Obama said it! Assault weapons ban

[tfbit]

You seem to like executive orders. I like it when the POTUS signs stuff that has been voted on by the senate.

The article you linked says that the senate was technically in recess, but the republicans disagreed because they didn't want him to make the appointment. That sounds like a retarded technicality to me.

And I also don't see how using executive orders to do things like Helping rebuild the gulf coast and Signing an order that helps clean up the oil spill, and help families effected by the oil spill and making people in office be more efficient in their spending are such an evil thing that you seem to think all executive orders are. Perhaps you shouldn't take such a simplistic view of the world.

 

[zers]

You seem to like executive orders. I like it when the POTUS signs stuff that has been voted on by the senate.

While I agree that in an ideal world that is the best option, but it seems like some (certainly not all) of his executive orders have been time sensitive. If it were to go through congress it could take months if not years before we see any progress from it.

Sure, if I thought he was abusing his power via executive orders would be different, however, I'd think that if he did, congress would call him on it anyway and fire him.

 

[4Freedom]

I'll take anti-gun Romney against anti-gun Obama.. Guns aren't the only issue.. But, yeah I think 1st term Romney will be 100 times more pro-gun than 2nd term Obama. Romney may have not had a great record in the past with pro-2A legislation, but I think people can mend their ways. I think it's worth giving him a chance. Obama, on the other hand, has always and still is very anti-RKBA. Just because he didn't pursue any legislation in the first term, doesn't mean he isn't itching to do it in the 2nd term, where he has nothing to lose. He has a consistent voting record as one of the most anti-gun politicians in the country. He voted for almost every anti-gun measure during his Senate years in Illinois and against every pro-gun measure. There is evidence he wrote a statement, stating something of the nature that people shouldn't have the right to possess handguns, as he refer to them as tools for criminals. This contradicts his statement of supporting the 2nd Amendment he made in the last debate. The only reason Obama didn't (and hopefully won't) pursue supporting or generating any anti-2A legislation will be the fact he has bigger issues to deal with. If there is an outcry and the media starts going on a frenzy during our next mass shooting, I am sure he will have no issues gaining points with his own people (The Democrats). He was very careful in the first election to appease the needs of swing voters, who would feel sensitive on an issue like an AWB.

I could be naive. I have really given up on politics and on the future of this country's stability. But, I think a 2nd term Obama will be worse than just about anyone else and this goes far beyond RKBA.

Anyway, in my opinion, which can be wrong, I think people are fooling themselves if they think Obama will bring us more freedom than Romney. My ideal candidate would have been a hybrid cross of a Libertarian/old-school Republican. Oh well, I guess I could just dream.. All I know is, being a small business, if I have to pay anymore welfare checks, failed government programs, hospital bills of illegal immigrants or bail out any more banks with constantly increasing taxes, I think I will just have to throw in the towel and focus on achieving a managerial position at a fast food restaurant, which may be the only future for many, once small-business owners in this country.

 

[Eddie1962]

With his comment about reintroducing the AWB, the President was just doing what all politicians do; saying what they think we want to hear at that moment. He was not addressing a question about the 2A from a law abiding gun owner; he was trying to appease the woman who asked the question at that moment. Her tone, body language, and the way she asked the question made it obvious where she stood on the whole gun control issue. I have yet to see a politician, left or right, who has disagreed with a question or concern from a potential swing voter in a tight race. Just my opinion on why he said what he said.

The truth is that neither party wants to tackle the issue of an AWB simply because it would be political suicide. And just for argument's sake, let say that the democrats were able to win both houses, I doubt that an AWB would gain much traction. Sure, there would be some huffing and puffing, (again appeasing their base) but I think they know it would be foolish legislation to pursue. Why? They barely control the Senate, and if they were to win the lower house, they are not going to jeopardize losing it when the next election rolls around. Just flashback to the mid-term election of 1994 when both houses were douched out and the republicans won the super majority. I don’t think they want a repeat of that very humbling experience.

Another interesting tidbit they’re probably aware of; the majority of the NRA’s political funding goes to OPPOSING democratic candidates, not supporting republican candidates. The republicans just benefit from the bloody aftermath of the NRA’s assault on the democrats. It brings to mind “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.

I’m also certain the democrats are aware of the shifting trends regarding gun control – ALL politicians live and die by polls and over the last decade the polls are showing a shift from a paranoid view on gun control, to a more accepting (tolerant) view. To me, this is following the same trajectory of every major issue in my lifetime. Women’s rights, civil rights, gay rights, etc. Remember, at one time these issues were opposed by the majority. Thank goodness we’ve made progress on these issues as a culture. I suspect that in time the same will hold true for gun rights – and no, I’m not equating human rights to that of a piece of steel, or polymer. But the right to bear arms is as important as the issues I mentioned because at it’s very core lies our right of living in a free society that is not controlled by its government.

Finally, it would be foolish to implement an AWB because, we, the people, the people who allow you to have the job as a politician are not stupid. We know that the rights granted by the OUR constitution are slowly being taken away. And not just since 2008 - it began in earnest in 2000. We know this and they know we’re on to them. I honestly don’t think they’re stupid enough to push their luck AND!!!!.....they know it.

