It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by MDDoxs
Originally posted by 007Polytoks
reply to post by MDDoxs
"Unstable"?
You do know that the media loves to grab the worst, most disheveled picture of people they can find; correct?
I am sure one could find pictures of you when you were just waking up that would look similar.
To pretend as if you can assess his mental health from one picture is to fall astray of logic.
Please don’t assume I came to my conclusions based on a photo of the individual. Perhaps you should re-examine your logic on forming ill informed conclusions. Further, I never crowned myself component to diagnose mental instability, it was an opinion.
My opinion was based on the information presented which is as follows:
1. Man publicly posted a list of individuals he wants to kill.
2. Believing that the people listed are scum/traitors that need to die.
I would classify that as someone who could be potentially "unstable", but if you have better criteria, then please let me know.
edit on 22-2-2013 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)
My opinion was based on the information presented which is as follows: 1. Man publicly posted a list of individuals he wants to kill. 2. Believing that the people listed are scum/traitors that need to die. I would classify that as someone who could be potentially "unstable", but if you have better criteria, then please let me know.
“I think what may have particularly have gotten his ire in the past month or two were the various legislation enacted with respect to the rights to possess a firearm. I think that was particularly upsetting to him,” Sgt. Cummings told 1010 WINS. “One posting which was posted about a month ago said that if anybody ever came to take the arms, they would suffer the consequences.”
Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by MDDoxs
1 yeah well the government does have it's list of who it wants to kill
2, those same people call them scum and say they need to die
By that opinion/logic the current administration needs to be locked up because it is "unstable".
No wait that won't happen.
Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by MDDoxs
Nah I agree with the dude up to a certain point they are scum and traitors, but would not go to jail over them they are not worth it nor is it my place to play god.
Originally posted by goou111
reply to post by neo96
Why are those called tank busters?
Originally posted by MDDoxs
Oh geez, looks like people are dragging in the gun control debate, look at this excerpt from CBS New York
“I think what may have particularly have gotten his ire in the past month or two were the various legislation enacted with respect to the rights to possess a firearm. I think that was particularly upsetting to him,” Sgt. Cummings told 1010 WINS. “One posting which was posted about a month ago said that if anybody ever came to take the arms, they would suffer the consequences.”
The media is certainly on the war path when it comes to this conetentious issue.
Originally posted by Kali74
It is entirely possible for the authorities to manufacture a 'terrorist' and have the media be complicit. I don't know if that was done in this case but it has been done over and over again against groups or people outspoken against the Government. Look at what happened with the Black Panthers and COINTELPRO. Look at what happened recently with the Occupy Movement most notably the NATO 5. This crap does happen and thus the reason we need to protect each other even when we disagree. It won't always be manufactured, crazy and evil do exist however... dig deeper on this one, it's worth questioning.
First they came for... but I said nothing because...
Let those words compel you instead of haunt you.edit on 22-2-2013 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by 007Polytoks
The .50 round, if we are talking something like a depleted uranium round might make it through some of the areas that aren't as reinforced, but as a whole, no, the round can't.
I find it highly unlikely, like 99.9999999999% sure he did not have such rounds.
Just morons reporting moronic statements.
Originally posted by lynxpilot
I'm very leery of such articles because an ignorant MSM has no doubt put their spin on it.
Firstly, the "tank buster" terminology has traditionally been associated with the A-10 Warthog aircraft as a 'tank buster' platform. They do use 50 cal rounds, and 50 cal rounds can be quite effective at penetration since penetration has less to do with the size of the round than it does the density of the round. There are depleted uranium 50 cal rounds out there, which would probably do a fair share of damage even to a MBT, but again the platforms that use these are slinging rounds by the thousands.
They will spin this to make him out to be a total nutcase no doubt. He may actually be a nut, but we'll never know. If he made any threats on the internet, he's an idiot.
Lastly, I'm trying to figure out how a limitation on the ownership of types of armament fits in with "shall not be infringed". Can anybody help me out here?
Originally posted by 007Polytoks
Originally posted by lynxpilot
I'm very leery of such articles because an ignorant MSM has no doubt put their spin on it.
Firstly, the "tank buster" terminology has traditionally been associated with the A-10 Warthog aircraft as a 'tank buster' platform. They do use 50 cal rounds, and 50 cal rounds can be quite effective at penetration since penetration has less to do with the size of the round than it does the density of the round. There are depleted uranium 50 cal rounds out there, which would probably do a fair share of damage even to a MBT, but again the platforms that use these are slinging rounds by the thousands.
They will spin this to make him out to be a total nutcase no doubt. He may actually be a nut, but we'll never know. If he made any threats on the internet, he's an idiot.
Lastly, I'm trying to figure out how a limitation on the ownership of types of armament fits in with "shall not be infringed". Can anybody help me out here?
The A-10 fires a 30 × 173 mm round; that is 17.3 mm bigger then the .50 caliber round.
Here is the A-10's cannon:
Compared to this .50 caliber rifle:
Maybe you are thinking of the Soviet Yak-B 12.7mm, or the DSKM; which due to ROF can be much more devastating then a bolt action .50 caliber rifle. Both of these machine gun's are not legal for civilians.