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.

 

Anti Gun Movement Needs Victory....Background Check Solution

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   


So in reality a large proportion of the gun transactions taking place actually include little to no checking whatsoever.


So in reality, how many actual real background checks would have been performed if all transfers of firearms (sales and trades) were checked. This includes gun shows and private sales.


How many more during the identical time period that produced 72 million.

See you have to come up with an almost irrational number to feed your hysterical exaggerations about how common sense dictated the need for all transfers to go through a background check.




posted on May, 5 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

They do have an agenda, they do love it when some nut case goes off and they are trying to use Sandy Hook for a big net anti constitution sweep.



Just think instead of Boston bombers they were the Boston shooters.....

To be truthful, all terrorist need to do is s few gun attacks and they would do more damage than any bomb would do by destroying our constitution. What would happen if there was 10 or 15 mass killings with only guns in a short period of time?
edit on 5-5-2013 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   
If there was anything resembling truth in media the "gun show loophole" would be fully explained as a private person to person transaction that does not generate a sales tax for the government. These are not licensed gun sellers selling their stock. They are private citizens selling their property without a government intermediary recording and/or approving the transaction.

A good example would be selling your car to someone. Except the state actually owns the car hence the title transfer, the sales tax collected, the yearly use tax collected (registration tags, commonly called license plates).

Sorry, but once registration happens for all guns, the people no longer own them and they become property of either the State or Federal government. Your use and free enjoyment of what was once your property (and Constitutionally protected right) will become limited and restricted.

An argument of it being better for the public safety and benefitting the general welfare of the people is moot due to the fact that very few of the over 300 million privately own firearms in the US have actually injured or killed anyone. The same percentage can not be said of non-privately owned firearms that are in the hands of law enforcement and the military.

That there have only been three Secret Service Agents shot in the line of duty (of which only one was killed and only two of them were protecting a president--Truman and Reagan, the other was protecting candidate Wallace) should speak volumes. But you won't hear any of that on CNN nor MSNBC.
edit on 5-5-2013 by Ahabstar because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Ahabstar
 


Perhaps if the praetorian media would accurately report the facts instead of slanting their coverage in favor of gun control to the tune of 8-1 this fact of the debate would he common knowledge?

Can't inform the public truthfully can we? No,.. no.. that's not how good propaganda works now is it?



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by Logarock

They do have an agenda, they do love it when some nut case goes off and they are trying to use Sandy Hook for a big net anti constitution sweep.



Just think instead of Boston bombers they were the Boston shooters.....

To be truthful, all terrorist need to do is s few gun attacks and they would do more damage than any bomb would do by destroying our constitution. What would happen if there was 10 or 15 mass killings with only guns in a short period of time?
edit on 5-5-2013 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)


You're making an argument that shows people need weapons to protect themselves.



new topics

top topics
 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join