Mayor asking Seattle businesses to go ‘gun-free’

reply to post by HauntWok


Yeah right I am waiting for the day the anti gunners actually read the second and ninith amendments because they have YET to comprehend what that means.

Instead they just use hyperbole and vitriol to push their fascist agenda's.

from the Seattle Times story;

“This is something businesses can do to be on the front lines of preventing gun violence,” said Ralph Fascitelli, board president of Washington CeaseFire, a gun-control group that approached McGinn three months ago with the idea and has since been recruiting participants. “It’s a good incremental step.”

Yes Yes but of course

Fascitelli said the program won’t stop a determined killer such as the Cafe Racer shooter. But he said that taking guns out of the equation could prevent some arguments from ending in tragedy.

Brilliant deduction Watson !

Gun-rights activist Alan Gott­lieb dismissed that line of thinking, noting how few people get fatally shot in crimes of passion in Seattle businesses.

The problem is that too many Liberals consume their news from inside an echo chamber that reflects their existing prejudice.

Seattle is a cesspool of Fibrillating, Palpitating, Foaming-at-the-Mouth, hyperventilating, Hyper Focusing, Ultra-Liberal Super Left Wing Fanatical Radicals.

So when is the ticker tape parade ?

I wonder who makes money from this work of genius ?

reply to post by CB328


Sounds like the Under the dome episode I watched last night...

This is bad news and one step closer a door to door campaign to kill all citizen dissidents.

reply to post by xuenchen


Agenda 21 speak.

reply to post by wrabbit2000


Not the Democrats of olden day, just had to add that.

reply to post by HauntWok


I will say this...and I mean this too. I really bow to your intellectual honesty. Even when it had to be apparent that following your line of thought to it's logical conclusion, as I've gently and steadily encouraged, would put you over a line you really can't ever cross back from in this debate. Not for anyone reading this anyway.. I mean, your statements here aren't hedged or even conditional.

They're absolute and absolutely calling every single gun owner in the United States (and presumably, the millions world wide where guns ARE actually legal in the majority of nations, albeit regulated much differently) criminals, soon to be criminals or wishing for the chance to become criminals.

ATS does a great many things, I must say. Among them and perhaps one of this site's most important contributions to the net and overall community online is giving people of *VERY* *VERY* different sides of life and world view a place to air those thoughts, see what the other believes and walk away without personal injury or plastic surgery appointments into the future.

Such a role it's played here..and I honestly wouldn't have believed a view point quite *THAT* extreme and absolute was held here as a sincere one, had I not read it with the logic you use to support it. It's been an educational debate here.

reply to post by burdman30ott6

Do you actually believe that or are you just trying to be an ass in this thread?

This is what I think that gun rights advocates actually believe, It would appear they think that as long as someone has a gun, all is good, because if it's illegal to do with a gun, that means it's infringing on the gun rights advocates right to keep and bear arms, and therefore an unconstitutional law.

Also, if you've got a rapist or a burglar do you really believe stricter gun control laws will stop them in any way?

While stricter gun laws don't do anything to stop crime (which they actually do). They give society a means to effectively punish those that commit those crimes.

Is the piece of crap going to suddenly say "Oh snap! My gat isn't legal so I better not break it out when I rob this 7/11!" and leave the firearm behind?

He might, then again he might not, but it would give prosecutors and judges the tools to put that guy away for a longer time. Instead of churning out wave after wave of more hardened criminals with weaker gun laws.

Sorry you think I'm being an ass in this thread, it's more my intention to show how utterly insane it is to think that guns actually make a country safer in any way. Especially seeing as how most gun related deaths are by those that own a gun.

reply to post by HauntWok


It is not GUN VIOLENCE for crying out loud how about holding people accountable for their actions.

As in PEOPLE VIOLENCE.

Guns do not get up all on their own and go around shooting people so stop trying to blame things for the actions of what PEOPLE DO.

There are LAWS against murder,assault,rape etc that Don't stop it, only PUNISH"S after the fact.

Do people try to ban private parts for rape ?

Do people try to ban fists after getting a beat down ?

Do people try to ban baseball bats ?

Talk about cognitive dissonance, and then turns around and say's government the thing that has killed more people in the world than any gun owner ever has, and then turns around and gives the very same weapons to anyone they deem to be 'friendly' you know like drug cartels, 2 bit dictator, and terrorist.

Geezus.

reply to post by CB328


is not Starbucks HQ in Seattle? they are quite pro gun so i dont see them listening to the mayor.dont think its up to the mayor but up to the buisness owners and corporations to set policy on the matter

reply to post by neo96

Guns do not get up all on their own and go around shooting people so stop trying to blame things for the actions of what PEOPLE DO.

I'll let Eddie Izzard explain this to you.

There are LAWS against murder,assault,rape etc that Don't stop it, only PUNISH"S after the fact.

Do people try to blame private parts for rape ?

Do people try to ban fists after getting a beat down ?

Do people try to ban base ball bats ?

I'll let John Stewart explain this to you

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by wrabbit2000

 

Don't worry, many in that "1/3 of the nation", are just waiting for the second american revolution so that they can mow down their fellow countrymen with impunity in the name of "freedom".

I read their posts every day, every time they dust off the Declaration of Independence and parade it out as their own personal licence to kill their fellow Americans, every time they make thinly veiled threats about our elected officials, every time they only post half of the 2nd Amendment and completely ignore the other half as if it doesn't exist, they push me more and more to the anti gun side of this issue.

