so many agendas in D.C., for me it's the natural reaction to question what's true and what is a lie..... especially when it accompanies such quick action from the President. Especially when we all know how much many Democrats (and maybe some Republicans) wanted to see these laws go into effect. Just because it's a tragedy and it happened to young children doesn't mean it gets a pass. It is important not to get swept up in emotion when trying to see the facts. If all these interviewees are parents who genuinely lost their children and are genuinely grieving, I apologize for any offense. However I will not blindly believe everything I see on TV. I and millions of others in this country and around the world know about this tragedy only because they have seen it on TV or read about it in the newspapers. Since when is TV a 100% trust-worthy source? Since never.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012
 


wow...that guy...

he sounds a LOT like me....i like him, he's got spirit...

Star & Flag for you, sir.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Screwed
 
When native gold-silt divers on the Amazon refuse to take a light down there with them is when we also ask two pertinent questions: Was a security camera in place at Sandy Hook? Can some expert please tell us if it has been tampered with, like they do in Hollywood?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by unb3k44n7
 




The principle of the matter is that we have the "right" to bear arms. See, I fumbled around with my own viewpoints for a little while about this whole gun control thing, but I understand better now. The meaning of the word "right" didn't click right away when I was thinking about it, a right is something that we are entitled to that cannot be taken from us. Every citizen of the US has this right. It's not there to be infringed on, to change the meaning of, or to alter or add to it's meaning. Our forefathers made this an amendment for a good reason. We have the right to bear arms (WE, as in EVERYBODY) to protect ourselves and our families. We (the people) have the "right" to bear our own defenses.


Two questions for you then.
1. If the "right" to bear arms was so important, then why did it have to be amended into the Constitution instead of written into it the first place?

2. If the meaning of rights cannot be changed, altered, or added to, then why are blacks no longer 3/5 of a person, as they were in the original document? Our forefathers certainly didn't want anyone besides white, land-owning, males voting or bearing arms.

The Constitution changes with the times. I'll never understand why gun-rights activists only seem to think that the 2nd amendment is the only infallible bit of the Constitution.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scuzzlebutt

Your logic seems to be that registering a weapon will keep said weapon out of the hands of a criminal. You further this logic by actually saying mentally ill people shouldnt be afforded their second ammendment right period.

We all know, if thought about rationally, that its insane to think registration stops anyone from getting a weapon. Case in point: Most murders are committed by handguns. Every state requires registration of handguns since the Firearms Act of 1968. How are these criminals getting handguns if they must be registered then?


First, I am pretty sure that mentally ill people are already precluded from purchasing a gun. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

Now, as for how criminals get a hold of guns if they have to be registered, that's simple. Once you have purchased a gun, you are free to sell it to whoever you want without any of the normal background checks, waiting periods, and the like that you had to go through if you bought from a gun dealer. So, if your gun is then sold again, and again, there is no way of knowing who has the gun five years after you sold it.

I am not for any ban on any guns, but I damn sure support any measure to make a gun owner responsible for acts committed with that weapon. I don't care if it's his kid that gets it out of the night stand and shoots up the school or he chose to no do the paperwork to ensure the state knew he had sold it to Joe Blow who then sold it to his buddy, who ultimately shot a convenience store clerk in a robbery.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
I commend all of you who have been coming forward and pointing out the inconsistencies in the SH story. None of us WANT to feel this way but its undeniable. It's more than just odd...it's sinister. Those of us awake enough can feel it. It's more than just mounting evidence against the official story. It's a deep deep feeling. In the months after 9/11 if people had been saying it was all a conspiracy, they would be called crazy or a sicko. But look now...it's been a pack of lies! Don't stop searching and fighting for the truth!



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ResistTreason
The recent school shootings have gone from being a 99% possibility of being a staged event, to now being 100% positive staged event.

Anyone whom cannot see it yet is a foolish, gullible, non-thinking sad example of a human being. Or a shill.

It was staged, for the purpose of disarmament of the American citizens. We must show that we will not stand for acts of Treason against the American People.



I'm sorry, but there is nothing in this world, which can be called a 100% positive conspiracy.

If you've closed your mind to any other possibility than this being a conspiracy, then you're just as bad as those who you claim are foolish, gullible, and non-thinking sad examples of human beings because they can't entertain even the possibility of conspiracy theories.

If you can't entertain even the possibility that a closed mind on either side is just as bad, then you're just as bad as they are.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
So, let me get this right.....all of those children and teachers didnt get killed at all? Im still in-process in soaking all of this in.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by imagineering
So, let me get this right.....all of those children and teachers didnt get killed at all? Im still in-process in soaking all of this in.


No, they're quite dead, i'm afraid......





new topics

top topics



 
162
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join