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 dooper
No foreign treaty can possibly negate our Bill of Rights. First of all, it's unconstitutional, and it would have to survive the Supreme Court.
Originally posted by LetTheTruthBeTold
This is the reason why the NRA jokingly named Obama the "Firearms salesman of the year." Due to his somewhat radical anti-gun views, people went out in hordes to buy firearms and ammo when he was elected.
Originally posted by suicydking
Originally posted by LetTheTruthBeTold
This is the reason why the NRA jokingly named Obama the "Firearms salesman of the year." Due to his somewhat radical anti-gun views, people went out in hordes to buy firearms and ammo when he was elected.
Sounds to me like everyone who went out & bought enough guns & ammo to create a shortage got hit by the Beanie Baby syndrome. Having a liberal like Obama in ofice who is considered radical by the far right would be the perfect time to start a little campaign to scare everyone into spending millions on guns this year.
What I'm referring to is the notion of artificial scarcity created by those who seek to gain profit by an increased demand.
Beanie Baby syndrome
Originally posted by House Of Mirrors
Originally posted by grayhawkz1
reply to post by House Of Mirrors
I think the presidents had a lot to benefit but we as a country did as well. Each one of our presidents had a personal gain but nothing compared to what we as a country gained. I also believe that those presidents had a lot of noise in their ears from congressmen and big business owners trying to steal some gov money. But in the end, we as a country have become bigger and stronger. No other country can match us and some how, we as citizens have lost that message. The vaccine is just a layer of protection offered to us at NO CHARGE by our government to help us. Sure they bought the vaccines from the big pharmas but someone had to make them. Why not them? I would hate to buy version xyz from WalMart.
no i have to disagree, the country didnt gain much if anything at all
the ones who gained were the politicians and the wealthy in charge
the big companies
as a country our military is weaker and spread thin
we the people have become incredibly weaker and have almost no power at all, it was sort of proven with the bush situation that its very arguable that we dont even have the power of the vote anymore
claiming our country has benefited more then it has been hurt is a severe misrepresentation of the facts, especially with the way our constitution has been completely destroyed compared to what it used to be
[edit on 17-9-2009 by Dramey]
Originally posted by suicydking
Originally posted by LetTheTruthBeTold
This is the reason why the NRA jokingly named Obama the "Firearms salesman of the year." Due to his somewhat radical anti-gun views, people went out in hordes to buy firearms and ammo when he was elected.
Sounds to me like everyone who went out & bought enough guns & ammo to create a shortage got hit by the Beanie Baby syndrome. Having a liberal like Obama in ofice who is considered radical by the far right would be the perfect time to start a little campaign to scare everyone into spending millions on guns this year.
What I'm referring to is the notion of artificial scarcity created by those who seek to gain profit by an increased demand.
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ‘Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009’. SEC. 2. GRANTING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THE AUTHORITY TO DENY THE SALE, DELIVERY, OR TRANSFER OF A FIREARM OR THE ISSUANCE OF A FIREARMS OR EXPLOSIVES LICENSE OR PERMIT TO DANGEROUS TERRORISTS. (a) Standard for Exercising Attorney General Discretion Regarding Transferring Firearms or Issuing Firearms Permits to Dangerous Terrorists- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by inserting the following new section after section 922:
Originally posted by December_Rain
Tbh I have never before read such idiotic statements on ATS before.
Let's consider this-
1. Why do people need guns? Dont you feel safe where you live now under the city's police? If not why are you staying there and dont go to someother country like afghanistan where people can keep as many guns as you want too? What if you live rural, like I do? When seconds count...the police are only minutes away.
It purely makes sense any govt. not only US should know which of it's citizens has guns and what type. A record of this kind would be very handy to lower down crime figures, gang wars, shoot outs, murders, robbery etc. How will you know if a unknown person buys a gun from some shop and uses it for murder?
A record of such kind will help the police to track down criminals.
It has been proven time and time again that criminals don't obey gun laws, NOR do they use guns bought by them (and conversely use guns in which they filled out that little yellow form 4473)
If you are honest and dont intend to use guns for illegal purpose such as helping terrorists by giving them your gun I can't understand why would people be worried if govt. knows they own a gun and of what type. Because it is none of their business what I own (and not listed in my store's inventory..that stuff is MINE) I personally would like to avoid having my firearms confiscated by overzealous State Troopers and California Highway Patrol during a natural disaster like my family went through during Katrina.
Originally posted by December_Rain
Tbh I have never before read such idiotic statements on ATS before.
Let's consider this-
1. Why do people need guns? Dont you feel safe where you live now under the city's police? If not why are you staying there and dont go to someother country like afghanistan where people can keep as many guns as you want too?
It purely makes sense any govt. not only US should know which of it's citizens has guns and what type. A record of this kind would be very handy to lower down crime figures, gang wars, shoot outs, murders, robbery etc. How will you know if a unknown person buys a gun from some shop and uses it for murder?
A record of such kind will help the police to track down criminals.
If you are honest and dont intend to use guns for illegal purpose such as helping terrorists by giving them your gun I can't understand why would people be worried if govt. knows they own a gun and of what type.
Originally posted by RobertAntonWeishaupt
A few quick(ish) points:
1. This seems like a potentially Draconian move on the part of the Government, but remember: the 2nd amendment only guarantees the right to bear arms (for the maintenance of a well-armed militia, no less). It does not guarantee the right to secrecy with regards to the guns. Yes, I understand that knowing where the guns are would be the first step to confiscating them etc etc, but you can't call the legislation in questions "shredding the Constitution".
2. Can we please drop this ridiculous canard that those of us with guns would stand any real chance against a full military assault from either the US or any other country? Can you see daylight where you are sitting? Then guess what, a military sniper a quarter mile a way could kill you where you sit. In your underground bunker? A drone piloted by a 19 year old kid 2 miles off shore can bomb you into dust. Granted, low tech insurgencies are giving our forces all kinds of trouble in Iraq and Afghanistan but they are hardly kicking anyone's ass and they are not living any sort of life that we would be interested in duplicating.
3. Points 1 and 2 being said, we should still be ready to take weapons, provisions, resources and loved ones into remote wooded areas for extended periods of time in the event that TSHTF, but I think that the actions of world financial markets and the stability of the dollar will have far more influence on both the trajectory of the feces and the speed at which the fan is spinning.
reply to post by House Of Mirrors
#2 is one of my new favorites. In the same breath that we speak about how mighty our armed forces are, we talk about the armed rebellion we would put together to go against those forces. Seriously? Think of any rebellion as a piece of gasoline soaked paper being put into a 1000 degree furnance. The time it takes for that paper to evaporate is 10 times the length any rebellion would last against these highly trained, extremely powerful fighting warriors. Time for a plan b, c, d and an e.
[oun, plural -nards /-ˈnɑrdz; Fr. -ˈnar/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [-nahrdz; Fr. -nar] Show IPA . 1. a false or baseless notion, story, meme, report, or rumor
Originally posted by dooper
No foreign treaty can possibly negate our Bill of Rights. First of all, it's unconstitutional, and it would have to survive the Supreme Court.
...............
..............
Originally posted by NoArmsJames
.............
I'll quote this so people have a chance to read it again, though they probably won't.