Barack Obama on Gun Control
February 12th, 2007 by Syd
If the Democrats have “gotten the message” on gun control, why is this guy their new “rock star”?
Senator Barak H. Obama, Democratic Jr Senator (IL); previously State Senator
Position: Keep guns out of inner cities — but inner city violence is also a problem of morality:
I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manfuacturer’s lobby. But I also believe that when a gangbanger shoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels someone disrespected him, we have a problem of morality. Not only do we need to punish that man for his crime, but we need to acknowledge that there’s a hole in his heart, one that government programs alone may not be able to repair.” Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p.215 Oct 1, 2006
Position: Ban high capacity semiautomatic handguns:
While Obama suggested there may be a need for restrictions on so-called semiautomatic guns, he contends Democrats must steer clear of alienating “lawful” gun owners. “I’m a strong believer in the rights of hunters and sportsmen to have firearms. I’m a believer in homeowners having a firearm to protect their home and their family,” Obama said. “It’s hard for me to find a rationale for having a 17-clip semiautomatic.” Source: Radio Iowa
Positions on Gun Control:
- Ban semi-automatics, and impose more restrictions on other types of firearms possession; Source: 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998
- Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons;
- Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms;
- Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.
- On the issue of prohibiting citizens from carrying concealed weapons, Obama said he believes national legislation should be passed to “prevent other states’ laws [allowing citizens to conceal their guns] from threatening the safety of Illinois residents.” Source
- “I believe we need to renew–not roll back — this common sense gun law,” [The Clinton “Assault Weapons” Ban] Source
- Proposes several gun-control laws, including restricting purchases of weapons and ammunition at gun shows, establishing a national database that would capture and record imprints left by bullets, and making gun locks mandatory. Source
- Obama said concealed weapons should be allowed for retired police officers and some military personnel.
- “Ordinary citizens should not be allowed to own military assault weapons, such as AK-47s and Uzis.” Source
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. Voting YES would:
- Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime
- Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect
- Call for the dismissal of all qualified civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment by the court in which the action was brought
- Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition, and sets a minimum prison term of 15 years for violations
- Require all licensed importers, manufacturers and dealers who engage in the transfer of handguns to provide secure gun storage or safety devices
Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S 397 ; vote number 2005-219 on Jul 29, 2005 Source
“This seems to be a man [Obama] who is absolutely determined to make the world safe for criminals while making sure that law-abiding citizens have no opportunity to defend themselves.” — Alan Keyes. Source
Commenting on the VT massacre, Obama said:
“(Cho) had a semiautomatic weapon with a clip that allowed him to take 19 shots in a row,” Obama said. “I don’t know any self-respecting hunter that needs 19 rounds of anything. The only reason you have 19 rounds is potentially to do physical harm to people. You don’t shoot 19 rounds at a deer. And if you do, you shouldn’t be hunting.” Source
Uh, dude, it’s not about hunting. Maybe it’s about being able to defend yourself from maniacs?
Barak Obama’s Voting Record on Gun Control
This page on Gunlaw News includes quotes, voting record and more links to additional resources.
In another place:
Obama regularly supported gun-control measures, including a ban on semiautomatic “assault weapons” and a limit on handgun purchases to one a month.
He also opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation.
Supporters framed the issue as a fundamental question of whether homeowners have the right to protect themselves.
Obama joined several Chicago Democrats who argued the measure could open loopholes letting gun owners use their weapons on the street. They said local governments should have the final say, but the self-defense exception passed 41-16 and ultimately became state law. Source
Barak Obama served on the board of the notoriously anti-civil right Joyce Foundation. Source. The Joyce Foundation is the funding source for astroturf anti-gun organizations such at The Gun Guys and The Freedom States Alliance.
On the Washington D.C. handgun ban, Obama said that he:
“…believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives.” Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional. Source
Now that the Supreme Court has issued its opinion on the Heller case (The Washington D.C. handgun ban), the Obama camp is attempting to weasel out of his previous support for the D.C. handgun ban which he called “constitutional” See this article.
Asked by ABC News’ Charlie Gibson if he considers the D.C. law to be consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms at ABC’s April 16, 2008, debate in Philadelphia, Obama said, “Well, Charlie, I confess I obviously haven’t listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence.”
