Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), "'assault' weapon bans are just the beginning".

page: 1
45
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
+11 more 
posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Although he stated his name, she didnt recognize him as a "conservative" blogger. Assuming he was a fellow gun grabber, she opened up quite a bit.

The statement comes at 1:32.

She goes on to say that they're on a roll and that they have to use this momentum to disarm the public (ban guns) as much as possible, including hand guns.

Many in the gun community have speculated that this isnt just about "assault" rifles but about disarming the American people in general.

Publicly, these gun grabbers have voiced support for the 2nd Amendment. This gives us some insight into their true intentions.

Precisely the reason why freedom lovers do not want to compromise, because we realize that they use a long established method of incremental-ism.

They cant strip us of our rights at once, which is why they chip away a little at a time.

edit on 12-3-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


And who is surprised??????


Many have been saying this is their goal for some time now.

edit on 12-3-2013 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


Many of us have said their goal is not to ban just one weapon type. What they want is complete incremental disarmament. This has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with control.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


Second Ammendment will read very soon:

The right to bear which arms the government deems fit

No more gun rights people! Which should help a lot....
/sarcasm

Unreal that people actually were for the ban, assault weapons or not it was a right given to us.......I don't have an assault rifle, but I saw this coming from a MILE away!!



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   
This is no surprise. It has been in the works for decades.

“Our main agenda is to have ALL guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.”

Sarah Brady



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that old lady cares so deeply about my safety. I wonder how many armed guards were there to protect her?

MOTF!



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:21 AM
link   
The constitution to the government is the same as placing rules on a child. They’ll test the bounds of the rules, argue over them and fight them tooth and nail to the bitter end. Now it’s the mark of a good parent to enforce the rules while leaving room for positive growth.

But as it stands now, the child has been left to watch over its self. Like most children without a parent around they’ve gone out of control.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:22 AM
link   
I would be curious to know what the majority of people in her district support? When she says "We" can do this...who is "We"?

Good interview, gives alot of insight on the agenda at hand....certainly backs up the fears many people have of an outright gun ban being the goal.....



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 

Baa baa...are the sheeple getting ready for the FEMA camps? Just a thought...

Kinda 'unreal' how quickly it's all happening. Wonder how soon it'll happen in Canada....



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by MountainLaurel
 


By "WE" she means politicians/elite that live in a different world. Their world is extremely safe. They have armed bodyguards, ride in bulletproof cars and live in heavily armed gated communities. They have no clue what the real world looks like.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jimmiec
 


I couldn't agree more....these folks don't represent the average person...they got thiers and they plan to keep at our expense....crooks.......the only encouraging thing to me is apparently they feel armed Americans are a threat to them....hence the drones.....scumbags........



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein
 


I called this as well. In fact I think I called this the very day that Sandy Hook happened. Why people continue to say that they aren't coming for our guns is beyond me. They aren't even hiding it anymore. I seriously wish I had more money because I'd be buying a gun right now.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Hell, Obama said he was coming for guns "under the table" (or something like that) MONTHS before Aurora happened, let alone Sandy Hook. Most of us have seen this coming for years, if not decades. Personally I believed things were about to ramp way up as soon as ATF started reclassifying some rifle rounds as pistol rounds, that has to have been well over a year ago by now, that was before Aurora too. If anybody thinks that gun control is getting out of control now, just wait and see where we are in another six months, year, ten years. The age of the civilian gun owner is just about dead--and what are you going to do when ammunition isn't even manufactured anymore in this country? When ammunition sales are only legal to military and law enforcement? What are you going to do with a closet full of AR-15s then, when they are useless because buying, owning, or making ammunition is a high felony; when your stock of ammunition and reloading supplies has run dry?

