Obama Nominates Rabid Anti-gunner to Head the ATF

[Doubletap]

Does this new guy need Senate ratification? Think he can get by the Senate if he does? Won't be long and we're rid of this administration.

I'd like to believe you're right..then I remember..that even some of the people on this site voted them in... How sad is that?

 

[Karma]

/ugggg..

Politics..

I know! Who would have thought we would have found politics in this section! lol

 

[MA Duce]

I'm not saying the Republicans are our saviors either but I am saying the gridlock is a good thing.

Gridlock is treason. We elected these guys to do a job. They are paid VERY well. Their job is to promote the advancement of our country. By publicly stating they will not perform their job they have broken their promise to the American people. The START treaty was created by President Reagan and had been supported by every administration since. 2 million Americans will be out of unemployment support by January. And for what?? So those who make over a million dollars a year can keep their tax cut. That is in no way shape or form a good thing for the United States.

 

[MA Duce]

I'd like to believe you're right..then I remember..that even some of the people on this site voted them in... How sad is that?

That is the scary part...Obama can appoint him during the recess and he will have no review by the congress

 

[DeathRattle]

I hate it when good political discussion turns into Red vs Blue. that kind of blind loyalty and unyielding rhetoric belong at tomorrows Civil War game (super lame, btw). Politics are not a football game. They are smarter than that...

America was founded on 4 principles from two schools of thought. From the Conservative school of thought, we took the ideas of Limited Government and the Right to bear Arms, and blended them with two Liberal ideas of free speech/press/religion and the Right to Rebel.

-limited government
-the right to private ownership of weapons by all persons (except for the, uh, slaves...)
-Freedom of speech,press,religion
-the Right to Rebel should the government become destructive to its ends.

While it is more than reasonable to look at the Presidents current appointees and believe that some very anticonstitutional proposals may come forth, it is also true that thus far into his first term, he has not expanded the already existing infringments left by administrations before him. Look at the folks around him, and it easy to think of another 'assault weapons' ban, but he hasn't done anything yet. As far as being the 'worst' president as far as guns go, Roosevelt signed the 1934 National Firearms Act, Johnson signed the Gun Control Act of 1968, Clinton signed the Brady Bill with Ronald Reagans support. Obama hasn't signed anything. Nothing. Unless I am missing something, which I don't think is the case.

I am upset that he stopped those rifles from coming to our markets. After all, we already flippin' paid for them with our taxdollars, not to mention American blood. I would've loved one.

Here's a link that lays it out pretty good.:

Don’t Blame Liberals for Gun Control


Again, stop being good democrats, stop being good republicans, and start being good Americans.

As you were.


*slips stepping off of soapbox.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Gridlock is treason. We elected these guys to do a job. They are paid VERY well. Their job is to promote the advancement of our country.

I agree wholeheartedly,...
IF you can get them to advance it, and not veer off to the left and into the weeds, like they've been doing for the last 4 years.
In the meantime, a new crew has been elected to one of the houses of congress. We'll see if they can steer things back toward the center, and onto a path of advancement.
If they can't, I'll settle for gridlock too! It beats being in the ditch. You know, the ditch over on the extreme left.

 

[MA Duce]

I agree wholeheartedly,...
IF you can get them to advance it, and not veer off to the left and into the weeds, like they've been doing for the last 4 years.
In the meantime, a new crew has been elected to one of the houses of congress. We'll see if they can steer things back toward the center, and onto a path of advancement.
If they can't, I'll settle for gridlock too! It beats being in the ditch. You know, the ditch over on the extreme left.

Haha good point! I would remind all that the financial train wreck we see in Europe right now is a direct result of a "socialism can solve all our problems " mindset.

 

[Stomper]

I hate it when good political discussion turns into Red vs Blue. that kind of blind loyalty and unyielding rhetoric belong at tomorrows Civil War game (super lame, btw). Politics are not a football game. They are smarter than that...

