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 CosmicCitizen
reply to post by HattoriHanzou
First it is "assault weapons" (with the scary black accessories); then it will be the base semi-automatics as they are "just as dangerous as the weapons that were banned because of their cosmetic features"'; then it will be handguns because of their concealability and actual use in crime (unlike "assault rifles"); then it will be high powered hunting rifles (ie bolt action) because they are favored by snipers for their accuracy and range; and finally it will be shotguns because they can shoot the equivilane of a whole "clip" (30 rd mag) of .30 calibre buckshot in one shot! OMG.
Originally posted by KyrieEleison
I'm not sure why they couldn't suggest recommendations that can be implemented within the already existing legal framework.
I mean, if all we're doing is just throwing out ideas, why not suggest designing some Judge Dredd guns that self-destruct if unauthorized persons attempt to use them?
Either they are not particularly clever or familiar with the law, or they have an agenda that they want to sell.
Originally posted by KyrieEleison
reply to post by HattoriHanzou
I didn't say it was something I endorsed, but at least it would fit the criteria better than a carpet ban.
Its not like we live in the pre-internet era where you either watched tv or listened to the radio. Today people can research things for themselves and get real answers.
Originally posted by robobbob
reply to post by Ghost375
what an amazingly ignorant way to live your life. no one expects you to uncritically accept information from a biased source-which is virtually every source of information including yourself, but you should at least consider and research what is unfolding. many of the worlds important discoveries have come from the fringes that no mainstream source would ever consider as legitimate. until the overwhelming evidence forced them to admit it, or face total irrelevance. much like what alt news is doing to the MSM. some of the most important things you can learn don't come from the safety of group thinking friends, but from clinched fisted opponents who drag you out of your comfort zone and force you to evaluate and then stand up for what you hold as true.
2 Billion rounds of militarily useless hollow point pistol ammunition + DHS armored vehicles + drones. DHS + TSA + non judicial killing of American citizens by EO + NDAA + warrantless surveillence + CISPA + attempts to disarm citizens
At what point are you willing to accept the idea that the government may not have the best of intentions?
Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by Hopechest
Hopechest
Member
Registered: 9-2-2013
Location: Arizona
Mood: God Complex
Member is offline.
You sound so certain
of what you are preaching.
Where do you get your fact
that it is just a research arm of the DOJ?
Originally posted by beezzer
Why would their recommendation, their suggestion be one of violating the 2nd Amendment?
Why?
Originally posted by derfreebie
Originally posted by beezzer
Why would their recommendation, their suggestion be one of violating the 2nd Amendment?
Why?
Because maybe they're convinced that public opinion will by now
let the administration get away with it. "Maybe we can..."
I smell another large ammo purchase soon too; by both sectors.
Originally posted by NoJoker13
So I'm waiting for how you can prove to me this is 'real' other then the fact that it's there and looks like someone made it on MSWord.
Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by HattoriHanzou
So prove that it's real, it lacks a national seal and anything to actually make it credible. If you want a document to be 'official' it needs to be notarized as far as I can tell this document isn't. So I'm waiting for how you can prove to me this is 'real' other then the fact that it's there and looks like someone made it on MSWord.
Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by Darkphoenix77
O really then why is everyone here excluding yourself taking it as such? I read your posts and you did comment on the fact that it isn't "actually" "official", or can't be proven to be so but many here aren't doing the same.edit on 26-2-2013 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)