Independent Study Proves Guns Don’t Kill People *Shocking Evidence

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by seabag

 

I put myself in harms way for this study!!! I had a loaded gun in my hands and was willing to shoot any one of those guns if they began shooting at innocent people.

Really this should be in the rant section.. Back on topic. Your axiom lacks lacks in the simpliest of understanding.... You might as well be saying I looked at a glass of water for an hour without the water quenching my thirst.

ATS moto is deny ignorance

Your OP reeks of it

You want to take some vitamin suppliments.

You appear to have a severe Irony deficiency.

(I am not a doctor or medical professional, and the above statement in any way shape or form does not constitute medical advice, any similarity to persons living or dead is purely coincidental and is purely fictional, eat your greens)

Ahem.

reply to post by Alfie1

The writers of the 2nd amendment were familiar with muzzle loading muskets which could fire 2 or 3 times a minute and that's it.

What difference does that make??

The intent of the second amendment was made quite clear by our founders; our right to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government with lethal force. It doesn’t matter that technology was lacking when they wrote it…the intention doesn’t change.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

George Washington

I officially nominate this thread for an ATS Oscar in the "Best Thread of the Year" category. S&F OP.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by Nicks87

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by Nicks87

What constitutional rights does the patriot act take away? That link is full of mis-info.

edit on 17-2-2013 by Nicks87 because: spelling

Federal courts have held some aspects to be unconstitutional so what are you saying is the mis-info ?

They have? Do you have any links? and if so then why hasnt it been repealed?

Here you go :-

www.nbcnews.com...

I don''t know why it hasn't been repealed but I thought you guys were supposed to be rushing into the streets guns blazing if this sort of thing happened.

No I'm a law abiding citizen and responsible gun owner. I will only use my weapons in the defense of myself or others from serious bodily harm or death.

reply to post by TDawgRex

My circle of friends consist of the “haves” and “have-nots” and it actually works out quite well. It’s one of the oddities in my life that I enjoy as do they.

Me too Dawg :-)

I have or have had friends in every possible category

Only thing I can think to disagree with is the gated communities - I've known more than a few Republicans living in there too - was a time in my life when I used to baby-sit their pets. Some of them I just knew - bars on all the windows - afraid

It really isn't the majority of people - but when you factor in the barred windows, specialty doors, cameras, locks, alarms, security systems, security personnel...not hard to see how our country and our culture has changed through the years.

Life has always been uncertain - but in this country fear and the illusion of security are marketing cash cows

And now we're being sold on security again

It's coming from more than one angle...nobody wants to really talk about it. We want to talk around it or face off

Originally posted by chrome413
reply to post by Lichter daraus

 

You obviously haven't been around many hard core NRA members then. Come hang out at the turkey shoot and you'll meet a lot of them and believe it or not, they think any gun law is unconstitutional. And I'm not just talking about regular people, but people of positions of importance within the NRA.

I don't know why you feel the need to continually hen-peck my opinion, when you're obviously uneducated on the subject yourself. Get out and get some life experience and we'll see how your opinion changes.

"hard core NRA members" ???

You make it sound like it's the KKK or some white supremacist group.

Originally posted by chrome413
reply to post by Lichter daraus

 

You obviously haven't been around many hard core NRA members then. Come hang out at the turkey shoot and you'll meet a lot of them and believe it or not, they think any gun law is unconstitutional. And I'm not just talking about regular people, but people of positions of importance within the NRA.

I don't know why you feel the need to continually hen-peck my opinion, when you're obviously uneducated on the subject yourself. Get out and get some life experience and we'll see how your opinion changes.

What dude, all i did was respond to your post where you claim people are saying we should be able to do what ever we want with guns. Btw, my family is a military family, and we have some nra members. I have been around guns all my life, try asking questions dont assume things about someone you dont know. I would also appreciate it if you wouldn't talk down to me thank you very much. if you cant talk to me like I'm an adult then I'm not even gonna waste my time with you.


Ps. Im not anti gun.

Did you even read my post because i think you should look closer. I don't agree with them taking our guns but I do agree to having some gun laws. absolutely nothing wrong with me agreeing to that.

reply to post by seabag


How dare you sir? This is an obvious conspiracy theory. Our lord and savior Obama has decreed that these are deadly weapons that leap out of drawers on their own. And you dare say he's wrong?! Do you not even care about the children?! How dare you.

Originally posted by Rezlooper
I officially nominate this thread for an ATS Oscar in the "Best Thread of the Year" category. S&F OP.

I'll be the second to second the nomination! This thread has everything going
for it, including the whipped cream of drama not held up too well by a pie
already in the face of those who just will NEVER get it.
I said it before, if you can find a country to live in where the government had
made doing evil a capital offense, U2U me immediately. I'll sell everything but
my friends to get there, and wish to live there in peace. In the meantime....

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Alfie1

 

The writers of the 2nd amendment were familiar with muzzle loading muskets which could fire 2 or 3 times a minute and that's it.

What difference does that make??