America was founded on 4 principles from two schools of thought. From the Conservative school of thought, we took the ideas of Limited Government and the Right to bear Arms, and blended them with two Liberal ideas of free speech/press/religion and the Right to Rebel.

1. Liberals are ALL FOR free speech (in all forms)... if you agree with what they say and is useful to their agenda, otherwise they advocate your shut down under "hate speech", etc.

2. "Liberals" are all for religious freedom... if your Muslim i.e. special prayer rooms, foot washes, etc... but try to have a moment of prayer as a Christian or Jew at any public function... well look it up for yourself what has transpired.

3. The right to rebel has been crossed over to "Radical Revolutionary". Don't believe me? Do MORE RESEARCH... look around.


-limited government Sound like today's "Liberals"?.... FAIL
-the right to private ownership of weapons by all persons (except for the, uh, slaves...) Sound like today's "Liberals" who are in REAL power? BTW it was the DEMOCRAT PARTY that fought (viciously) against "racial integration" and "equal rights" during the 60's.... FAIL
-Freedom of speech,press,religion "Fairness Doctrine"? Only when it suits today's "Liberals" needs/agendas.... FAIL
-the Right to Rebel should the government become destructive to its ends. (DHS Director) "Auntie" Janet Napolitano (with the psuedo-manly voice) said, "Veterans are the single biggest threat to the goverment".... FAIL

While it is more than reasonable to look at the Presidents current appointees and believe that some very anticonstitutional proposals may come forth, it is also true that thus far into his first term, he has not expanded the already existing infringments left by administrations before him. Look at the folks around him, and it easy to think of another 'assault weapons' ban, but he hasn't done anything yet. As far as being the 'worst' president as far as guns go, Roosevelt signed the 1934 National Firearms Act, Johnson signed the Gun Control Act of 1968, Clinton signed the Brady Bill with Ronald Reagans support. Obama hasn't signed anything. Nothing. Unless I am missing something, which I don't think is the case. Then you need to check his stance and voting record whilst he was part of the Illinois legislature... those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it, this is merely "cycle-1" of that process so gear up for "cycle-2"... its comming whether you believe it or not.

I am upset that he stopped those rifles from coming to our markets. After all, we already flippin' paid for them with our taxdollars, not to mention American blood. I would've loved one.

Here's a link that lays it out pretty good.:

Don't Blame Liberals for Gun Control


Again, stop being good democrats, stop being good republicans, and start being good Americans. I agree with this, I'm no longer affiliated/registered with ANY political party.

As you were.


*slips stepping off of soapbox.

At the founding of our country, "Liberal" thought WAS conservative thought... "Liberal" meant you were for personal LIBERTY, a "Libertarian" in fact. The term "Liberal" as used today has NOTHING TO DO with the "school of thought" at the founding of our country, as it was co-opted by PROGRESSIVES to mask their true intent... that is DOCUMENTED fact and can be sused out with a bit of self-diligence wading through all the propganda (from both sides).

 

[KomradRazvan]

Phantom 1, KomradRazvan Zero.

Obama Administration Blocks Korean M1 Garands & M1 Carbines.


YouTube - Ace Ventura - YES!

that doesn't affect your second ammendment rights. that affects what is on the market. Besides, there are way better firearms available than those. Those were just historical pieces. I dont see that in any way, shape, or form as a limit to your second ammendment rights. You can still go and buy an AK for about $350 without any more requirements than you had under Bush. Sorry, but the score is still 0 - 0, as the question was "what was done to curtail your firearms freedom?" and not "what deal was kept from being imported?" If they really wanted to curtail your freedoms, they wouldn't allow Saiga's to be imported in. So I still have not seen one valid example. Nice try though.