Mr. Obama says he’s, “…in it to transform the country.” No thanks, Barak. Think I’ll pass. Your kind of changes I can live without.
Different face, same shtick. Next.
DAL357
[…] Front Sight, Press considers Barack Obama on Gun Control. […]
Here we go again. Another dumb ass thinking about kissing ass and not safety.
The Right to Life presupposes the Right to Self Defense to maintain ones inalienable indiviual right to life and property inviolate against criminal aggression. Without the Right to Self Defense there is no Right to Life or Property.
Thus all laws, rules and regulations which act as an impedement to protecting ones life and property against criminal aggressors deny the Right to Life itself.
It makes no difference to the victim whether the victims Right to Life is violated by a government representative, Republican, Democrat, the color of the violators skin pigmentation, ethnic origin, mystical belief structure, country of origin, knife, louisville slugger, machine gun, semi-automatic rifle,
pistol, shotgun, handgun, rock or vehicle.
All victimless crime laws prevent citizens from the exercise of their Cosntitutionally protected second amendment Rights.
Moreover, all victimless crime anti gun laws punish individuals not for having violated the Rights of any other human being, but on the premise that they “might”!
All individuals running for public office should
be held accountable for their oath of office which requires supporting the U.S. Constitution againt all enemies both foreign and domestic. Thus, should be impeached for proposing or voting for any law which would use the police force of government to violate the inalienable Rights of Citizens enumerated inthe U.S. Contitution.
Voting for any individual running for public office who is known to believe in violating citizens Rights under the color of law does not demonstrate a citizen playing with a full deck.
So Say I,
ROBERT INGRAM POWELL, Ph.D.
w6vro@msn.com
Damn! How could anybody have addressed this any better than Dr. Powell? Kudos!
He couldn’t have put it better. And I want to know how anyone can possibly think that imposing more gun control will stop crime? Like R. I. Powell said, it doesn’t matter if a criminal can get a machine gun, a Daisy Red-Rider, a baseball bat, or a rock, they are still going to do harm. Can’t anti-gunners see that if you take guns away from responsible people, you’re taking away their defense against criminals that won’t obey gun control laws. And even if they do, they will still commit crime with any weapons they can get.
I must say, Dr. Powell gave an excellent and professional response to a touchy subject. I firmly believe in our right of the second amendment, it has been put in place for a reason since 1791. Our right to posses and bear arms. A right my grandfather had and his father before him. A right that I have in the state I reside to protect my family and friends within my own dwelling. Where is my family’s right to life when my doors are locked 24/7 and a non law abiding individual snatches their breath in search of own my personal property? My firearms are registered, the government knows right where I am, why am I being punished for obeying the law while criminals can posses and do what they feel? If this is the only thread that keeps me a Republican then so be it!
[…] Front Sight, Press has published a well-researched article which causes us deep concern about support for Barack Obama as a presidential candidate. […]
The truth is that the world is full of monsters, and some of them need killing, or at least wounding, when they decide to attack person or property with deadly intent. Trust me, law enforcement will get there too late.
Why don’t we just enforce the gun control laws we already have on the books? What’s the difference if my Glock has a magazine that holds 9 rounds as opposed to 14? I could just change clips more often.
Also, nobody really needs a fully automatic AK-47 to protect their person or property. Besides, unless they have proper training, all they would do is hose down the neighborhood and their family members when they try to nail the bad guy. Also, unless one is living out in the middle of nowhere, no city dweller needs armor peircing rounds for their handgun or rifle. Even if they hit the bad guy, the bullet will keep going and blow holes through the walls of the adjacent neighbors homes. These sorts of weapons and ammunition belong only in the hands of military and law enforcement. If we have to worry about them, its anarchy in the streets anyway.
If there is a home intruder intent on death or destruction, why not just go for the old fashioned head shot? Or, here’s an idea, why not use a shotgun with 000 shot in it and a high base load? That’s going to stop anybody, body armor or not. Or how about getting some training on how to handle and lay down accurate fire with a handgun, shotgun or rifle, all of which can be purchased in any sporting goods store or pawn shop (except of course in NYC and now SF) after mandatory waiting period to figure out if the purchaser has a criminal record. Stop the whining.