The intent of the second amendment was made quite clear by our founders; our right to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government with lethal force. It doesn’t matter that technology was lacking when they wrote it…the intention doesn’t change.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

George Washington

I don't think it is at all clear that the writers of the 2nd amendment imagined a right to oppose the government with force. The amendment doesn't say that and it would be pretty surprising if they were inviting their own violent overthrow. The connection in the amendment is to a well regulated militia not armed insurrection.

In support of this armed resistance to tyranny stuff all I get is spurious quotes like your George Washington one above.

www.guncite.com...

If the case was a good one why have so many quotes been manufactured ?

Originally posted by derfreebie

Originally posted by Rezlooper
I officially nominate this thread for an ATS Oscar in the "Best Thread of the Year" category. S&F OP.

I'll be the second to second the nomination! This thread has everything going
for it, including the whipped cream of drama not held up too well by a pie
already in the face of those who just will NEVER get it.
I said it before, if you can find a country to live in where the government had
made doing evil a capital offense, U2U me immediately. I'll sell everything but
my friends to get there, and wish to live there in peace. In the meantime....

OH get over your self hating loathing and ENJOY this great land we call AMERICA my forfathers fought, bled. AND DIED FOR!!!! From the civil war to WW2 and Korea the men in my family of valor shed their blood and life SO WE CAN HAVE THIS LAND AS OUR LAND... Any defector in harming my country WILL BE DEALT WITH SWIFTLY, thank you.

Originally posted by Alfie1
With respect, you can't just ignore the fact that firearms have now reached a level of efficiency where any moron can inflict terrible casualties in a very short time.

Completely irrelevant to the argument at hand. Any "moron" can inflict terrible casualties with a can of gasoline and a match in an even shorter time.

If a death ray was devised, which it probably will be, which could incinerate hundreds in a second would you still be saying well it's just a "tool" ?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I would. Because that's what it is, a tool, be it a death ray, a machine gun, a musket, a sword or a rock.

The writers of the 2nd amendment were familiar with muzzle loading muskets which could fire 2 or 3 times a minute and that's it.

No, what the founding fathers had in mind had nothing to do with the technology of firearms at the time, it had to do with a 'concept'. That concept was to grant common citizens the right to possess the same level of weaponry that the newly formed government had because the foundation of this nation was to be a government ...of the people, by the people. The 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution sought to ensure that.

Originally posted by Infi8nity

So we ban all hammers because thats what ignites the bullet?
A gun is basically a mechanical hammer.

Inanimate objects do not make choices.

Garden tools should be banned too.

This post reminds me of a shining moment in my career as a child. It starred: 8 year old me, my 5 year old little brother, a shovel for maximum whacking, two cinder blocks and a pristine red shotgun shell I found laying around where it shouldn't.

The experiment was a booming success. Thankfully neither one of us got hurt.

But yea, now that I think about it, I had transformed myself into a basic gun I guess. Maybe I should be banned too.

SnF OP. I get what you are saying. Your post made me lol a few times too.

reply to post by Flyingclaydisk


If you can't see any difference between a rock and a machine gun I really don't know what to say to you.

Originally posted by Nicks87

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by Nicks87

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by Nicks87

What constitutional rights does the patriot act take away? That link is full of mis-info.

edit on 17-2-2013 by Nicks87 because: spelling

Federal courts have held some aspects to be unconstitutional so what are you saying is the mis-info ?

They have? Do you have any links? and if so then why hasnt it been repealed?

Here you go :-

www.nbcnews.com...

I don''t know why it hasn't been repealed but I thought you guys were supposed to be rushing into the streets guns blazing if this sort of thing happened.

No I'm a law abiding citizen and responsible gun owner. I will only use my weapons in the defense of myself or others from serious bodily harm or death.

Glad to hear it but you did claim on page 21 that you wouldn't put up with a tyrannical government. Have you changed your mind despite being shown that elements of the Patriot Act are unconstitutional ?

reply to post by Alfie1


the difference is that one is made of metal and shoots projectiles at a high rate of speed and the other is made of stone and can be thrown, slingshotted, or catapulted at high rate of speed. people have used both to kill people so what's your point. Im seriously asking what is your point.

reply to post by Alfie1

I don't think it is at all clear that the writers of the 2nd amendment imagined a right to oppose the government with force. The amendment doesn't say that and it would be pretty surprising if they were inviting their own violent overthrow. The connection in the amendment is to a well regulated militia not armed insurrection.

It is clear if you read some of the quotes of the founders.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

Thomas Jefferson



Amendment 2 clearly states “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The “militia” is the people. The supreme court has upheld this assertion:

In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions officially establishing this interpretation. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes

wiki

Also, violent crime in the US has been on a steady decline for DECADES even as gun sales rise. Explain that!

reply to post by seabag


Oh yes, impossibly declining crime rates. Explain how they have been tampered with? Hmm, can't be that hard surely.

reply to post by seabag


Most people don't understand that George Washington didn't even want to be President and that he turned down the option to be KING multiple times. This poster you responded to is absolutely clueless.

"If he does that," King George remarked, "he will be the greatest man in the world."

reply to post by Alfie1


He clearly stated that he would protect family and friends if need be, how does that say he changed his mind.
To me he is basically sayin yes he will fight the government if they are harming people and family.