Ban guns NOW!! But start from the top down...

reply to post by NOTurTypical

And they're obviously great leaders considering they know better than we do on virtually every area of our miserable lives.

Yes, we are poor misguided sheep that need to be tended... and fleeced. I think though they see us more as ungrateful louts that couldn't tie our shoes without their "benevolence".

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

And they're obviously great leaders considering they know better than we do on virtually every area of our miserable lives.

Yes, we are poor misguided sheep that need to be tended... and fleeced. I think though they see us more as ungrateful louts that couldn't tie our shoes without their "benevolence".

True dat.

I just wish our founding fathers were statist Socialists. Just imagine how much further along we'd be in our subjugation evolution as a nation.

How many years do you think we were handicapped by their absurd, Neanderthalic devotion to liberty and freedom? I say at least 200 years. Silly dolts.

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni

Originally posted by madmac5150

Originally posted by Zarniwoop

Deny all of them Secret Service protection including the FLOTUS. The Secret Service should be for POTUS only.

POTUS is doing a bad enough job without having to worry about FLOTUS being kidnapped.

Silly idea, but I think you knew that already

Well of course that is a bit silly, but she claims to eat healthy and exercise... she could outrun the bad guys... maybe

Dude... if anyone gets even close to michelle, specially when shes eating, all she has to do is growl...



see?

LMAO... maybe the Secret Service is wasted on her then...

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Well that is a never ending battle... Freedom vs ... Fleecing? Its why the Bill of Rights is not in the constitution but a separate document. Even then when our liberty from oppression was being established, the forces of enslavement (mostly the Crown) tried to keep it from being ratified at all.

We are supposed to have a "limited" government, responsible for tarriffs and the common defense. Of course you know that...

Ban TeaBags. Problem solved. ALL problems solved.

Childish drivel

reply to post by madmac5150



Until all people worldwide are disarmed, I am not willing to disarm myself.

I don't trust a military to protect me from foreign threats, nor providence to protect me from domestic threats. It is my responsibility.

I can't believe you people want to disarm when we exist on the same planet as China, Saudi Arabia etc...

reply to post by madmac5150


Do you realy belive so much to the police and to the other security agencies?
They can be corrupted, and can rob you all, like bandits, bad guys, in Western Movies, can't they?

I think we have a second amendment for reason, but all this paranoia about Obama taking away our guns is really just irrational. Noone accused Clinton or Carter of being in a conspiracy against the average American gun-owner, and they weren't. Obama has relaxed gun laws in national parks and respected states rights in places like SC that allow you to now have guns in church. There is a conspiracy to take away constitutional rights and its a bipartisan idea that has mostly focused on the 4th amendment, wiretapping citizens and invading privacy. When fascism comes it will come covertly in ways that are hard to detect. Taking away guns is too tangible and too inflammatory.

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Well that is a never ending battle... Freedom vs ... Fleecing? Its why the Bill of Rights is not in the constitution but a separate document. Even then when our liberty from oppression was being established, the forces of enslavement (mostly the Crown) tried to keep it from being ratified at all.

We are supposed to have a "limited" government, responsible for tarriffs and the common defense. Of course you know that...

The term "fleecing", as I understand (correct me if I am wrong) started because decrees and edicts were scribed on fleece parchment, so "fleecing" became a term used for governments that stole from their people by the use of law.

How appropriate to use that term now... good call

And,

Why do guns need banned again?

Because someone thinks we dont need them.

If you dont want a gun, dont get one.

Some people like swimming, baseball, and cars.

Some people(alot of people) like guns.

reply to post by madmac5150

The term "fleecing", as I understand (correct me if I am wrong) started because decrees and edicts were scribed on fleece parchment, so "fleecing" became a term used for governments that stole from their people by the use of law.

I think fleecing refers to shearing the wool from sheep? And parchment was made from their skins. Either way the animal (or us) was giving their all. Thanks for the law on parchment used to rob us part. I didn't know that.

Not going to happen but if it did then start with the knives also:

At least 2 dead in Japan knife attack 14 March 2013

These knife attacks happen almost every week in a country with one of the strongest gun control laws in effect and in the safest country in the world.

Gun control advocates are delusional.

but you can't ban anything without being able to enforce the ban, and the only effective enforcement is the threat of superior violence or imprisonment - and enforcing imprisonment requires superior violence.

Oh and this morning another knife attack in Japan, yet again.... Go on ban knives too, rocks also...-

4 wounded in stabbing rampage outside subway station in Tokyo

It doesn't matter if you ban or not. In fact, don't it would serve the idiots right.

I'll tell you what you have missed. Man will Exit the WEST gate soon. It is forming in the Pacific. The "Ban" is not for man, but meant for those whom chose the COVENS.
"El-ite" means "followers of El". They are sociopaths. Killers. All the weapons they created for us, will be their own fate. The law states "SET may do as he wishes to those that choose him."

And that is why so many 'wailed when they found out the choice they had made'.

How many times do we need to say it? The 2nd amendment is there so the citizenry of the United States has the means to overthrow their government if that government has acted in contrast to the constitution! It doesn't make us Hillbilly redneck domestic terrorist gun nuts, it makes us smart enough to realize that government can be compromised and corrupted! Its a Fail-Safe people!

Agreeing that US citizens should be disarmed shows your total disdain for the US Constitution, and as such, you are a traitor to the US. That is the plain and simple fact. It is unConstitutional to ban firearms, no matter what anyone, including you, says, and that is the bottom line. Apparently you have bought into the MSM, who doing their jobs, have concentrated solely on anti-gun news...There was just as much, of more, pro-gun news, but NONE of that made it to the MSM. I have at least a dozen replies throughout various threads on ATS that delves into the gun control issue very deeply, and I just do not have the time at the moment to do it again.

So IF you are TRULY interested in seeing the truth about this issue, you should dig them up. But as I said, the bottom line is that gun control cannot be legally carried out. There are ways to change the Constitution, and if you or anyone else wants to ban guns, which will never happen, then you should obey the laws instead of trying to break them. In trying to weed out the criminals, you have become criminal in your ideology. And taking away guns will not disarm the criminals anyway. But that is not what the 2nd amendment is about, but I would not expect someone with your views to understand that point, honestly.

If you are seriously FOR banning guns, then you are lost my friend.