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.

 

Lethal weapon: This is the gun that is killing America

page: 12
26
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   
With our right to access to military equipment comes
    Innovation
    Transportation
    Opportunity
    Culture


But, no. The current owners of this country want
to keep everyone peasant like, and scared to
travel. How many people have you met who have
not even traveled outside of their own state, let
alone outside their own city. The answer should
be zero. But it isn't.



I mean, seriously, who doesn't want one of these
in their town.

Mike

edit on 6-11-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


I dont want the second amendment amended. To me "well regulated militia" means the people compromising these militias are being well regulated by the government. I think for most people this is what it means in plain english.

Just because the government has decided to work for the bankers doesnt make my opinion any less rellevant. If people were informed voters and voted responsibly, stopped listening to msm so much, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Thats about all I have to say.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 02:47 PM
link   

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


I dont want the second amendment amended. To me "well regulated militia" means the people compromising these militias are being well regulated by the government. I think for most people this is what it means in plain english.

Just because the government has decided to work for the bankers doesnt make my opinion any less rellevant. If people were informed voters and voted responsibly, stopped listening to msm so much, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Thats about all I have to say.


However, "well regulated militia" does not mean regulated by the government, it never has, it was not intended to, and "government regulation" was not even a term that existed in 1790. Besides, the body of the Constitution sets out very clearly how and when the federal government is to control and call out the militia, and regulating the day in and day out operation is not anywhere in there.

Besides, even if one regulates the militia, there still is nothing that mandates anything on "the people" when they are not called up as a militia, so the part that says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," still stands as written as well. You can't take one clause literally and not take the other clause literally.

The second amendment is very simple: because the founders wanted a militia of the people to be well equipped and ready to go and that a militia of the people was necessary for a free society, they decided that the people should have the right to keep and bear arms--period. There were no qualifiers at all, of any sort. No "only in militia service," no "only for sporting purposes," no "only arms not used in crimes." Nothing. Not a single qualifier. There are qualifiers and details all throughout the Constitution, but not in the second amendment. The reason why is because they believed that the right to keep and bear arms was just as much a fundamental right as the freedom of speech. Nowhere in the second amendment or anywhere in the constitution does it say they have a right to arms when in a militia capacity only and nowhere in the Constitution does it say the military and police are to be allowed better arms than the people.
edit on 6-11-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Hit "quote" instead of "edit."
edit on 6-11-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


So well regulated militia means that only military forces are to be regulated, since citizen rights to own arms cannot be infringed? That does make sense.

Also back then there were not any professional servicemen, so anyone that participated in the revolutionary war was automatically considered militia.

Today militia connotates professionalism.
edit on 6/11/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: add content



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


So well regulated militia means that only military forces are to be regulated, since citizen rights to own arms cannot be infringed? That does make sense.


That's my take on it.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   

NavyDoc

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


So well regulated militia means that only military forces are to be regulated, since citizen rights to own arms cannot be infringed? That does make sense.


That's my take on it.


Then if that is the case people wrongly interpret civilians to be part of the militia and the government has been perpetuating this disinfo for a long time. Thanks for your well thought-out replies. I know I can be very stubborn with my views but it doesnt mean I cant change my mind. It just takes an awful lot of convincing lol.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
As previously stated, I find that regarding the language of the time to be extremely important. Well regulated was a common phrase that meant "in good working order". Not sanctioned, controlled, mandated, overseen, or legislated by a government. The phrase "well regulated" was in common use all the way up to the first decade of the 20th century.

"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."

Translates to:

"A well drilled and disciplined Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It is still used by some of the bespoke old-school gunsmiths steeped in tradition like Holland & Holland, Purdey & Sons, Hartmann & Weiss, Lebeau Courally etc. They still refers to the proper functioning of their firearms as being "well regulated" or simply "regulated".
edit on 6-11-2013 by Galvatron because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Galvatron
 


So basically it was 'ole english' from the skakespearean era?

Even today american english from british english can be vastly different.

Where is the lift mate?



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


One of my favorites is "lorry". Which means truck.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   

NavyDoc

mikegrouchy

Galvatron
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


The 2nd amendment doesn't include ordnance, only arms (man portable personal weapons). Ordnance was recognized then as it is now as being a different category of weapon.


