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 LordGoofus
It's hilarious how much some Americans are over-reacting to gun control. My predication? The bill will be passed, assault rifles and a few other guns will be banned, gun lovers will bitch and whine and moan for a month or so, then be forced to shut up when crime stats show no unusual increase in homicide rates 12months after the ban is put in place. Life goes on and we all continue waiting for the government to go all 1984 on our hines as the economy slowly trickles into a long overdue recession...
Amendment II 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.
Originally posted by chiefsmom
The only good thing about this, and I don't like it, by the way, is if he does sign an EO, at least the next president can get rid of it right away.
Whatever he decides to do.
Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by flyandi
As it stands now, you have had Supreme court rulings on what weapons are covered under the 2nd. So in effect, they have already done the same thing in the US. The US military can have rocket launchers, RPG's, and other weapons that public civilians cannot have. The US supreme court case that I am referring to was in 1939, one year after Hitler's law.
Originally posted by IBelieveInAliens
You all need to take a step back and see that this is a good thing. For years the rest of the civilized world has looked on in horror at the rampant gun violence in America. You CANNOT sustain a society whose inhabitants are all pointing guns at each other. And that's the truth of it. For one thing it creates an arrogance, that uniquely American arrogance that says "I have a gun and I could shoot you and kill you if I liked".
I for one will salute Obama when he disarms the American public. Perhaps it will teach American society a little humility - it'll be a new concept to many of them but I'm sure they'll get used to the feeling.
The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia‘s ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.
The city’s population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.
And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.
With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn’t. The fact is I can’t remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?
The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.
The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city’s crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn’t force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don’t have a death wish.
There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired.
What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion?
And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?
Let them take arms.
The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them.
What signify a few lives lost in a century or two?
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is it's natural manure.
Originally posted by Wertdagf
Your guns cannot stop the weapons the military has now.
You could have all the guns you want and not a a single one can stop a hellfire missle fired from a mile away. To think that a hand gun or a rifle is gonna protect you from a jet flying several miles above you is idiotic.
If Obama starts talking about how much he loves god and says that the unbelievers must be placed in camps or murdered for jesus then we have a problem. Hitler was a catholic and his reasons for killing the jews were religious. Have you seen his painting of Mary and baby jesus... its quite good for a psychopath.
Originally posted by theAnswer1111
What I've been seeing pushed online now is that the 300 year old Constitution is "too antiquated" and was written when guns only fired one shot at a time. Ridiculous. It may have been written long ago but it was written for a reason.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.
It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Originally posted by kauskau
americans are more happy than other countries?
I dont think you have been to scandinavia than or to switzerland, to the netherlands.
America in some parts look like a third world country.