Well, if your Glock has a magazine capacity of 9 rounds, it’s a rare collector item and I’d like to make you an offer on it.
Second, most gun control laws on the books now are both ineffective and unconstitutional.
Third, no one is talking about fully automatic machine guns. Obama is talking about banning ALL SEMIAUTOMATIC firearms. That would include all Glocks, 1911’s, Ruger 10/22 rifles, and self loading shotguns.
I reserve my right to whine until you get your facts straight.
Well get used to the idea of losing your rights people.Odds are that there will be a democrat elected for president and it doesn’t matter if it’s Barack or Hillary,you can kiss your freedoms good bye..I’m not saying that the republicans are any better either…It’s like this;the problem with a 2 party system is that 1 will win…Vote libertarian !…Hell vote communist…We’d still be better off….Actually,I don’t care who you vote for;I thibnk we’re all screwed anyway..Hitler started out preaching democracy and freedom and on top of that he gave all of his troops a volkswagen…Get my point?My advice is to buy all the high capacity semi-autos you can,while you still can…..Which rights will they take away next??They are already taking people’e homes to build wal-marts and jiffy checks….You can’t hurt the rich man.The only thing you can do is prepare for the worst and pray for the best…
This is super late in the discussion but I just stumbled upon this article and wanted to say that it was well written and informative… Also have to admit that it gave me a different view of Obama, I had been pretty interested in him up to this point, but I will not give up my right to bear arms (or my handguns) to any Tom Dick or Harry, President of the United States or not, just because he thinks it will make America safer. Er… at least… I’ll definitely think twice before voting for him/her. I think it’s absolutely stupid that politicians think that taking away citizen’s rights to a concealed or even home-protection-only handgun will somehow cut down on crime - everyone in these comments are absolutely correct that it will make our world a much safer world for criminals, because they are still going to be able to obtain these weapons - and we will have nothing to fight back with.
P.S. Syd - Glock 27’s have 9-round clips. (9+1, anyway, but it’s still a 9-round clip.) Still, every other Glock I know anything about holds closer to 15… but your post cracked me up and you had some very valid points.
It is amazing how antigunners seem to blame all of society’s ills on firearms used by those who are criminals or those who have lost control of reasoning. It would be fair to say that antigunner’s logic would also fit in blaming the pen for misspelling the words they wrote. To me this is an accurate analogy that fits in describing their rationale. They continue to seek gun abolition in our country. I do not trust politicians that support highly restrictive gun laws and many years ago I declared my voting status as non-affiliate as I have seen politicians in the two major parties sell out gun owner rights or take neutral positions. Sadly a third party that supports gun owner rights has a snowball’s chance in hell of being elected. The poiliticians who support gun owner rights in this election have a slim or no a chance of being elected. I just hope the US supreme court upholds the second amendment or otherwise the cliche ” when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” will become reality. When you think about it, the first amendment was paramount to the founding fathers. When you consider the other liberties they could have decided upon, they chose the right for an individual to posess firearms next before those everyday liberties we take for granted. Something to think about.
Every so often comes a new messiah that is going to “change things”. This time it’s Obama. In his arsenal of he wants to begin restricting your rights to bear arms. Not all at once but just let him get his nose under the tent.
These guys never declare war on the guys we need the guns to protect ourselves from. No. It is the guy that does everything right. He works. Pays his taxes. Might even go to church. This guy watches the news and reads the paper and doesn’t feel so safe anymore. He notices the police deal with crime AFTER it is commited. So he gets a weapon to protect him domain. This is the guy Obama is going after. Not the gangbanger that breaks into your house and trys to steal your protection. Obama wants to heal the hole in his heart. Great, do so. Only don’t leave us defenseless while you have the greatest protection man has to offer. What is that your security is carrying? Semi autos? I am shocked. More of that do as I say….I am a little more equal.
