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.

 

New Gallup Poll - % of Americans favoring stricter gun laws falls in 2014, % favoring less strict up

page: 3
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



Yes I was scratching my head??? Then realized a lack of clarity.

It is interesting being on the other end of the wrath and seeing the defense coming at you.




posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   

buster2010
Sorry but if you are not a member of a well regulated militia then you do not have the right to bear arms. That is what the constitution says everyone keeps making the wrong assumption.


Not this again.

The Supreme Court has ruled as recently as the 2008 DC v Heller decision that the individual right to arms exists unconnected to militia service. Until such time as that decision is revisited, if it ever is, then that interpretation is essentially the law of the land.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


ROFL... Well, my sincere bad for that and my bunny eyes must have just been extra sleepy this morning.

Glad to hear we're all on the same side after all, even if our overall side still has disagreement here and there... Nothing that stands in the way of the main goal, right? Freedom and the protection of it's basic core values.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   

buster2010
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 





The other activity you mention isn't a protected and ABSOLUTE right of the citizens of the United States, protected as Item #2 in our founding papers and core values of the nation itself.


Sorry but if you are not a member of a well regulated militia then you do not have the right to bear arms. That is what the constitution says everyone keeps making the wrong assumption.


As someone else mentioned, that "Well Regulated Militia" wording was finally defined and defined to encompass the entirely of the U.S. Population ...not just Militia as defined by some State or Federal criteria.

DC vs. Heller (2008)

The above is the case that settled that and put to rest the ignorant notion held before that happened, that Militia may mean National Guard, Reserves or some other body regulated by the very Government the 2nd was written as a last ditch option to counter. It wouldn't have made much sense, otherwise ...but it did need properly defined, which it was with the Heller case.
edit on 3-2-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


Take that up with the Supreme Court. They ruled on it in 2008

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.

The second Ammendment provides two rights: the right for a state to have a militia AND the right for the people to bear arms.
But I can take it one step further. If you own a firearm, then you are part of the militia. You don't have to go to meetings.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


How is it still regulated???

By the Progressives that have infected the Govt.

How is one to Bear Arms, if the Govt states "well, you can't buy or sell it".

It is infringement anyway one looks at it.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


This has been presented to you, and others, several times over.

Title 10 USC 311. Militia composition and classes.

All able-bodied americans from 17 to 45 years of age are members of the Militia. American women who are members of the national guard are members of the Militia. Former members of the U.S.Army, navy, air force and Marine corps are members of the Militia until 64 years of age. (described in 32-313). The national guard and naval militia are called the organized Militia. The unorganized militia is everyone in the militia who is not in the national guard or the naval militia.


So.......



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
If some people call the criminals, the cops, and the military ALL being better armed than the average John, and Jane Doe citizen.

'Well regulated'.

Well that has been and EPIC failure.

If you support laws disarming the law abiding citizen then you support fascism.

It is that simple.

If you support laws disarming the law abiding citizen then you support the epitome of the police state.

Zeig Heil !.

Then there is all that arms dealing the US government does arming drug cartels, and any 2 bit dictator so called 'friend' of the day.

If you support having to ask government for permission to own a gun you can't get any more ridiculous.

And if you haven't led a perfect little life in America ( which there is no one) it is next to impossible.

If you support holding an entire population GUILTY for actions they did not do that's more fascist.

What makes gun 'regulation' asinine is there is current no gun law on the books that the laws against assault, and murder DON'T already cover.

Think people.

Stop supporting fascism.

The only people who think we need more gun laws are the people who never bought one.
edit on 3-2-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   

neo96
If some people call the criminals, the cops, and the military ALL being better armed than the average John, and Jane Doe citizen.

'Well regulated'.

Well that has been and EPIC failure.

If you support laws disarming the law abiding citizen then you support fascism.


That is a terrible analogy, while I disagree with disarming the citizenry, this is a HUGE and brash assumption that is frankly insulting. It also does nothing to further your cause and will probably just upset people.


It is that simple.

If you support laws disarming the law abiding citizen the you support the epitome of the police state.


Again, not true. Disarming the citizenry may result in a police state, but the supporters probably just want their families and friends to be safer (though their solution is misguided).


Zeig Heil !.

Then there is all that arms dealing the US government does arming drug cartels, and any 2 bit dictator so called 'friend' of the day.

If you support having to ask government for permission to own a gun you can't get any more ridiculous.

And if you haven't led a perfect little life in America ( which there is no one) it is next to impossible.

If you support holding an entire population GUILTY for actions they did not do that's more fascist.


You mean like demonizing a whole religion based on the actions of a few all so you can invade two countries?


What makes gun 'regulation' asinine is there is current no gun law on the books that the laws against assault, and murder DON'T already cover.

Think people.

Stop supporting fascism.


edit on 3-2-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


Stop supporting right wing talking points and rise above the political divide. You make good points but obscure them in partisan talking points that will only make your opposition mad and do little to change anyone's minds.
edit on 3-2-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 





That is a terrible analogy, while I disagree with disarming the citizenry, this is a HUGE and brash assumption that is frankly insulting. It also does nothing to further your cause and will probably just upset people.


Nope.

Holding me, and millions of my fellow countryman accountable for actions we didn't do is a HUGE BRASS ASSUMPTION of what someone MIGHT do.

They haven't done anything, and last time I checked people who commit a crime, get their trial by jury. Where I haven't, and neither have millions of other gun owners.

I find gun regulation INSULTING.

Because as previously stated.

There is no gun law on the book, that the already previous law against murder already covers.




Again, not true. Disarming the citizenry may result in a police state, but the supporters probably just want their families and friends to be safer (though their solution is misguided).


Yeah it is true.

All them 'safe zones' not so safe.




You mean like demonizing a whole religion based on the actions of a few all so you can invade two countries?


That has jacksnip to do with the topic, but hell throw it in anyway.

But let's roll with it, That is the same people making those asinine gun laws.




Stop supporting right wing talking points and rise above the political divide. You make good points but obscure them in partisan talking points that will only make your opposition mad and do little to change anyone's minds.


You got to be effing kidding me ?

Those aren't 'right wing talking points'.

That is liberalism,.

In the classical sense.

FREEDOM.

My next door neighbor, and my government has exactly ZERO right to tell me what I can or can't own then turns around and is one of the worlds largest arms dealer.

Straight up FACT.

The US government has more blood on it's hands than any American gun owner.
edit on 3-2-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   
I haven't trusted any polling that has been done in the last 14 years or so
think about it most of these people don't trust you to live your life without there help
I find it VERY hard to believe they really care how you answer them
when they could just know how it turns out b4 the poll is taken..why leave it up to chance
when it could be another nail to seal the agenda

they want gun control..as in they want to take away weapons and standing armed forces from the people of all countries
and give an army to the united nations to police the world..they have been waiting for it to happen since 1946


forgive me it slips my mind right now who said it but
a communist is just a socialist who knows what there doing



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join