The reasons for their want of bloodshed in the streets vary, but each and every one of them wants to take a human life. Each and every one of them are just waiting for the day they can unload a hail of bullets into whatever "enemy" they can imagine. Be it a criminal who is attempting to mug them, or a government employee trying to do his job. Each and every gun rights advocate is just waiting impatiently for the day they can watch the light fade from someone's eyes as their target takes their final breath.

And that's why I can't be pro gun. I simply cannot be on the side with homicidal maniacs feverishly building up their courage with the help of whatever hand cannon they can get their hands on, until the "day of reckoning" comes in their minds, and they take to the streets blowing away "the evil liberals, commies, socialists, (or whatever portion of the population they deeply hate with every fibre of their being)" and somehow feeling justified in doing so.

So I applaud the mayor, for asking businesses to go gun free. He's not passing a law, he's making a plea to sanity.

Wow the ignorance in this post made my head hurt. You basically said that because there are a bunch (well you pretty much said all but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for my sanity) of misinformed idiots on the pro-gun side and because of this you are going to side with the anti-gun crowd whose entire argument is derived off of false premises and half-truths.

By the way all these armchair warriors that are "waiting for the second American Revolution" as you said are mostly all talk. The ones you need to be worried about aren't the one posting on a forum that the government reads. The ones you should be worried about are the ones that you don't hear or know about until AFTER they've started their attacks in the OKC bombing.

I actually have a tough time believing that you were EVER pro-gun because if you were you would know how stupid and condescending your post was towards people who enjoy guns. I can understand having been pro-gun at some point then deciding to not like them due to some personal grievance that happened, but I'd also hope that you wouldn't just throw all the pro-gun arguments out the window to replace them with the outright lies and propaganda that the left uses to demonize guns.

Originally posted by TheSpanishArcher
"Shall NOT infringe". It's a constitutionally protected right, get over it.

So is the part of "WELL REGULATED MIITIA" but you Americans seem to forget that part.

You see thesecound part and think OMGZ GUNZ but forgot the first part that seem to insist on the training and responsibility that comes with it.

And I dont think they they had the Goverment controlled National guard in mind either when your forfathers wrote it down but a purley state controlled body with no Fedral control.

Here in the Uk it isnt quite that bad
however i wouldnt say we are crime free

Originally posted by 50swesterns
Here in the Uk it isnt quite that bad
however i wouldnt say we are crime free

Shhhhs you will shatter the illusion that some have that the UK is a crime ridden tyranny with mob rule and everyone getting knifed and rapped as soon as they leave there front door, of course once we get to our evil socilised NHS communist hospitals the evil death pannels deny us treatment of our knife and gun wounds

reply to post by HauntWok


Nah think the Bill of Rights, says it better :

Amendment II
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
.

And :

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Bill of Rights

There is no argument to be had here as that is CRYSTAL CLEAR.

I carry concealed during the winter months and open carry when its warm. If a business has a sign and I am carrying I will not give them my business. If its a place that I have to shop at I carry any way. With my CCW in MS no gun signs have no force of law. In NV I open carry and I have had no issues.

Its all about choice.

You can choose to be helpless or you can choose to have a fighting chance should the need arise.

When I was 15 I was shot by 2 guys in New Orleans had I not been tipped off by a friend and decided to carry my mothers 9mm to school I would be dead now. I still got shot but I was able to shoot back stopping them from hurting me anymore. I was lucky.

So you can be a victim if you like.

I will keep and bear my arms and you can keep your change.

Have a Great Day!

reply to post by neo96


HEY! You can post the first part of the 2nd Amendment! YAY for you Neo!



Now, let's see if you can spot the mistake that Penn in the above video made.

I'll give you a hint

Now, the parts that you blatantly forgot to add to your post.

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

www.archives.gov...

reply to post by HauntWok


Yeah most people like to conventaly forget the 1st part.

Its a case of wanting something "cool" without the responsibility and training the first part of the amendment entails. The "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" bit was not but infront of the "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" for laughs. If it was seperate issue it would have been put in a seperate amendment.


But hey just as long as every tom dick and harry can have there "cool" Gunz without any work. And by work I mean a mandatory safety course.

reply to post by HauntWok


I don't know what Bill of Rights you've been reading, but The Bill of Rights that I've read says this:

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.

Which happens to be exactly what Neo posted.

What you posted is from Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution which overlays the responsibilities of Congress. A1S8 is NOT part of the Bill of Rights so there is no other part of the 2nd amendment that Neo failed to post. He posted the whole thing. Don't muddy the waters by making it seem like the pro-gun side is hiding information.

Also it's nice that you linked that section, because the last time Congress exercised that particular part of the Constitution was for WWII. The President has hijacked that particular delegation of duty and then even more recently by deploying the National Guard overseas. And you wonder why gun owners are ready for a second Revolution.

Originally posted by crazyewok

Originally posted by TheSpanishArcher
"Shall NOT infringe". It's a constitutionally protected right, get over it.

So is the part of "WELL REGULATED MIITIA" but you Americans seem to forget that part.

You see thesecound part and think OMGZ GUNZ but forgot the first part that seem to insist on the training and responsibility that comes with it.

And I dont think they they had the Goverment controlled National guard in mind either when your forfathers wrote it down but a purley state controlled body with no Fedral control.

edit on 20-8-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

I get a kick out of the Brits on this site that act like they have any business worrying about our Bill of Rights.
Seriously, has sh** to do with you.
You should be more concerned about breaking up another UK pedo ring, instead of our 2nd amendment