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.
originally posted by: seagull
Every single school in my town have houses, usually a lot of 'em, well within the 1000' radius of this proposed idiocy. I wonder, do the owner of these homes have to undergo some form of psychological exam in order to live there, after all, they might be dangerous.
originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: neo96
I know.
My facetious seems to be broken this morning...afternoon...whatever the heck it is.
Good luck enforcing this rule.
Here's an interesting thing to think about.
Every single school in my town have houses, usually a lot of 'em, well within the 1000' radius of this proposed idiocy. I wonder, do the owner of these homes have to undergo some form of psychological exam in order to live there, after all, they might be dangerous. ...*gasp*...they might even own a gun or two.
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t
To be honest, anyone who seriously entertains the idea of a gun confiscation in this country is deluding themselves. It's just fearmongering to assume that such a thing would occur. Even the democrats, when pushing gun control, never push to outright ban all guns. It's always restrictions on how to buy them.
That is just what Americans in the 1940s thought about their gold and silver until the STATE confiscated it.
That is just what the Japanese Americans thought then the STATE took all their belongs at the outbreak of world war 2. Then were thrown in fema camps of their day.
And that's what the Native Americans thought until Uncle Same took their weapons, and put them on trails of tears to the reservations.
Unlikely ?
Yeah right.
originally posted by: butcherguy
I know a farmer that owns fields bordering a school. He would not be able to walk his property line with his shotgun to hunt pheasants without breaking the law.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: seeker1963
I have ADD. Though I'm not sure why you are asking me these questions. I never said I was in support of these EO's. To me, Executive Action from Obama when it comes to guns is just feel good policy to convince the idiots that he is doing something.
originally posted by: seeker1963
...
pill pimps pushing their poison!
originally posted by: hknudzkknexnt
If they would take them it won't be on your terms
Prepare to be very un prepared
a reply to: seeker1963
originally posted by: hknudzkknexnt
IF I had children I would be worried. Imagine sleeping then hearing swat burst into your home and hear screams things being broken and such in a massive raid all because... You posted your beliefs on a public channel, causing you to become a sore thumb a giant red dot
Always stand up for your rights, but do it legaly. Please
a reply to: seeker1963
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: seagull
So, if I were to walk to the store, which I've been known to do...I have to past by a school, I'll be frisked. Cool, something to look forward to.
I was guessing.
I have no clue how they think that 1000 foot no gun 'rule' can be enforced.
The only way it can be is by going all gestapo on people.
The White House confirmed that President Obama was preparing a series of executive actions on gun control to match his recent passion on the issue after the latest mass shooting in Oregon.
“It’s a high priority and will continue to be until we start to see more progress on this issue in this town,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters today at the press briefing.
Earnest said he would “quibble” with anyone who criticized the president for not voicing any specific gun control proposals during his press conference, asserting that the White House was working behind the scenes for more executive actions on guns.
...Theres been a tendency of this administration to hide behind executive privilidge everytime theres something shaky taking place.
originally posted by: crazyewok
Obama cant.
I dont see how he can. Such a executive order would be illegal and the states could just ignore it am I correct?