Then they want to reduce you to a rifle for your protection. I own both. Rifles are for hunting. Hand guns are for protection from people that mean to harm.
the second amendment should be treated just like every other,
the right to bear arms does not say how many bullets or what kind of arms we can have just that we have the right. Should we sue budweiser or ford for drunk driving? Should we give bottle locks with every bottle? It kills alot more than accidental gun deaths every year. Should we say the first amendment allows free speech only in certain terms. The freedoms we so cherish are attacked everyday The liberals have became what they fought and rebelled against. Morals are iffy with most and their elitist attitude leaves freedom out in the cold. The people i know who own guns are the most patriotic. You don’t have to agree with my views but that is what makes this country what it is we can disagree and that is what truly is under attack.
ROBERT INGRAM POWELL, Ph.D.,
Sir, you rock! Thank you for an extremely well thought-out commentary. Are you familiar with Maryland’s gun laws?
Link here http://www.lcav.org/states/maryland.asp
I will quote the most amusing section for you:
[{Maryland is a “may-issue” state, meaning that the Secretary of the Maryland State Police (“Secretary”) has discretion to issue a permit to anyone seeking to wear, carry or transport a handgun if the applicant demonstrates a “good and substantial reason” to carry a handgun and has not previously shown a “propensity for violence or instability” that may cause the applicant to be a danger to himself or herself or other persons when possessing the handgun. Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety §§ 5-303, 5-306(a). “Good and substantial reason” includes a finding by the Secretary that a handgun permit is necessary to protect the applicant against apprehended danger. Section 5-306(a)(5)(ii).}]
Anyway, I have a non-resident CCW license from Florida and Utah. I can carry in 30+ states EXCEPT in Maryland where I live. Here, you have to be well-connected, a business man, a doctor or pharmacist or had been threatened or raped/mugged (with several witness’ statements supporting this) to get CONSIDERED for a permit. The MD AG already opined that there is no right to use a firearm to protect property-yet they only issue you a weapon permit IF you are businessman or doctor or lawyer and/or carry cash. (Who carries cash anymore?) How much $$$ is my family’s life worth? How about my $40K SUV?
Sorry to preach to the choir Sir…I was just wondering of any bullet-proof (pun intended) argument to beat the draconian laws and get a permit in MD? BTW, legal precedents in MD already determined that the 2A does not apply to states…I wonder if the 1A, 4A or 14A do??? Huh?
Thank you and keep the good work!
WHEN will I offer up my rifle or my handgun ?????
AFTER those political persons in power have collected
ALL the gun from those who would do harm with their
guns. First things first. Then let us look at the crime
rate figures. Where is the political POWER when it’s
needed for the law abiding citizens??
DON’T Punish US.
The last thing we need is stricter gun laws - - - find out more about Obama here:
http://barackhusseinobama2008.com
I find it amusing that people blame “inner city” violence and crime on gun owners, yet it’s those of us who go to the lengths to get the license AREN’T the ones doing th crime. I believe that his narrow outlook (limited to Detroit) has jaded him when it comes to the aspects of gun ownership. Plus wouldn’t he be violating amendemt rights in voting for more gun control? Or is it a circumstance of “its nothing until someone points it out” senerio?
Why doesn’t Mr. Obama first think about taking the guns away from radical anti-white terrorist groups like the black panthers? Oh I forgot, they support him.
Where does it stop? If there is to be no limit to weapons should we have the right to carry a portable nuclear weapon should they become available and affordable?
Every civilized society evolves and perfects its laws and regulations based on progress. When the second amendment was written in the bill of rights, guns were:
1- A lot more necessary
2- A lot different than they are now
I believe that most Americans (gun owners and not) are reasonable people. Why not establish reasonable regulation? Do we really want any mentally unstable person to get access to devastating weapons?
I think that the majority of citizens in this country who want a weapon for other reasons than hunting, want it because of protection. Not because they want to commit crimes.
Make it harder for criminals to get access to guns and make it feasible for law abiding citizens to defend themselves.
Nobody wants to see anymore horrifying pictures of deranged individuals shooting down our innocent children in school. Not the liberals, not the conservatives, not even the NRA.
Lets have a rational discussion - put the emotions aside and find a common sense solution to this endless debate.
My friend’s son is 15 years old. A couple of days ago, he received a temporary membership from the NRA. Never asked for it. This is irresponsible. What if we sent 15 year olds temporary driver’s licenses without training them?