 

[KomradRazvan]

Gridlock is treason. We elected these guys to do a job. They are paid VERY well. Their job is to promote the advancement of our country. By publicly stating they will not perform their job they have broken their promise to the American people. The START treaty was created by President Reagan and had been supported by every administration since. 2 million Americans will be out of unemployment support by January. And for what?? So those who make over a million dollars a year can keep their tax cut. That is in no way shape or form a good thing for the United States.

I agree. It seems that the convservative party has lost their minds. Instead of trying to do any good for the american people, they are turning into that little 7 year old who refuses to do anything but stomp his feet and say "no no no." Conservatives are always whining and crying about how democrats do things without bi-partisan support and blah blah blah. Yet when they have the reigns, they don't care. Remember the war with iraq? Not only was there no bi-partisan support for this, but the majority of us (Americans) opposed it. When Vice Dic(k)tator Cheney was asked if he realised that fact, his response was "So?" On top of that, for some reason, and I've heard it come from those in power as well as from the common folk (some of whome are on here), they seem to de-value higher education. I will never understand that....

If you want to really talk about the curtailing of your freedoms, lets look at the previous administration. Look at the Patriot Act. That single act has curtailed more freedoms in the United States than any other appointment/legislation/executive order in the history of this great country. To the point that if any of you went to the library (for the conservatives: that is a building that holds books.... Books are those square things that hold a bunch of papers with writing on them on a certain topic), and looked up a book on something they deemed to be "radical" or in line with "terrorist thought" or it that may contain something that was against "national security interests), they can start monitoring your activities without letting you know.

As stated above, as president, Obama has not signed anything that would limit or curtail your firearms freedom, or any freedoms for that matter.

Honestly, neither party is 100% logical in their political agendas... but I see most democrats as being closer to providing actual FREEDOM to EVERYONE as opposed to all the CEOs and top 2% of Americans.

 

[KomradRazvan]

I'll bet he prays at night:

"Please Allah, let one of the conservative Supreme Court justices die in their sleep tonight....."

i wish people like you would give up on calling him a Muslim. He isn't one.

I also wish people like you would pick an arguement. First you say he is a Muslim, then you accuse him of being a part of a radical christian church. Then you also whine and complain about freedoms, such as freedom of religion, but then choose to persecute him based on whatever assumed religion YOU claim he is a part of. Doesnt make any sense.

 

[KomradRazvan]

I accept your surrender.

I didn't surrender. I was out of town and busy with preparing for finals this coming week. Sorry that I have higher priorities than arguing with you. I'll make sure that i'll move you up the list.

 

[phathom]

that doesn't affect your second ammendment rights. that affects what is on the market. Besides, there are way better firearms available than those. Those were just historical pieces. I dont see that in any way, shape, or form as a limit to your second ammendment rights. You can still go and buy an AK for about $350 without any more requirements than you had under Bush. Sorry, but the score is still 0 - 0, as the question was "what was done to curtail your firearms freedom?" and not "what deal was kept from being imported?" If they really wanted to curtail your freedoms, they wouldn't allow Saiga's to be imported in. So I still have not seen one valid example. Nice try though.

I am not free to own whatever arm I see fit to arm myself with. It is already ridiculous the restrictions they have put in place, they are just trying to put more and more slowly that they can get by, so eventually we won't have any freedom of being able to own anything.

They are chipping away at our rights piece by piece, sure there are a lot of people who wouldn't jump up and buy a M1 Garrand, but if we let them do that, what next? They already limited full autos, short barrels, and suppressors, in some states they already deny concealed carry, limit magazine capacity, and caliber (50bmg) what can and can't go on a gun (stocks, grips, etc.) until recently, and they are still fighting to keep it this way, you couldn't even own a handgun in Chicago, in some states they have extreme registration measures and ridiculous gun control legislation which makes ownership hard and expensive, and forget trying to carry anything.

