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.

 

An Open Letter to Lovers of the Gun

page: 10
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


Your use of semantics are okay at best.

Most of the Govt power has come into life from force. Or threat of force.

Again. If the Anti-gun rights crowd is so sure of their backing, why not take this the correct route of Amending the Constitution to ban guns.


I would love to see the result of such a journey.




posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


Gun free school zones as well.

I love it when criminals obey laws.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

soulwaxer


I'm all for the 2nd, but I don't see much point to it as long as the citizens do not have the same amount of fire-power as their government. You know, like jet fighters, drones, missiles and nukes...



Then you truly don't understand why the 2nd Amendment was included in the founding documents.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by eManym
 


It is not a privilege. It is a right.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


No no no no no.

They were targeted because they were sick and tired of the Govt circumventing the laws.

There was no law broken by stock piling firearms. They wanted to be left alone.

You are pitching BS as fact and it is getting old.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   

FyreByrd

LurkingRelentlessly
i have a serious question for everybody who relies on police to save them in dangerous situations.

what do you do when the power is out? because where i live thats when most burglaries occur.

oh...your cell phone?

have you ever seen one of these? are you aware of how easy they are to create? the parts are readily available at radioshack.

your more vulnerable than you think.


I certainly don't 'rely' on anyone else to 'save' me. I don't put myself in dangerous situations nor do I relish 'winning'. As such, I've rarely found my self in dangerous situations.

Maybe it's a guy thing - like big cars. But it gets people killed.


so if you find yourself in a situation where you are in danger of being attacked, you do what....exactly?

you pretend your not being attacked?

or are you saying that danger only comes to those who invite it?

please explain. ill let you know beforehand that both notions are laughable...but...please continue.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


You don't put yourself in "dangerous situations"? I am not trying to be an ass here but how exactly do you know when you will find yourself in a "dangerous situation"? LOL

Banks get robbed, gas stations get robbed.....the list is endless. If a crazy person wants to shoot up the mall with you in it how exactly are you going to avoid that? If you are in the bank getting a loan and someone comes in to rob it and starts shooting people how are you going to avoid that?

If people knew when bad things were going to happen don't you think they would avoid it? Your statement is just silly BUT I do agree that the likelihood of me being in the bank when it is robbed is low BUT to say that I don't put myself in "dangerous situations" as you say is just silly. Bad things happen to good people minding their own business and living life every single day in all kinds of places that are not "dangerous".

I live in a nice and quite East Texas town where most people are very nice and mind their own business. In November last year we had a home invasion here and a Mother and her 10 year old daughter were murdered IN THEIR OWN HOME by a random person. Is that a "dangerous situation" to you? Sitting in your own home in an area with very little crime and everyone pretty much knows each other seems like it would not qualify as a "dangerous situation". I wish you well living in your "un-dangerous" community, good luck....



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by BugOut
 


Just the thought of not wanting to be in dangerous situations, makes it so these things don't happen to people.


Only in the mind of a Progressive does such a thought occur.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


Politics and propaganda. I often find it interesting how anyone can pull statistic off the internet and show that they support whatever agenda they are pushing, either the pro-gun one or the anti-gun one.

Sure there is more death and violence now then there was 10, 20, 100 years ago -- there are more people around. Wherever you have gatherings of people you are going to eventually have drama, violence, scandals, disharmony, etc. If they don't have access to guns they will use knives, bats or make their own explosives with household cleaners and their copy of some kill-everyone-around-you handbook you can download off the Internet.

Owing a car, weapon, taboo book or whatever doesn't mean you support the violence that surrounds us. It is all crazy though. It boggles my mind that it's okay to show kids gore and violence but gods forbid you show them a breast. Society and the world is messed up and going around banning things isn't really going to fix it.

What it is going to do is make it more difficult for the responsible people to take a stand against those who want to lead society right into a future where everyone is an autonomous sheeple incapable of independent thought.