The gun owning rights supporters I know have a great respect for the weapons and the handling of it. We shouldn’t treat the subject lightly and let anyone who feels like it acquire a gun.
This is why I believe common sense regulation is necessary.
Frederic, if you had ever filled out a yellow sheet at a FFL dealer you would know that to purchase a firearm you have to answer the question “have you ever been treated for a mental illness”. If you answer “Yes” you are forbidden from buying a firearm. I’ve been buying firearms for over 30 years and that has always been the case.
I think your statement about the temporary NRA membership is Bull S–t. The NRA is not going to issue a membership to a minor without an adult requesting it and it will not be a free membership.
Art
Hmmmm…a black man who is gun-phobic… Shocking. Sort of like most the jews in Congress… If only these folks weren’t so ignorant of history, they’d understand the racist roots of gun control in this country.
During my first day of range training at the police academy, our instructor said “this is a magazine, not a clip. If you call it a clip in front of me, I’m going to say, a what? until you get it right.” Obviously B. Hussein has done his research and knows what he’s talking about when he refers to “having a 17-clip semiautomatic.” I have lots of MAGAZINES for my various guns, but I don’t have one where I’ve snatched up 17 mags. for just that one gun.
I know this is going to sound rather…un-PC, but in these times, we can’t afford to have anyone besides a conservative white man in the Oval Office. I can’t bring myself to vote for a black man whose first name is Barack, whose middle name is Hussein (didn’t we hang one recently?), and whose last name is Obama, especially after having folks with good, WASPy names like Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Ford, etc. Honestly, we in white America need to wake up and realize that this country is being pawned off to every grubby hand that begs for a piece of its soul. And it’s time to take back what we have fought so hard to build before we become some third-world cespool!
Frederic - sounds like you need a history lesson, as well. It was “common sense” gun control in Germany that laid the groundwork for the Holocaust. So, keep telling yourself that more laws on paper are going to stop people from committing heinous acts…when the guns have all been banned and you’re the victim of a home invasion at 2 a.m. because the thugs know they can get away with it unresisted, then you can tell me all about “common sense.”
If I remember right during the induction ceremony into the US Army, I swore to uphold the constitution of the United States and defend it against enemies foreign and domestic.
I may have forgotten something in the 55 years since I took this oath.
Since that time every GI, be he Marine, Army, Air Force, or Coast Guard, has taken the same oath. This includes both active and reserve units. Mine was a life commitment and that includes all who may be enemies of my country. If we forget the oath and refuse to act upon it, we as a people do not deserve the country handed us.
I really do not understand this BS about hunting or sports utility of a firearm. The founding fathers had just won a war for freedom and did it with civilians and civilian weapons. Giving up the freedoms we have enjoyed will end when we give up our weapons. The same despots that pass restrictive laws now will be in complete control.
The shots at Concord were in defiance of an order from the British to confiscate the weapons stored at Concord.
Texas rebelled agains Mexico when Santa Anna order the confiscation of firearms of the colonists in Mexican territory.
Yep, we won also.
Quite possibly, the German citizens murdered by the Nazis could have survived as a whole if they had refused to give up their arms. History may have been far different.
Right? Wrong? This is my belief,
eddie
First off let me say that I am a Belizean and not an American, however what happens in the US affects us here in Belize. I am black (not that this should matter) but I am strongly pro-gun I believe that an unarmed population breeds a corrupt and tyrannical government, and I do not trust any government or organization who is interested in disarming its citizens. One of the things that I have noted throughout history is that all calls for disarmament have always come from the rich and the elitist; these are the people who either have government resources at their disposal or can afford to pay other people to protect them. Any person who believes this nonsense that the government is only trying to ban high capacity semiautomatic weapons is very naive or just downright stupid; the semi autos are just the first step from there it is all weapons, then unlimited presidential terms, then cameras in your homes. I am not saying that the government will never get my gun, but what I am saying is that they will have to wade knee deep through spent brass to pry it from my “cold dead hands”. If 15 percent of all Americans felt that way the government would serve the people and not the other way around. God bless Our Countries.
