Topic: Obama & Guns
Lynann's photo
Mon 12/08/08 12:07 PM
For those who are concerned about Obama and guns I give you this.


As gun sales shoot up around the country, President-elect Barack Obama said Sunday that gun-owning Americans do not need to rush out and stock up before he is sworn in next month.

"I believe in common-sense gun safety laws, and I believe in the second amendment," Obama said at a news conference. "Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. I think people can take me at my word."

But National Rifle Association spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said it's not Obama's words — but his legislative track record — that has gun-buyers flocking to the stores.

"Prior to his campaign for president, his record as a state legislator and as a U.S. Senator shows he voted for the most stringent forms of gun control, the most Draconian legislation, gun bans, ammunition bans and even an increase in federal excise taxes up to 500 percent for every gun and firearm sold," Arulanandam said.

Obama answered "yes" in 1996 to a questionnaire from an Illinois group on whether he supported a handgun ban. But he later said a staffer filled out that answer and he did not support a ban.

Nationally, background checks for gun purchases jumped nearly 49 percent during the week Obama was elected, compared with the same time period last year, according to the FBI's National Instant Background Check System.

Anecdotally, gun dealers around the country have reported spikes in sales. The Illinois State Rifle Association Reports gun sales for November were 38 percent higher than last year.

"We don't dispute [the gun sales hike] because the numbers from the federal system certainly confirm that there is increased activity out there. We just think it's a bit stupid," said Peter Hamm, spokesman for the Brady Campaign against Gun Violence.

"Anyone who thinks they need to rush out and buy a firearm clearly has not been paying attention to how quickly we make progress on this issue. We don't think these are first-time buyers. We think they are people who already have more than enough guns at their homes to protect themselves and are buying more."
ABDON M. PALLASCH Political Reporter

no photo
Mon 12/08/08 12:10 PM
it's all part of his econonimc plan to promote retail sales of firearms and kickstart the economy

talldub's photo
Mon 12/08/08 12:11 PM
Edited by talldub on Mon 12/08/08 12:13 PM

it's all part of his econonimc plan to promote retail sales of firearms and kickstart the economy

Given the amount of racists that seem to want to shoot him I predict a boom (no pun intended) in the gun industry!

no photo
Mon 12/08/08 12:16 PM


it's all part of his econonimc plan to promote retail sales of firearms and kickstart the economy

Given the amount of racists that seem to want to shoot him I predict a boom (no pun intended) in the gun industry!


all part of his secret plan to rule the world

talldub's photo
Mon 12/08/08 12:16 PM



it's all part of his econonimc plan to promote retail sales of firearms and kickstart the economy

Given the amount of racists that seem to want to shoot him I predict a boom (no pun intended) in the gun industry!


all part of his secret plan to rule the world

Is he really just Bush in disguise?!

Hardolin's photo
Mon 12/08/08 12:58 PM
Edited by Hardolin on Mon 12/08/08 01:00 PM

"Anyone who thinks they need to rush out and buy a firearm clearly has not been paying attention to how quickly we make progress on this issue. We don't think these are first-time buyers. We think they are people who already have more than enough guns at their homes to protect themselves and are buying more."
ABDON M. PALLASCH Political Reporter


I'm not sure if this last quote is the reporter's thoughts or a continuation of the 'Brady' personel, but it is clearly a socialist in any event.

1) This quote justifies the actions of gun purchasers.

2) This quote is a threat to our freedom.

Who is this person to determine how many is "more than enough"?
Who is this person to decide what a firearm is to be used for?

I personally own four firearms. One is a .338 hunting rifle suitable for anything from deer to elk and bear. One is a long range target rifle .30-06 set up for 500 to 1000yds. One is a .44mag handgun for short range hunting and home defense. One is a 12gauge shotgun for bird/skeet shooting.
My guns all have custom triggers and stocks tailored to thier purpose. For example I could not use my hunting rifle at 1000yds without substantial load work/range time/new scope/new barrel. Likewise I would not carry my target rifle into the field on a hunt and risk damage/exposure.

Do I have to many guns?
I don't think so. In fact I look forward to purchasing a few more in the next year or so.

An armed man is a citizen.
An unarmed man is a subject.


This whole gun ban argument is as ignorant as banning cell phones in cars. We don't need to ban them. We already have a law against wreckless driving.

Obama has shown time and time again that he is pro-gun ban.

When your brother punches you in the arm every time you look away, do you believe him the tenth time when he says "ok I promise I won't puch you again"?

cutelildevilsmom's photo
Mon 12/08/08 01:04 PM
Edited by cutelildevilsmom on Mon 12/08/08 01:05 PM
Hasn't the supreme court already decided this?..Obama doesn't want your guns but please lock them up,learn to shoot them properly so I or a child don't get a stray bullet in our rump or worse.

OneHungryChciken's photo
Mon 12/08/08 02:59 PM
He has voted for every anti gun law that has come in front of him including one that would have resulted in confiscation in IL. How he considers himself Pro 2nd is beyond me???????????

Winx's photo
Mon 12/08/08 03:05 PM

Hasn't the supreme court already decided this?..Obama doesn't want your guns but please lock them up,learn to shoot them properly so I or a child don't get a stray bullet in our rump or worse.


drinker

Lynann's photo
Mon 12/08/08 08:18 PM
Yep SCOTUS has affirmed a citizen's right to own guns.

haha The NRA would be outta business if they didn't keep people afraid.