Consider this: There are myriad groups and institutions in place to protect the ownership and use of firearms. There are no such groups that I know of to protect the right to own archery equipment, kitchen knives, baseball bats, or any of the other things people turn to when they don't have a gun to protect themselves. So, once the "right" of gun ownership has finally fallen, the supplies of ammunition and reloading components and replacement parts has run dry, and they come after, say, bows, or swords, or what have you... There will be nobody standing in the way of them banning absolutely *everything* that you could possibly ever use as a weapon. What about when they make martial arts classes illegal?

This gun thing may seem like the end, but it is only the beginning. In the end you will have nothing with which to protect yourself except your brain (which they are poisoning into bland stupidity) and your muscle (same.)

Just like all the other herded beasts of burden.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpaDe_
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


Many of us have said their goal is not to ban just one weapon type. What they want is complete incremental disarmament. This has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with control.


If it had anything to do with public safety you would not see 300 page proposals that hardely make any sense at all. I think most folks would compromise on the second amendment if the gun grabbers were reasonable. By reasonable I mean mild gun control(restricted automatics, no short barralled shotguns, no armor piercing rounds).

The brady bill that preceeded this new attempt at restricting many more types of firearms was quite severe itself. I see no reason for short barralled rifles being taxed $200, no reason for a total ban on automatics except pre-87 guns, silencers being taxed $200 and all the additional state and local laws attached to the federal ATF laws. Then you need to wait about 10 days to cool off assuming you pass background checks(background checks being necessary is good) and apply for concealed carry permit that costs an arm and a leg. In some states you have to be a cop or security officer to get ccp or prove your life is threatened.

I mean come on. All this red tape does is DISCOURAGE so many people from going through the loops. They PURPOSEFULLY make it tough and expensive so that people give up or buy illegal arms via the mafia. I was never one to insinuate the second amendment should be taken 100% literally but after all this bullcrap and all these suspect school shootings I say the hell with gun control.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:23 PM
link   
shes gonna be pretty mad when the federal awb fails miserably and the lists of those who have voted for it become public then we get to watch with fun and joy as they all loose their seats to the opposing side to are anti gun control.its gonna put a smile on my face when this woman looses her job for trying to pass such ludicrous legislation,democrats are allready waving white flags and every time they do it the nra gets less and less likely to compermise with the anti gunners,the NRA is a shark and it smells blood and its the only lobby we have in the usa that makes the Isreli lobby look weak and useless they dont know what they have started but soon it will become evident that they will fail to even get universal background checks.

they can keep saying they are winning but we know the truth the anti gunners will fail and fail spectacularly.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krazysh0t
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein
 


I called this as well. In fact I think I called this the very day that Sandy Hook happened. Why people continue to say that they aren't coming for our guns is beyond me. They aren't even hiding it anymore. I seriously wish I had more money because I'd be buying a gun right now.


There has always been a segment of the people wanting to ban guns, how is today any different?

I would actually say its getting better since the Supreme Court has issued a number of key rulings protecting the right to own guns that didn't exist before.

Here is a list of gun control legislation, and anti-gun control legislation to show that today is no different than past gun-grab attempts.


1791
The Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment -- "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." gains final ratification.

1837
Georgia passes a law banning handguns. The law is ruled unconstitutional and thrown out.

1865
In a reaction to emancipation, several southern states adopt "black codes" which, among other things, forbid black persons from possessing firearms.

1871
The National Rifle Association (NRA) is organized around its primary goal of improving American civilians' marksmanship in preparation for war.

1927
Congress passes a law banning the mailing of concealable weapons.

1934
The National Firearms Act of 1934 regulating only fully automatic firearms like sub-machine guns is approved by Congress.

1938
The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 places the first limitations on selling ordinary firearms. Persons selling guns are required to obtain a Federal Firearms License, at an annual cost of $1, and to maintain records of the name and address of persons to whom firearms are sold. Gun sales to persons convicted of violent felonies were prohibited.

1968
The Gun Control Act of 1968 - "...was enacted for the purpose of keeping firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetence." -- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms The Act regulates imported guns, expands the gun-dealer licensing and record keeping requirements, and places specific limitations on the sale of handguns. The list of persons banned from buying guns is expanded to include persons convicted of any non-business related felony, persons found to be mentally incompetent, and users of illegal drugs.