These kinds of threads always make me remember a classic movie...here's a few quotes:

Lenina Huxley: Ah, smoking is not good for you, and it's been deemed that anything not good for you is bad; hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, contact sports, meat... Bad language, chocolate, gasoline, uneducational toys and anything spicy. Abortion is also illegal, but then again so is pregnancy if you don't have a licence.
Lenina Huxley: Taco Bell was the only restaurant to survive the Franchise Wars. Now all restaurants are Taco Bell.
Moral Statute Machine: You are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute.

So put me on this side of things:

Edgar Friendly: ... I'm the enemy because I like to think. I like to read, I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy that could sit in a greasy spoon and wonder gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs or the side order of gravy fries. I want high cholesterol. I would eat bacon and butter and buckets of cheese. OK. I want to smoke Cuban cigars the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-O all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why, because I might suddenly feel the need to. OK? Pal, I've seen the future. Know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his pajamas, sipping a banana-broccoli shake, singing 'I'm the Oscar Meyer wiener'...

Okay, maybe a little over the top...but the point stands, fix the root of the problem, don't try and Band-Aid the problem because in the end that Band-Aid is gonna come off and the fallout is gonna make everything worse before it can get better.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


If you want a solution to the school shooting things, perhaps you could look into history.

Apparently back in the old days, this wasn't an issue. Growing up in the '70's and 80's, this just didn't happen.

And wait for it......folks still had guns back then.

Knowing that, guns don't seem to be the root of the problem here. Could it be.......parenting? Society? Liberalism? Socialism? Lack of faith? Human life devalued?

Perhaps you and your buddy who wrote that letter could expand your tiny minds.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   

network dude
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


If you want a solution to the school shooting things, perhaps you could look into history.

Apparently back in the old days, this wasn't an issue. Growing up in the '70's and 80's, this just didn't happen.

And wait for it......folks still had guns back then.

Knowing that, guns don't seem to be the root of the problem here. Could it be.......parenting? Society? Liberalism? Socialism? Lack of faith? Human life devalued?

Perhaps you and your buddy who wrote that letter could expand your tiny minds.


Not in this numbers. If I remember correctly, USA produces about 5.5 million firearms yearly and about 90% of that stays in states. This number excludes military.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by SuperFrog
 


This says otherwise.


It's just one source, but it does seem to disagree with your memory.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Lots of gun data in USA is actually product of gun lobby and I have high doubts about those numbers.

Here is couple of interesting graphs for you and rest of gun-lovers...





Your lower number of household with guns is not product of people selling and getting rid of guns, but higher number of households, from migration to new households, many of them not needing gun for everyday life...

BTW, here is number I remember seen, and 90% of that stays in USA:

2010: 5,459,240
2009: 5,555,818
2008: 4,498,944
2007: 3,922,613
2006: 3,653,324
2005: 3,241,494
2004: 3,099,025
2003: 3,308,404
2002: 3,366,895
2001: 2,932,655
2000: 3,793,541
1999: 4,047,747
1998: 3,713,590
1997: 3,593,504
1996: 3,854,439
1995: 4,316,342
1994: 5,173,217
1993: 5,055,637
1992: 4,175,836
1991: 3,563,106
1990: 3,959,968
1989: 4,418,393
1988: 3,963,877
1987: 3,559,663
1986: 3,040,934


We are first country to have more guns than total population. (I believe latest numbmers are like 101 gun per 100 people, guess what it was 40 years ago)



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   

SuperFrog
We are first country to have more guns than total population. (I believe latest numbmers are like 101 gun per 100 people, guess what it was 40 years ago)


Which brings me back to my point. 40 years ago, kids didn't go out and shoot up schools.

Logic, the lost art.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   

network dude

SuperFrog
We are first country to have more guns than total population. (I believe latest numbmers are like 101 gun per 100 people, guess what it was 40 years ago)


Which brings me back to my point. 40 years ago, kids didn't go out and shoot up schools.

Logic, the lost art.


That is exactly what I said, number of guns 40 years ago was not the same as of today. You showed graph that supposed to say my numbers did not make any sense. Remember this post?


Higher numbers correspond to higher crimes, including more mass shooting.

