It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How many more victims before Americans demand the repeal of "gun free" or victim disarmament zones

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 06:58 PM

People, its not a coincidence: Newtown CT, Blacksburg VA, Fort Hood, Columbine, Aurora etc.

The perpetrators of these crimes are not randomly choosing these locations.

They are specifically targeting these areas because they know they can inflict maximum casualties. They know that honest, gullible, naive, law-abiding citizens will respect these stupid laws and leave their firearms outside the invisible border of the "gun free" zone.

Professor John Lott on gun free zones.

Shortly after the gunfire, Mason said, someone on an overhead speaker told workers to seek shelter and later to head for the gates at the complex.

Yah, go hide until police arrive...

And please, lets not even start the "banning guns" nonsense.

Its a right, not a privilege.

From 1989:

edit on 16-9-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)

Banning guns in any way shape or form is against the constitution. It would have to be changed and ratified and that will never happen. So many people talk about stupid things like Syria causing civil war, try taking our guns and there would be war.

Want to do something, try getting treatment programs for mentally ill. All the shooter's past year had mental illness. Better place to start.

The Bot

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:04 PM

reply to post by gladtobehere

So your proposed solution to gun violence is to introduce more guns into the equation? I don't see how that helps. The more people you have shooting in the same place, the worse it's gonna be.

We do not have to introduce guns into the equation... the criminals have already done that for us.

Instead of feeling like guns are being introduced into an equation where they already exist, think of it to be like untying the hands of the law-abiding citizens who are being killed with no legal way to defend themselves.

Could you beat up Mike Tyson in his prime fighting condition?

What if I strapped him into a chair and tied his hands behind his back, then blind-folded him, could you beat him up then?

you w/guns = Mike Tyson
you w/o guns = Mike Tyson, strapped to a chair, hands tied behind his back, & blind-folded.
edit on 19-9-2013 by esteay812 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:50 PM
reply to post by sparky31

Well, you don't have to go back too far to find an example of a shooting in a small Scottish town. On 13 March 1996, Thomas Hamilton entered Dunblane primary school with four handguns and shot dead 16 children and one adult. He then shot himself.

Tennis player Andy Murray broke down in tears while remembering the event in a recent interview. A good friend of mine has two daughters, now in their 20s, who survived the shooting and are still traumatised by what they experienced.

If that proves anything, I guess it's that having a low level of gun ownership and strict licensing doesn't guard against the actions of nutcases.

The outcome of Dunblane was an effective ban on handgun ownership in the UK, with even legitimate users such as Olympic sportsmen and women having to travel abroad to practise their sport.

I think that was a kneejerk reaction that penalised innocent people, but on the whole I would not support the liberalisation of UK gun laws or the routine arming of our police.

posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 12:21 AM
reply to post by gladtobehere

Maybe the fact that the SWAT team was told to stand down, and prevented from going in and helping, could make people think! I prefer to be able to defend myself!

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in