Ban guns NOW!! But start from the top down..., page 1


Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times
Topic started on 17-3-2013 @ 01:34 PM by madmac5150
I think I have a decent enough idea on a rational gun control policy, and I am curious as to its reception.

IF the American citizens are to be disarmed, then it needs to begin with the politicos hell bent on banning them. Start by banning the private ownership of firearms by elected officials and politically appointed officials. Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Reid, Mr. Holder turn ALL of your guns in first... and the firearms owned by every body guard and staffer... IF these "elite" people truly believe that guns are evil, then they need to turn in all of theirs in a gesture of good faith. Deny all of them Secret Service protection including the FLOTUS. The Secret Service should be for POTUS only. After banning firearm ownership by elected and appointed officials we then freeze ANY federal gun legislation for 10 years. Give them 10 years of looking over their shoulder every time they leave their home, without the benefits of a firearm for protection. If after 10 years they still want our guns... then MAYBE we will talk.

Of course, their first argument would be that "we are public officials and need to be protected"... Which implies, of course, that somehow these people's lives are worth more than yours or mine... and we should have a serious problem with that... it is "We the People" not "We the Politicians" and it is about damned time that we remind them of that.

Let's see Mayors Bloomberg and Emanuel stroll around their respective cities without any kind of protection detail...


reply posted on 17-3-2013 @ 01:48 PM by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Zarniwoop



FLOTUS Kidnapped?! Could you imagine holding Michelle Obama against her will? I wouldn't feel bad or worry for HER...I'd feel deep pity for the poor bastards that took her. She'd be back...they wouldn't be.

I think the OP was trying to make a point with some sarcasm here..at least I hope I read this right? It's a bit off though, at least to me because this very issue is so real and the "We get guns to shoot you....because you might shoot us" B.S. logic of the Government just isn't much I can find humor in these days.... Just me though.

A Flag for good effort.


reply posted on 17-3-2013 @ 02:03 PM by redoubt
I have to salute the OP for the concept; ban guns from the top down and perhaps... just maybe, we might again find a way to evolve as a species. It's been a while since we did that. In fact, we've been headed in the other direction now for several decades.

I think we have to work hard and surgically extract all the political influence and corruption to this subject before we can begin to get a clear view of the subject.

Person kills other people.
Person in question uses gun to kill other people.
Government ignores person and punishes inanimate object.

There was a time when person's of nobility could select someone to take their place when it came to punishments. There were called 'whipping boys' and it was a very definitive name because, lashes were not felt by the offending party but by someone of less social culture who was rewarded for taking the whip in their name.

During the US Civil War... mainly in the state of New York but elsewhere in the north, draftees could pay someone to take their spot so they didn't have to serve.

Here we have this inanimate object; the gun, that takes the brunt of public anger for the crimes commited by... wait just a minute: a Human Being!

Okay, so if these lunatics had NOT had firearms, them people would not have died, right?
Well, one only needs to refer back to Timothy McVeigh to see how that works. A little cow poop and a few chemicals mixed with a rental truck and... well, we all remember that.

The problem is one related to both the human condition and the culture we have ourselves created. Guns have been around for hundreds of years... but as for the extreme violence in movies, TV and video games?

NOOOOOO! We can't include that!

Camel cigarettes were made to change there ads because children are impressionable. They will smake because they like the cute camel. Apply the same logic to the violence in the movies and other forms of entertainment and we all run into the street screaming... NOOOOO video games don't affect the kids!

That may well be a direct result of the old reference, 'The dumbing down of America' but I think it is more political than simple education.

Many think there is an effort to tear down this nation to make way for a new age world government. Such could not exist with a US Constitution in force or 190 million Americans armed and ready to defend their rights and freedoms!

From the top down works okay... but, don't hold your breath if you want to see how it all plays out, lol.

...


reply posted on 17-3-2013 @ 02:19 PM by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Zarniwoop



I'm 100% behind you on that. We can start with their Health Care. They get the care of kings and lesser Gods ...while we get rationed for meds and told we have to justify the smallest thing ..while the Doctor has a book worth of paperwork to prove HE justified OUR justification.

Indeed... The issue of their lives meaning FAR more than our pathetic little existences IS the core one I suppose. After all... There are over 300 million of us. There are only a couple thousand of them. I guess that means they must be rare and precious. ...or so that seems to be their thinking. (Endangered would be another way to put it. )


reply posted on 17-3-2013 @ 02:24 PM by NOTurTypical
reply to post by madmac5150



If we're gonna start banning inalienable rights why can't we go in numerical order?

Let's start with the first amendment.


reply posted on 17-3-2013 @ 02:31 PM by intrptr
reply to post by madmac5150


Agreed. Good point. If I am to be defenseless then why not the government too? Surely they want to set a good example for what they believe in. They are after all representing my interests?


reply posted on 17-3-2013 @ 02:35 PM by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by intrptr
reply to
post by madmac5150


Agreed. Good point. If I am to be defenseless then why not the government too? Surely they want to set a good example for what they believe in. They are after all representing my interests?


And lets not forget that the hallmark attribute of a great leader is to lead by example.

And they're obviously great leaders considering they know better than we do on virtually every area of our miserable lives.


reply posted on 17-3-2013 @ 02:37 PM by NOTurTypical
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni



Yikes! Okay, amend my earlier post.

Step 1, growl.
Step 2, (if necessary), urinate on attackers.
Step 3, (if necessary), fire two shots from double-shot shoutgun.
Step 4 (certainly necessary after step 3), reload shotgun.
Step 5, (if necessary), fire two shots through White House front door at scary people on front porch.




edit on 17-3-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



UN Proposes Tax On Americans for 3rd world countries
  Posted 18 days ago with 28 member flags
Armed bystander stops stabbing outside school
  Posted 12 days ago with 27 member flags
" Climate Change Is Not A Hoax", says Obama!!??
  Posted 4 days ago with 21 member flags
Former Arizona Sheriff Mack, ‘Gun Control Against the Law’
  Posted 13 days ago with 12 member flags
Limiting Freedom & It\'s Effects On Society
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags