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 sdcigarpig
Having read the article the following can be stated:
Good for the people. They are standing up for their personal rights and freedoms. As long as it is peaceful, then this will be something that we can sit and discuss, along with seeing how things come around, along with how it will play out.
However, it must be stated that caution on the part of the protestors should be reminded, that with any demonstration, the side that throws the first punch will lose the battle for the opinions of the whole. Make no mistake, the people showing up, are within their rights to do such, as long as it is peaceful, but throw or threaten and the battle is lost from the get go.
Originally posted by strafgod
Reply to post by Honor93
Your coming off as if your offended by my idea, why? With this tech implemented all zones could be gun free, it would only make it to where the law abiding citizen isn't the first to shot but in a time of need would allow you to defend yourself. I know its a pipe dream but would you not agree this is a better solution than flat out banning guns?
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
did you re-read what you wrote ?
it would only make it to where the law abiding citizen isn't the first to shoot
Originally posted by DAVID64
reply to post by madenusa
When is this happening? I wish I could write a letter to my Governor, letting him know how I feel about our gun laws and any new ones coming into effect. But, I live in Illinois and he will back Obama in anything he does. I guarantee our new concealed carry law will be so strict there's almost no chance of getting one. I'm glad to see States standing up to Obama and letting the people's wishes be heard. Just wish this was one of them.
Originally posted by Ghost375
What's wrong with those people?
He didn't actually pass any gun "control" legislation.
He just passed orders for some studies on gun issues or strengthened laws already on the books.edit on 17-1-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by strafgod
Reply to post by Honor93
Your coming off as if your offended by my idea, why? With this tech implemented all zones could be gun free, it would only make it to where the law abiding citizen isn't the first to shot but in a time of need would allow you to defend yourself. I know its a pipe dream but would you not agree this is a better solution than flat out banning guns?
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
'wants' are not equal to rights and should not be protected or guaranteed.
or an idea is brought forth that eases the mind of those that want them banned could live with
Originally posted by T4NG0
"Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."
"Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities."
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein
Yes. Indeed, your forefathers also gave you the right to have bazookas and rocket launchers. In fact, in order to protect yourself against any tyrannical government, the 2nd amendment should also allow you to have EMPs; indeed, nuclear weapons themselves and any other advanced weaponry that exists today. Why stop there? You should also be allowed to purchase WMDs!
The fact of the matter is, your guns are petty and silly. If the government really wanted to become totalitarian and tyrannical, I'm sure they could use some sort of device to incapacitate the entire population, stop the water, stop the food and simply have the army stroll in without any resistance, with no citizen able to grab their gun because they're busy writhing on the floor from a government device that rendered them so.
Oh, 'Muricans and their guns. The only thing it protects you from is from another gun-wielding maniac and even that's not guaranteed.
General Assembly Proposed Bill No. 122 January Session, 2013 LCO No. 543 Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY Introduced by: SEN. MEYER, 12th Dist. AN ACT CONCERNING RESTRICTIONS ON GUN USE. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened: That the general statutes be amended to establish a class C felony offense, except for certain military and law enforcement personnel and certain gun clubs, for (1) any person or organization to purchase, sell, donate, transport, possess or use any gun except one made to fire a single round, (2) any person to fire a gun containing more than a single round, (3) any person or organization to receive from another state, territory or country a gun made to fire multiple rounds, or (4) any person or organization to purchase, sell, donate or possess a magazine or clip capable of holding more than one round. Statement of Purpose: To reduce the use of guns for criminal purposes.
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein
Yes. Indeed, your forefathers also gave you the right to have bazookas and rocket launchers. In fact, in order to protect yourself against any tyrannical government, the 2nd amendment should also allow you to have EMPs; indeed, nuclear weapons themselves and any other advanced weaponry that exists today. Why stop there? You should also be allowed to purchase WMDs!
The fact of the matter is, your guns are petty and silly. If the government really wanted to become totalitarian and tyrannical, I'm sure they could use some sort of device to incapacitate the entire population, stop the water, stop the food and simply have the army stroll in without any resistance, with no citizen able to grab their gun because they're busy writhing on the floor from a government device that rendered them so.
Oh, 'Muricans and their guns. The only thing it protects you from is from another gun-wielding maniac and even that's not guaranteed.