Just look at this number, 5.5 million of guns, 90% sold in states - 4.95 millions of guns - huge industry and someone is profiting a lot, spreading some wealth among politicians that support industry.

Every time there is this debate, I wish USA congress has the same thing as NASCAR racers - showing their donors on their uniforms and car. It would be much easier to know why some politician voted the way they did...


edit on 27-1-2014 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   

macman
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


What is anyone supposed to get out of this?

We get it. You and others are afraid of an inanimate object.
Just because you and he, and others want to disarm, does not mean everyone else should.

All this is is the typical Anti-Gun rights emotional rant.

The only thing missing was some kids standing behind Mr. Pitt, and maybe Senator de Leon giving his explanation of firearms.

If you and others want to ban guns, get the 2nd Amendment changed the correct way. Instead of circumventing the process and doing it the "Progressive's" way.




If it is just a simple inanimate object, why do you even need it? Why defend it so much? If it is just an inanimate object....



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 01:31 PM
link   

teslahowitzer
I feel sorry for these people, I really do, but they and you will never dictate policy to me, NEVER. I am 100% behind the 2nd, which, without it, there is no 1st ammendment. You bleeding heart sissies do not get it and never will, and that will never be my problem, never. If you had a clue, in which there are serious doubts, you would put the blame where it REALLY belongs, with the parents of these children, not with a 238 year old document that will domino past your level of comprehension. You can yack all you want and my enlighten the weak minded single celled idiots, but to the awake patriots, we see the bs and call you on it. If these children are homicidal. in the true form, had no access to guns, they would use knives or similar, you gonna call for a ban on knives? baseball bats? and the list goes on and on....there will be no end to this and that needs to be understood. In reality, these two ammendments are the first and second for a real reason, just because you fail to see that for what it is does not make it someone else's problem, want my guns? come get them...


Another weak argument. Name a 25 person killing spree done with a bat.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   

KawRider9
Cars kill waaay more people than guns!

Ban 'em Deano...


Which is why measures for car safety exponentially improve every single year. Which is why there are speed limits, seat belts, and air bags, that are all required.

So the same measures are needed for guns, whose technology have NOT improved, ever, to make them safer.

Besides, this is a silly comparison. People need cars, people don't need guns.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 01:35 PM
link   

thisguyrighthere
I always loved teh "if there's a gun in your home" statistic.

If there's a car in your driveway you increase your chances of getting in an accident.

If you eat a lot of rice you increase your chances of choking to death on rice.

If you have a furnace you increase your chances of dying in a furnace explosion.

If you have children you increase the chances that your child will die.

As a side note: Children Decrease Happiness


Yet another weak and disingenuous comparison.

How many people do you personally know that have died from rice?

How many people do you know personally that have had a furnace explode?

For me it is zero.

However, I have seen people shot, and killed, with guns.



posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 01:37 PM
link   

nixie_nox

teslahowitzer
I feel sorry for these people, I really do, but they and you will never dictate policy to me, NEVER. I am 100% behind the 2nd, which, without it, there is no 1st ammendment. You bleeding heart sissies do not get it and never will, and that will never be my problem, never. If you had a clue, in which there are serious doubts, you would put the blame where it REALLY belongs, with the parents of these children, not with a 238 year old document that will domino past your level of comprehension. You can yack all you want and my enlighten the weak minded single celled idiots, but to the awake patriots, we see the bs and call you on it. If these children are homicidal. in the true form, had no access to guns, they would use knives or similar, you gonna call for a ban on knives? baseball bats? and the list goes on and on....there will be no end to this and that needs to be understood. In reality, these two ammendments are the first and second for a real reason, just because you fail to see that for what it is does not make it someone else's problem, want my guns? come get them...


Another weak argument. Name a 25 person killing spree done with a bat.



Daegu subway fire, Daegu, South Korea: 2/18/2003. 198 killed, 147 injured. A 56 year old unemployed taxi driver, dissatisfied with his medical treatment, sets fire to a crowded train.

It's not a bat but you see where I am going.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join