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.
I am old enough to remember taking my 22 rifle to school and keeping it in my locker so I could hunt rabbits on the way home from school. Nobody ran in fear when they saw me coming (not even the rabbits) and nobody raised a stink about it. We have had semi auto assault weapons for quite a while now, but in the past 30 years or so something has changed. It is not the weapons.
The biggest mistake we have made is to hand out stiffer judicial penalties for drug dealers than we do for murderers. We need to make the death penalty mandatory for people who have a gun in their possession during the commission of a crime or those who are guilty of murdering someone.
That's a good idea. Let's arm ourselves with keyboards and bash some friggin' heads in!
That age group increasingly looks to be the age group that snaps and commits these mass murders. I was actually generalizing but there is some underlying problem that causes them to kill when things go badly for them. I don't know what that is, i have my suspicions but the age group that is committing these horrendous acts is more and more evident.
link
"We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment," the group said in a written statement. "While claiming that no policy proposals would be 'prejudged,' this Task Force spent most of its time on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners -- honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans.
I don't really think raising the age limit would have any effect. It was more a statement to identify the age group that seems to be snapping in violent ways.
We need to make the death penalty mandatory for people who have a gun in their possession during the commission of a crime or those who are guilty of murdering someone. Furthermore we should make sure that penalty is carried out within 60 days of sentencing.
Originally posted by DirtyD
reply to post by groingrinder
We need to make the death penalty mandatory for people who have a gun in their possession during the commission of a crime or those who are guilty of murdering someone. Furthermore we should make sure that penalty is carried out within 60 days of sentencing.
That's sounds like great idea, let's give the government even more power to murder people.
You as a free people should be able to buy whatever guns you choose and we as a free people should be able to debate common sense conditions so that my right to walk down my street isn't infringed by my neighbors 12 year old that got a hold of his parents AR-15.
reply to post by seabag
Do you want to deter more crime? Harsher penalties work! If you think harsh punishments are not a deterrent then please explain what sense there is in enacting stricter gun laws?
Why not leave Left/Right out of it when it clearly is a pro-gun/anti-gun issue? There are people on all sides of every aisle occupying every position in the debate. Most Americans are supportive of the 2nd Amendment of which only a portion are advocates of strict control... sure there's a basis for stating that a majority of those would be Liberals or Progressives but why state it? Why alienate the minority of those groups that support no or little gun control and what about the Libertarian Left that agree with common sense back ground checks and nothing more?
Furthermore as another poster pointed out, if resistance to tyranny is the main issue for those of you screaming that they're coming for your guns as opposed to engaging in intelligent debate and taking every opportunity along the way to bash the Left, where have you been with your guns? Where was the armed protest against the shredding of habeas corpus? Police state? Surveillance state? Are those not tyrannical? It seems like mouthing words to me. If that were the case you're most certainly advocating for the wrong types of arms in which to defend against tyranny with.
There's nothing wrong with saying you're against gun control because you want to be able to buy whatever kind of gun you want, you don't have to falsely play hero to the Republic... so kindly stop insulting our collective intelligence.
You as a free people should be able to buy whatever guns you choose and we as a free people should be able to debate common sense conditions so that my right to walk down my street isn't infringed by my neighbors 12 year old that got a hold of his parents AR-15.
Originally posted by DirtyD
reply to post by seabag
Do you want to deter more crime? Harsher penalties work! If you think harsh punishments are not a deterrent then please explain what sense there is in enacting stricter gun laws?
I'm not for stricter gun control, and I don't think the death penalty deters squat. I hardly think criminals stop to think about the consequences of their actions.
Originally posted by oasisjack
We are not filling the streets and waging war against tyranny as it is not occuring yet, for a government to go tyrannical it would require the peoples disarmament. Now I do believe we are heading down that path as we do have indefinate detentions for our citezenry, a fully working propaganda machine and strange weapons/ammunition aquisitions by branches of the government that require neither wepons or ammo.
I truly think that after seeing the arab spring and our own occupy wall street and tea party movements they fear that if a big enough government snafu occurs especialy related to the economy or commodities there will be an american uprising they could not quell unless we are neutered through legislation first. A million starving and poor American citizens armed and desperate is far more threatening than any foreign army.
reply to post by seabag
But of course solving the problem IS NOT and WAS NEVER the objective here...disarmament is the objective.
So are people not to share their position on these topics here on ATS? Are we all supposed to stop logging in and instead run for political office?
Originally posted by spacedog1973
If tyrannical governments are the ones who's guns should be taken away
If the purpose of civilians possessing firearms is to oppose tyrannical governments....
Why are you sitting there at your computer talking about it?