CIVIL WAR: Senate To Go For Handguns

reply to post by rockoperawriter
Starred for excellent choice. Also like ambient/black/post metal, hard rock, and classic rock. Can't beat the "classic" classics though, heh.

Back on topic:
I feel like something ominous looms on the horizon for this country, I have a pit in my stomach that I cannot shake. An overwhelming sense of foreboding envelopes my soul, and I fear that we are about to see horrors that we cannot fathom. When I give it thought, the hair stands up on the back of my neck. I hope I am wrong

reply to post by VikingWarlord


a horn of mead to that

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by Observor

 

An Assualt rifle ban, if brought before the Supreme Court, most likely would be found unconstitutional. Every man in America is a soldier. A militiaman. Constitutionally any way.

Whatever will be passed will stand the scrutiny by the Supreme Court. You may still believe it to be unconstitutional, but that is a different story.

The whole point of the second amendment is so the people can maintain a fighting force. A militia. Not just so we can hunt, but to fight.

If the first amendment applies to modern devices and technology, so does the 2nd amendment.

Perhaps. But I doubt you will be able to buy nuclear weapons and ICBMs.

I know that guy killed 28 people, and i don't mean to sound heartless, but I didn't do it.

The only solution is to put armed guards in schools. Should we have too? No. We also shouldn't have to have submarines lurking around each others borders ready to annihilate millions upon millions of CHILDREN and women, but guess what? We do.

Since neither of us is trying to pretend this move has anything to do with preventing mass shootings, we don't need to bring the children into the picture.

Hmmm...
A war between the people who have guns and the people who don't...
Should be quick.

(Edit)
I guess there is something good about the US making so many wars around the globe, we have many battle hardened types discharged into the general public, aka the militia.
These men might be disarmed but, the grabbers just may run into some claymores as they are walking away.
Soldiers aren't dumb, them Afghans taught us something we forgot.

Originally posted by g146541
Hmmm...
A war between the people who have guns and the people who don't...
Should be quick.

(Edit)
I guess there is something good about the US making so many wars around the globe, we have many battle hardened types discharged into the general public, aka the militia.
These men might be disarmed but, the grabbers just may run into some claymores as they are walking away.
Soldiers aren't dumb, them Afghans taught us something we forgot.

edit on 28-12-2012 by g146541 because: No such thing as a fair fight

I don't particularly have an opinion on the authenticity of John Titor's claims but he said that the next Civil War in the US would be people against gov, or rural against cities... hmmm

Andro

disarmed it now

Just get America to stop producing ALL weapons PERIOD.
That way no innocent school child gets massacred at class, no young person will join a gang, no man or woman would be held up at a liquor store, no soldier would commit suicide, there'd be no threat of nuclear war.

But then war IS the biggest business for the US Elite's and every little helps fill their pockets.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Announced on coasttocoast am tonight, anyone posting or talking about this issue on FB will be banned. Remember Feinstein is from CA and so is FB.

reply to post by DataWraith

There will still be over 300 million guns already produced and soldiers can still use their service weapon or hang themselves to commit suicide. So stopping production of new guns wont stop gun violence nor non-gun violence including suicides.

Originally posted by DataWraith
Just get America to stop producing ALL weapons PERIOD.
That way no innocent school child gets massacred at class, no young person will join a gang, no man or woman would be held up at a liquor store, no soldier would commit suicide, there'd be no threat of nuclear war.

But then war IS the biggest business for the US Elite's and every little helps fill their pockets.

Children have been massacred at schools for a long long time.
In Africa where there is a shortage of firearms or guns, they just use machetes, before those, empires used swords and fire.
It's not guns, it's evil men.
But once the guns are gone, they will not be confined to malls or schools, they will be able to do whole cities.
Only a few actually see this truth.
It has happened uncountable times in the past and it will happen again.
Sure 20 children is a tragedy but, I'd take that over 2 million men women and children.

I was being sarcastic y'all.
Apart from the Elites bit, they're all selling war to make money which they cant take with them when they die.
They think they can buy off death, or buy their way out of the noose, they be fools

So since there is the extreme probability that the recent shootings were scripted hoaxes, and that discussion of that revelation is taboo or attacked at any popular website that matters, and that the gun grab is founded upon those likely hoaxes, yet now Civil War talk is promoted and allowed?

This is a super conspiracy dude.
Dont fall for it.

You have any idea how frustrating it is?

To know any day know, people are gonna start snapping as a result of TV psyops?

To sit and watch it happen without being able to stop it?

Nothing good can come from war. Nothing.
The US GOVT needs to stop the war mongering and bloodlust.
Quit being tyrants this is poor administration, unprofitable, and psychopathic.

Unless the ultimate goal is to triple fake us out, and actually be intending to sell and proliferate more arms.

You never know, those arms manufacturing industries have powerful lobbies and have a lot of money to fund a conspiracy.

There are a lot of possibilities here, but they are mostly conspiracies against us .
Hehe.

Any politician who actively and publicly supports the disregarding of the 2nd, would essentially be commiting political suicide.

There will be a war, but it will be a war on gun policy not a war using guns.

The victims of the coming war will be the reputations and political careers of those stupid enough to try and tell Americans their government is the boss...which of course it isn't, and was never designed to be 'in charge'.

The very fact that constitutional gun rights are being attacked and trampled over by the American government, proves absolutely the wisdom of placing the 2nd amendment into the constitution in the first place!

DON'T VOTE for them any longer...ONLY VOTE FOR patriot politicians who respect the American contitution.

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by Xcathdra
All this bill is is a reauthorization of the Brady bill, which lapsed under President Bush and was not pursued by Democrats when they held the government.

Yes this the same law that was in place from 1994 until 2004. So if people who managed to live from1994 till 2004 could come forward and tell us about those dark years of civil war and FEMA camps it might tell us what will happen if this passed again. Those must have been dark days.

And what happened during those years? Columbine. And no, this is not even close to being the same thing. This is an all out assault on the second amendment and will lead to an eventual ban of ALL firearms.

No it is excactly the same law. Word for word.

I am not going to be able to read 8 pages right now to see if someone straightened you out, so....

From Feinstein's own website :

Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by: Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test; Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.

Let me know if I am wrong, but when the Senator that has introduced the bill says it is different, I am going to suppose that it is not exactly the same as the 1994 bill.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
good

no need for high capacity magazines

all these guns really provide, in any practical sense, is the ability of the owner to fantasize about using them and to feel like a tough guy

and statistics show they will more lilkely be used by the owner on a family member, or agaisnt the owner than on an intruder

"happiness is a warm gun...bang bang shoot shoot"

sweet dreams

Yes there IS a need for high capacity magazines. They keep good guys from being outgunned by bad guys. Or would you prefer that bad guys have more job security?

And your so called "stats" are complete and total BS. There is no supporting evidence to your claims.

The Motto of ATS: Deny Ignorance. Try it sometime.

Originally posted by fweezerburn
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Announced on coasttocoast am tonight, anyone posting or talking about this issue on FB will be banned. Remember Feinstein is from CA and so is FB.

Facebook banning people over talking about the ban? That's ridiculous, they wouldn't.

If they did: They would probably be doing the human race a favor, far too many people waste time on that cancerous website. They just might have to re-enter the human race and become productive again.

BTW, what is the purpose of a ban on rifles that have the means of attaching a bayonet?

Have there been a lot of bayonet-related crimes happening????

This is obviously 'feel good' legislation that has a lot of rules that will have zero effect on crime.