Yes, please continue being the "rational" one
as someone should do it. Even when the gun
grabbers have shown them selves to anathema
to reason, healthy compromise, or truth.



I will continue to push for compensation
commensurate with the level of infringement
heaped on us for decades.



I'll take two.

Mike


Love the comic...so true, so true.


2d ... Even though Galvatron is ... unfortunately/technically/legally/Constitutionally ... correct. Can you imagine showing up to the range in your very own Apache?!? LOL

The 'real' problem with military grade weapons is that it would require only a very small force of people to reek a whole lot of mayhem. Stopping such a force ... whew!! ... I wouldn't want any part of it. For The General ATS Readership: If you have ever been exposed to sustained indirect fire, you know EXACTLY what I mean. If you have not, open your mind and think about what I just said.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 

I remember a contest where a kid won a Harrier jet and they said "no".You can by surplus aircraft called "Warbirds" but you'd better be qualified for licensing on the type and jets ain't easy. Not to mention a million in maintainance and fuel a year for the up keep on a jet.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:50 AM
link   

cavtrooper7
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 

I remember a contest where a kid won a Harrier jet and they said "no".You can by surplus aircraft called "Warbirds" but you'd better be qualified for licensing on the type and jets ain't easy. Not to mention a million in maintainance and fuel a year for the up keep on a jet.



Your talking about the Pepsi Catalog, where
they advertised that one could win a Harrier
for 7,000,000 points.


Well one guy did, demanded his harrier, and
Pepsi said "lol, was a joke G." So he sued.




Here is the original commercial.

Pepsi won the case by saying it was illegal,
anyway, for a civilian to own a harrier.

wikipedia / Leonard vs. Pepsi Co. Inc.


Mike

edit on 7-11-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 07:18 AM
link   

EarthCitizen07
Why the "if that"? Just about every country on earth, except maybe cuba and north korea, allow shotguns. I really love my double barrell because I get the best bang for the buck in every regard. The choice of ammunition cannot be beat. Its just not a good military weapon though because it has a maximum effective range of about 100 yards with sabot slugs. Normal accurate distance is about 40 to 60 yards with all other shells.


If they do allow shotguns it certainly is not as freely and leisurely as it is in the US.

And I'm pretty sure Japan, for instance, does not allow possession of shotguns. Or if it does, it's probably break action or something like that. Or permits are rarer than hen's teeth.


EarthCitizen07Why not? Its just as semi-auto as a bolt action rifle. One trigger pull equals one bullet on the way.

Unless you are trying to imply there are too many full-auto conversion kits available, but failed to get your point across.


I suspect you're trying to pretend to be a smart aleck going a. and comparing a bolt action to a semi-automatic rifle. You are failing miserably.


EarthCitizen07

Pejeu

You can't hunt with a bolt action rifle?


Of course I could but its not good for birds, rabbits, ducks, geese, etc.

Its good for dear, protection from bears, snipping on alqueda terrorists, wild boar, etc.

I cant afford too many guns. I am as poor as they come. Spare a thought for me.


Don't hunt what you can't afford to, then.


kingofyo1
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


That fact makes me wonder if EVERYONE outside of the states thinks Hitler was a good guy... And then I remember there's people that come around like TrueBrit every once in a while and my faith in humanity is partially restored


Because, of course, thinking civilians should NOT have ready access to firearm ownership is akin to thinking Hitler was a good guy.

Thanks for reminding me how deep thinking and open minded the average right wing / gun loving American is.


TKDRL
Or any highly trained individual with any weapon.


You mean like that dude that killed JFK?

Or that other dude that snipped a whole campus, this dude?




kingofyo1
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Well, you gotta remember Genocide has never been a popular idea amongst society


By your reasoning warzones should be the safest places on Earth to live.

Everyone packing in a warzone. So nobody ever dies or is maimed for life.

We should seek out places like 'liberated' Libya or war torn Syria to live.

I mean, all those guns around surely mean that their gun murder rates are the lowest in the world.

More guns = less crime (including murder), don't it?