[…] “I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manfuacturers lobby. Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p.215 Oct 1, 2006 Front Sight, Press Blog Archive Barack Obama on Gun Control While Senator Obama may give lip service to the Second Amendment he really has no commitment to support it and would undermine it if elected. […]
Total Gun Control exists in Mexico. I lived in Veracruz between ‘94 and ‘97, the largest port city in the country , with commercial ships coming from all over the world daily. The people are not allowed to carry or own guns. I arrived in 1994 during a presidential election year, where one of the major candidates was gunned down in a border town. Pick-up trucks with six young, heavily-armed police officers patroled the streets of cities en masse during the presidential year. I taught a daily English class to the operations manager of the Port of Veracruz. The Zapatistas threatened to take over the Port. My student showed me huge machine guns set up all around the port, covered with tarps, yet ealily visible from his 8th floor window. The Navy stepped up its patrols and there was no attempt to overthrow the port.
I only heard gunfire once in three years. It woke me up in the “ejido” in which I rented a small house in the early morning. My neighbor told me later, “It must have been the police chasing some robber. The people do not have guns.” Now it has changed. There are shootings and beheadings by the drug cartels of police and innocents to prove they will not be corraled by the police. The situation is real in the border towns.
Yet there is a law in Mexico which states that a man’s home is his castle. Police are forbidden, and DO NOT ENTER A MAN’S HOME TO ARREST HIM. They post officers around the house and wait for him to go stir crazy and arrest him when he comes out. If he outwaits them, he can escape.
I am of two minds about guns. We all have too many handguns and gang violence is on the increase. There is so much over-population in the inner cities and so much poverty, alienation and anger, righteous and otherwise, that more and more of these frustrated people are becoming criminals. When a man can not get a job to support himself and/or his family, he will eventually get hungry and will steal to eat. Knowing that the police are well armed, he will want to arm himself as well. It is a vicious cycle and the economic and life quality of poor and now middle-class people who are losing their homes, jobs and hope needs to be addressed as well as gun control. It is crime and violence that needs to be controled.
I live in a University community. We have two rifles in the house for hunting and target practice in the woods.They are legal and licensed. We have the right to have these guns and I would strongly object to that right being removed. We also have a large dog with a big voice, whom I would prefer to be the deterent to any robber.
Now, if our government ever decided to declare martial law and become totally fascist - and let’s face it this administration has been goose-stepping in that direction - our having guns may not be able to deter them completely. However, should we give up that right that our forefathers wisely included in the U.S. Constitution, we could find ourselves being required to turn over our passports and even our driver’s licenses and become prisoners in our own homes. It has happened before and it still exists in some places. Be not too sure that it is impossible to happen to us Americans. Remember in the home of the brave, only the Brave are Truly Free. Honor the flag by being an active citizen. Let’s let Sen. Obama know how we feel and how we will vote on this very important issue of Democracy. Ho!
You know as I read all of the posted remarks. It comes to mind that in a country that is so divided on almost all aspects of our day to day lives. We still don’t get it. As you can see by the remarks that Mr. Matt stated, that this is a white mans country, a country built on slave labor, and that a black man can not be elected, especially with a name like Barack Obama, I don’t agree with a lot of the mans views but That shows that nothing positive will ever be accomplished. Lets take a look at U.S. history, since everyone here is so much into. When the constitution of the United States was originally drafted it stated that a black man was only one third of what a white man was and a native American was only one eighth or one tenth of what a white man was worth, And you want to talk about who is a tyrant, but most of White America stood by and did nothing. We already lived through it once. It’s was called the civil rights movement. The thing is that as Rev. Wright said, no one likes it when the chickens come home to roost. Now on the other remark of WASPY last names like Bush, Clinton and so on. Who put together and signed into law the Homeland Security Bill, straight out of Mind Cumuft, wasn’t a WASPY last name guy,”Bush”! Or The Assault Weapons ban,” Clinton.” Look at all of the politican that have lied to the American people. I invented the internet, Oh they stole the presidency from me,” Gore”! Today is a day that will be known in infamy,”FDR” although he new the Jap’s were going to bomb Perl Harbor. With all of the catistrofic events in our century, WW1,WW2,Vetnam, 9/11 and so on. People wake up. Now I am a true believer of the Constitution as in it’s true form. That We the people of these United States Of America are all created equal no matter what color,religin or creed, have the right to protect ourselves from all that intend us harm weather, foreign or domestic, criminal or a tyrantical government. And until the people of this country stop being ignorant and close minded, still trying to keep up the old ethnocentric ways of the past. Them the words, ” A government for the people and by the people”! Will still continue to mean nothing. A well armed and intelligent open minded society is a true polite and kinder one. PS. and for the dumb ass that stated that we need more common sence laws, All of the current gun laws that are on the books are already to much, but enforced. Specially the number one thing they are always crying about. The guy that committed the VT shootings was mentally unstable and had been professionally treated. Was able to get his hands on a gun from an internet dealer. The gun shop that handled the transfer did a back ground check on him. So wright there they should have denied him to of purchased the gun. weather instant or 7 or 15 days that should have of prevented him from getting the gun but when the people don’t do their job other pay with blood, and I by no means am referring to the shop either. I mean the the people that enter data into the data base ie NCIC.