You know that politics of fear stuff right?


Winx's photo
Tue 12/09/08 09:52 AM

Yep SCOTUS has affirmed a citizen's right to own guns.

haha The NRA would be outta business if they didn't keep people afraid.

You know that politics of fear stuff right?




grumble

Hardolin's photo
Tue 12/09/08 01:03 PM

Yep SCOTUS has affirmed a citizen's right to own guns.

haha The NRA would be outta business if they didn't keep people afraid.

You know that politics of fear stuff right?




They re-write or at least re-interpret the constitution all the time.

This is what is really important about elections. Our next president will likely nominate 2 or more new judges to the court. You can bet that with the dems controlling both the house and senate we will get some very liberal judges confirmed to the court. Change two seats on the court and *bam* there's nothing stopping them from banning firearms. The democrats don't give a rat's ass what the constitution says, only how they can 'interpret' it to mean whatever they want.

These are lifetime appointments without accountability that remain long after a president leaves office. I'm not afraid of a socialist president. I'm afraid of what this socialist president will do long term to this country with his fellow democrats running everything.

Winx's photo
Tue 12/09/08 01:06 PM


Yep SCOTUS has affirmed a citizen's right to own guns.

haha The NRA would be outta business if they didn't keep people afraid.

You know that politics of fear stuff right?




They re-write or at least re-interpret the constitution all the time.

This is what is really important about elections. Our next president will likely nominate 2 or more new judges to the court. You can bet that with the dems controlling both the house and senate we will get some very liberal judges confirmed to the court. Change two seats on the court and *bam* there's nothing stopping them from banning firearms. The democrats don't give a rat's ass what the constitution says, only how they can 'interpret' it to mean whatever they want.

These are lifetime appointments without accountability that remain long after a president leaves office. I'm not afraid of a socialist president. I'm afraid of what this socialist president will do long term to this country with his fellow democrats running everything.


I'm a Democrat and i give a rat's ass about the constitution.:angry:

I feel that if McCain was going to have assigned those judges, our constitution would have been walked all over.

no photo
Tue 12/09/08 04:38 PM
Edited by Bushidobillyclub on Tue 12/09/08 04:43 PM


"Anyone who thinks they need to rush out and buy a firearm clearly has not been paying attention to how quickly we make progress on this issue. We don't think these are first-time buyers. We think they are people who already have more than enough guns at their homes to protect themselves and are buying more."
ABDON M. PALLASCH Political Reporter


I'm not sure if this last quote is the reporter's thoughts or a continuation of the 'Brady' personel, but it is clearly a socialist in any event.

1) This quote justifies the actions of gun purchasers.

2) This quote is a threat to our freedom.

Who is this person to determine how many is "more than enough"?
Who is this person to decide what a firearm is to be used for?

I personally own four firearms. One is a .338 hunting rifle suitable for anything from deer to elk and bear. One is a long range target rifle .30-06 set up for 500 to 1000yds. One is a .44mag handgun for short range hunting and home defense. One is a 12gauge shotgun for bird/skeet shooting.
My guns all have custom triggers and stocks tailored to thier purpose. For example I could not use my hunting rifle at 1000yds without substantial load work/range time/new scope/new barrel. Likewise I would not carry my target rifle into the field on a hunt and risk damage/exposure.

Do I have to many guns?
I don't think so. In fact I look forward to purchasing a few more in the next year or so.

An armed man is a citizen.
An unarmed man is a subject.


This whole gun ban argument is as ignorant as banning cell phones in cars. We don't need to ban them. We already have a law against wreckless driving.

Obama has shown time and time again that he is pro-gun ban.

When your brother punches you in the arm every time you look away, do you believe him the tenth time when he says "ok I promise I won't puch you again"?

I agree with you on all counts.

Here is the caveat. The change to the constitution that reworded it from a very vague wording, to a persons right to bear arms, will pretty much kill any ban attempts till changed. Its no easy thing to make changes to a constitution and has never been done this soon after a revision.

IMHO there is no way that even in two terms Obama could get that changed to make it legal to ban guns. Even if he could it would be political thumb smashing, far too many conservatives would give him such a hard time if he did tried to do something like that. I just don't buy into the fear.

There is a law suit now in every city that currently has a gun ban due to this change.

I am looking forward to having enough extra cash to get a new rifle, had to sell almost all my guns when I got into a car wreck and had no cash to buy cheap transport to work.

Hardolin's photo
Wed 12/10/08 12:02 PM
One of the biggest problems IMO we face is that so many people have no clue as to what the constitution says, much less what it means.

The right to keep and bear arms is not intended to 'protect hunters' or 'shooting sports' or even for 'home defense'.

The purpose of the second is to ensure that the 'power' ultimately resides with the people. To garauntee that the people always have the ability to overthrow our own government through force if need be.

Not for home protection, not for hunting, not for sport, not even for national defense against an invader, but to protect us from our own government.

Just as the first is not meant so that some teenager can wear an offensive t-shirt in school, but so that the government cannot stop political speech.


Another thing the constitution says that many people don't seem to comprehend is that the federal government can only do what this constitution says it can do, all other rights belong to the states and the people.