So how come so many people die of gunshots in warzones, where everyone but toddlers is carrying?
edit on 2013/11/7 by Pejeu because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 08:20 AM
link   

glowdog
people turn into something else when armed. in their "last stronghold" ... hunting "human animals".

wow


Indeed.

It's like with BMW drivers, somehow.


TKDRL
reply to post by glowdog
 


It's called defense. Someone thinking they can help their selves to the fruits of our labour, or bring harm to people in our community are no better than some wolves or coyotes trying to get into the livestock. People want to act like animals, they will be treated as such. Why do you think it doesn't happen here? We won't allow it to happen.

We won't give up our guns anymore than we would let someone steal any of the tools we rely on to live.


In fewer words, you're looking forward to the opportunity to shoot someone over property.
edit on 2013/11/7 by Pejeu because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Pejeu
 


We are going to have to agree to disagree about JFK lol.......
Taxas shooting, yeah, there you can see what happens when someone who knows what they are doing does the shooting. And if I recall correctly, his weapon of choice was a bolt action rifle. Kinda proves my point, don't you think? Someone who knows what they are doing can do real damage, even with a bolt action. All they need is a good vantage point, you can find those all over a city.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Pejeu
 


In fewer words, I will do what I have to do. Doesn't mean I am gonna enjoy doing it, or foaming at the mouth for a chance. Nice try. I bust my ass to earn my money, why would I let someone else take what I have sweat and bled for? Why would I allow it to happen to anyone in my bluecollar community?



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 08:52 AM
link   

TKDRL
reply to post by Pejeu
 


We are going to have to agree to disagree about JFK lol.......
Taxas shooting, yeah, there you can see what happens when someone who knows what they are doing does the shooting. And if I recall correctly, his weapon of choice was a bolt action rifle. Kinda proves my point, don't you think? Someone who knows what they are doing can do real damage, even with a bolt action. All they need is a good vantage point, you can find those all over a city.


Which speaks to why civs shouldn't be allowed to own any firearms at all. Including long guns.

Maybe just muzzle loaders as they had back in the day they actually wrote your constitution. It was actually all they had back then. Even hand guns were muzzle loaded.


TKDRL
reply to post by Pejeu
 


In fewer words, I will do what I have to do. Doesn't mean I am gonna enjoy doing it, or foaming at the mouth for a chance. Nice try. I bust my ass to earn my money, why would I let someone else take what I have sweat and bled for? Why would I allow it to happen to anyone in my bluecollar community?


You already do. Without even realising it.

And I'm not talking about the gubmint.

You're going to kill someone trying to stave off death by starvation but what do you do now, against the money power?

Absolutely nothing.

Hell, you prolly work for the money power for all I know.
edit on 2013/11/7 by Pejeu because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Pejeu
 


It's a great thing people like you will never get your way. Not in the US, not in Canada.

Someone staving off starvation you say? More like trying to support a drug habit, the majority of what people breaking into homes are doing. Not because they are hungry, but because they need their next score. They were hungry, plenty of soup kitchens around. They don't steal food, they steal stuff they can pawn off easy. People that feel they are entitled to help themselves to other people's property are sick.


edit on Thu, 07 Nov 2013 09:01:38 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Pejeu

glowdog
people turn into something else when armed. in their "last stronghold" ... hunting "human animals".

wow


Indeed.

It's like with BMW drivers, somehow.


TKDRL
reply to post by glowdog
 


It's called defense. Someone thinking they can help their selves to the fruits of our labour, or bring harm to people in our community are no better than some wolves or coyotes trying to get into the livestock. People want to act like animals, they will be treated as such. Why do you think it doesn't happen here? We won't allow it to happen.

We won't give up our guns anymore than we would let someone steal any of the tools we rely on to live.


In fewer words, you're looking forward to the opportunity to shoot someone over property.
edit on 2013/11/7 by Pejeu because: (no reason given)


You say that like its a bad thing.

P.S. no one in America breaks into houses because they are starving. If you're starving, we have churches. Soup kitchens, and food stamps.
If you're gonna troll effectively you need to be based in reality
edit on 7-11-2013 by riffraff because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
26
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join