Well I have to say that firearms is my hobby.it’s is also my familys hobby.we all work many hours and look forward to are time spent together at the range.we also use firearms as self defense tools as two famliy members have concealed carry liscenses.so I guess we are all fearing not only are right to defend our selves but are family past time as well.ask your self is that criminal?
Dr. Powell’s comparison between the right to life and the right to protect life is brilliant. Thank you. I believe the government’s attempt to take our ability to resist an overbearing non-responsive system will end the cold civil war and start the hot one. We can pray for a different outcome………..keep your powder dry.
it is totaly uncomprehensable that the collection of private handguns and or long guns would have any effect on the crime rate but moreso encourage the promotion of such on a unprotected society,
thus the hidden agenda of such a gathering of firearms can and only has one end result;
that being the complete inslavement with minimal resistance, to a population, hence an unarmed country that is requierd to do as the goverment demands with out question,
any person that believes that this country was forged with sticks and rocks needs to be removed from the ground from which i stand on, further, if the goverment had any guts at all which it has none except to those that are affraid or would vote to surrender any and all weapons,they would go after the organized gangs in this country and deport along with collect these guns and leave the true americans alone,
i can only assure you that any gun of mine to be collected will only be a result of a firefight and removed from my hands upon death,
as far as your driveby shootings,as i said if you had any guts or direction you would walk into the gang areas of this country and unarm these groups, and there affiliates, this is the problom you morons, not the guy down the street that collects or hunts,
it is true however that you dont need a 30 round clip to hunt deer, but with goverment trying to incorporate laws that leave a population at risk the use of 30 round clips becomes apparent,
further i think the reallity is that joe the plummer probly has a more real idea of the countrys needs than a bunch of good ol boys that should be incarcerated for the acts they have put upon the people of america,
further with 300 million people and maby 5 million cops and the like, who do you think is going to keep it safe when your out numbered a hundred to one? theres not enough military left in this country to control the chaos that is a direct development of this goverment and there blatant mismangement, so i say,go ahead and punish the true americans for paying for your stupid idiotic ideals, and your enept ability to lead, and your gutless cowardness ways of going after the organized gangs and such,the true problom,but my friend if you come to my address to collect my guns then have yours loaded and off safety as mine will be, to be as arrogant as to put a country in the positon as this goverment has, and to further make regulations and laws to abide by, that have a direct impact on the future of this country,and the lively hood of its people i think perhaps before trying to instill more guidlines that you should get your own house in order,
just as a herion addict, thats been caught 25 times and begs for one more chance to get straight, you yourselves need to prove to the american public that you are capable before your voice should be herd,in other words for those of you that dont understand,before you go on making decisions that effect millions of people you have to prove that your worthy of making good judgements that you and you alone would be held accountable for, comprende?
So is this guy (obama) trying to say that im only supposed to own a single shot handgun? How am i to defend my family if four guys break in to my home each holding a single shot handgun? There certainly not going to give me time to reload after each shot. Thanks a lot obama
you can never protect yourself against a maniac no matter what arms you bare