Pretty soon it will be like other countries, only the criminals have guns, concealed/open carry not allowed, guns limited to hunting rifles/shotguns with limited capacity, guns have to be registered and kept locked up at a gun range only to be used in practice or competition. What firearms, including make/model, capacity, caliber, etc. highly regulated and for those you must pay high registration and taxes to the state to "own" those.
Before you can own a gun, you must get a permit, and to get that permit you have to pay high fees and get your local police chief to sign off on it, it is renewed yearly and can be revoked at their will. On top of that you will need to have a permit for each gun you "own" again, with more fees, and not even the freedom to keep them at home.

This is the future if we let this kind of thing slide. We must oppose them oppressing our rights.
If you can't see what they're trying to do, you need to open your eyes and look again.

 

[Trlsmn]

that doesn't affect your second ammendment rights. that affects what is on the market. Besides, there are way better firearms available than those. Those were just historical pieces. I dont see that in any way, shape, or form as a limit to your second ammendment rights. You can still go and buy an AK for about $350 without any more requirements than you had under Bush. Sorry, but the score is still 0 - 0, as the question was "what was done to curtail your firearms freedom?" and not "what deal was kept from being imported?" If they really wanted to curtail your freedoms, they wouldn't allow Saiga's to be imported in. So I still have not seen one valid example. Nice try though.

Except for the fact that you said this:

Can you please provide me with one example Obama or his administration has done since they are in power that his curtailed your firearms freedom? I would like just 1 example. Please?

So yet another point deducted from KomradRazavan.

 

[Trlsmn]

i wish people like you would give up on calling him a Muslim. He isn't one.

You may wish all you wish, as they say, wish in one hand and... see which one fills faster

I also wish people like you would pick an arguement. First you say he is a Muslim, then you accuse him of being a part of a radical christian church. Then you also whine and complain about freedoms, such as freedom of religion, but then choose to persecute him based on whatever assumed religion YOU claim he is a part of. Doesnt make any sense.

"You" really shouldn't use the word "you" when it is not "I" who has said these things, but it is "you" ascribing "your" perception to me.

"I" wish you would come with a argument that actually was thought out, up to this point it's like shooting fish in a barrel to counter point you.

"I" also wish you understood sarcastic humor, because making a Muslim joke means nothing about my beliefs, if you want to know my beliefs you need only ask, what you shouldn't do is tell me what my beliefs are as you have no knowledge and it makes you look ignorant.

 

[KomradRazvan]

Except for the fact that you said this:



So yet another point deducted from KomradRazavan.

dude... that wasnt an example of it affecting your freedoms...

 

[Trlsmn]

I didn't surrender. I was out of town and busy with preparing for finals this coming week. Sorry that I have higher priorities than arguing with you. I'll make sure that i'll move you up the list.

You threw out a challenge, I accepted, and then you ignored my challenge, you've been online and made other posts since then, you lost, accept it, move on.

 

[KomradRazvan]

You may wish all you wish, as they say wish in one hand and... see which one fills faster



You really shouldn't use the word "you" when it is not "I" who has said these things, but it is "you" ascribing "your" perception to me.

I wish you would come with a argument that actually was thought out up to this point it's like shooting fish in a barrel to counter point you.

I also wish you understood sarcastic humor. Because making a Muslim joke means nothing about my beliefs, if you want to know my beliefs you need only ask, what you shouldn't do is tell me what my beliefs are as you have no knowledge and it makes you look ignorant.

well trlsmn, i didnt say you said it, i said people LIKE YOU. As in people who have expressed the same views as you. And sarcasm rarely works in txt form on a forum... it is really hard to tell it was sarcasm from your post.

 

[Trlsmn]

dude... that wasnt an example of it affecting your freedoms...

You can't handle the truth! Read your own words, your challenge was met, the proof was shown.

You lose! Grow up!

 

[KomradRazvan]

You threw out a challenge, I accepted, and then you ignored my challenge, you've been online and made other posts since then, you lost, accept it, move on.

you didnt give me a challenge... you asked for a wage.... what kind of challenge is that?