1972
The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms is created listing as part of its mission the control of illegal use and sale of firearms and the enforcement of Federal firearms laws. ATF issues firearms licenses and conducts firearms licensee qualification and compliance inspections.

1977
The District of Columbia enacts an anti-handgun law which also requires registration of all rifles and shotguns within the District of Columbia.

1986
The Armed Career Criminal Act (Public Law 99-570) increases penalties for possession of firearms by persons not qualified to own them under the Gun Control Act of 1986.

The Firearms Owners Protection Act (Public Law 99-308) relaxes some restrictions on gun and ammunition sales and establishes mandatory penalties for use of firearms during the commission of a crime.

The Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (Public Law 99-408) bans possession of "cop killer" bullets capable of penetrating bulletproof clothing.

1989
California bans the possession of semiautomatic assault weapons following the massacre of five children on a Stockton, CA school playground.

1990
The Crime Control Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-647) bans manufacturing and importing semiautomatic assault weapons in the U.S. "Gun-free school zones" are established carrying specific penalties for violations.

1994
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Public Law 103-159) imposes a five-day waiting period on the purchase of a handgun and requires that local law enforcement agencies conduct background checks on purchasers of handguns. (ATF's Brady Law web site.)

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-322) bans all sale, manufacture, importation, or possession of a number of specific types of assault weapons.

1997
The Supreme Court, in the case of Printz v. United States, declares the background check requirement of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act unconstitutional.

The Florida Supreme Court upholds a jury's $11.5 million verdict against Kmart for selling a gun to and intoxicated man who used the gun to shoot his estranged girlfriend.

Major American gun manufacturers voluntarily agree to include child safety trigger devices on all new handguns.

usgovinfo.about.com...



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
shes gonna be pretty mad when the federal awb fails miserably and the lists of those who have voted for it become public then we get to watch with fun and joy as they all loose their seats to the opposing side to are anti gun control.its gonna put a smile on my face when this woman looses her job for trying to pass such ludicrous legislation,democrats are allready waving white flags and every time they do it the nra gets less and less likely to compermise with the anti gunners,the NRA is a shark and it smells blood and its the only lobby we have in the usa that makes the Isreli lobby look weak and useless they dont know what they have started but soon it will become evident that they will fail to even get universal background checks.

they can keep saying they are winning but we know the truth the anti gunners will fail and fail spectacularly.


It is almost like the democrats WANT TO LOSE so that republicans can come back. Perhaps the democrats gave up on america and say "your turn buddy....rape her good man!" As much as I dislike democrats I dread seeing a republican elected president and vice president much more.

I can only hope it is under Rand Paul or that Gary Johnson picks up the momentum big time. I want to see them get that magical 5 percent so that the media whores cannot ignore libertarians and other small parties again.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


yeah you bring up a good point while im not a fan of most democratic polices it does give me a small degree of fear that if the republicans take the senate(after this gun ban attempt debacle) and hold on to the house if they win the white house the things they could pass could be staggering with their conservative majority in the supreme court. so its something to watch as well so we dont end up switching liberal tyrants for conservative ones if that makes any sense

i think the worst fault of the democrats is not realizing the stupid things they say just add more suport to the pro gun crowd,i mean at first it was no no were not coming for your guns.....then well were only coming for some of them(after saying and insisting that they werent in the first place) then to we must ban all guns now the time is now we must pass this legislation on the backs of dead children because we know if we dont get it now it will never happen....dont they realize this just polarizes their opponents? they underestimated the nra and more importantly underestimated lawfull gun owners and to a lesser extent over stated the support they thought they would get from police(seems the sherrifs arent to happy with proposed new laws)
edit on 12-3-2013 by RalagaNarHallas because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Mine are right here. Come and get them.




posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


There will be no ban.





new topics

top topics



 
45
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join