Whew…..never thought a cerebral enema would feel sooooo good.

 

[4Freedom]

If Obama and Romney are just as pro-gun as one another, I would still take Romney. I'd rather have a president who doesn't apologize to a country who murdered one of our Ambassadors. Shouldn't it be the other way around, they apologize to us for having our Ambassador raped and murdered? The media totally hushed up the fact he was sexually molested and beaten before he was murdered. I feel we have a spineless leader who kneels before Muslim leaders. Perhaps, it has something to do with his Islamic upbringing. Nonetheless, he is the President of the USA and he should stop giving them special treatment. Has there been any other president to kneel before the King of Saudi Arabia? Shouldn't the Saudi king kneel before our president? Who refines their oil for them and is their largest consumer and keeps money in their pockets? Also, his supporting of re-instituting religious Islamic leaders across the Middle East I think will bring us many misfortunes in the future. We always complain about starting wars and going to war. Perhaps, we can stop supporting and putting in power the anti-American maniacs that America has done in many Middle Eastern countries. Almost every war we have fought has been against people who we initially help put into power, including Ayatollah Mullahs of Iran, Sadam in Iraq, Bin Laden in Afghanistan. The Pakistanis, who receive a good chunk of aid from the USA, were helping to house and protect Bin Laden. Now we have Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt and so-called Moderate Islamists in Libya. Do you think we can ever learn?

Although, I have lost confidence with most politicians on both sides. I just gave Mr. Obama a chance as my leader and I am not happy at all. Time to give the other guy a chance. Hopefully, he will do a better job.

 

[slingshot1943]

I like how everyone is freaking out because he basically said if it comes across his desk he'd sign it, which you all already knew.

I actually really liked his speech/stance when asked the question. You people are focusing on the 1 sentence, when you should be focusing on the rest of the 5 minute speech. He said he wants to help with the underlying cause of violence and violent crime, which is a good thing. If you battle the ignorance and poverty that causes violent crime, violent crime will go down, and nobody will give a bubblegum about banning this gun or that gun or that assault dildo or that baby killing round.

I guess you haven't been around long enough to remember gun grabbers saying "If it just saves one life". Crime will never go low enough. I believe most of them have a different agenda.

 

[zers]

If Obama and Romney are just as pro-gun as one another, I would still take Romney. I'd rather have a president who doesn't apologize to a country who murdered one of our Ambassadors. Shouldn't it be the other way around, they apologize to us for having our Ambassador raped and murdered? The media totally hushed up the fact he was sexually molested and beaten before he was murdered. I feel we have a spineless leader who kneels before Muslim leaders. Perhaps, it has something to do with his Islamic upbringing. Nonetheless, he is the President of the USA and he should stop giving them special treatment. Has there been any other president to kneel before the King of Saudi Arabia? Shouldn't the Saudi king kneel before our president? Who refines their oil for them and is their largest consumer and keeps money in their pockets? Also, his supporting of re-instituting religious Islamic leaders across the Middle East I think will bring us many misfortunes in the future. We always complain about starting wars and going to war. Perhaps, we can stop supporting and putting in power the anti-American maniacs that America has done in many Middle Eastern countries. Almost every war we have fought has been against people who we initially help put into power, including Ayatollah Mullahs of Iran, Sadam in Iraq, Bin Laden in Afghanistan. The Pakistanis, who receive a good chunk of aid from the USA, were helping to house and protect Bin Laden. Now we have Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt and so-called Moderate Islamists in Libya. Do you think we can ever learn?

Although, I have lost confidence with most politicians on both sides. I just gave Mr. Obama a chance as my leader and I am not happy at all. Time to give the other guy a chance. Hopefully, he will do a better job.

Romney repeating the "apology tour" over and over again doesn't make it true.

 

[Norm0931]

I agree Romney is the lesser of two evils as far as 2A. I honestly would rather Romney win purely because I think he can fix the economy and I think he would hang himself if he did any anti0gun legislation. I do think the guy can fix the economy though. I was actually talking to a co-worker today who had decided to change his vote because of the last two debates. He stated that Obama seemed dazed and confused in the first debate and just wanted to talk trash about Romney being more rich than him in the second. I've got to agree.

 

[slingshot1943]

What I thought was funny was when Obama said 'when I was president' I wonder if he already believes he already lost the election...

He sees the internal polling data, I bet thats the way it looks now.

 

[The Redpaw]

How is he acting like a dictator? The president has no power not given to him by congress.

I'm not here in this thread or any other thread to argue, but I clearly know that appointing a CZAR to oversee specific agencies was never met with approval in any social circle I frequent, and my clients are pretty diverse.

When the president has clearly stated that he'll find ways to circumvent congress to meet his agenda, that is a clear statement of his intent for dictator like activities.

Not disputable what I wrote, it has happened and will need to be corrected in the coming change of office.

 

[Steve06]

A sad state of affairs indeed when our great country of over 300 million can only come up with these two Bozo's as candidates for President.

 

[Dave Workman]

Here's a little bit of a different angle on this. Remember, they wuz all calling us nuts because we wuz concerned about Obama and guns?

There's a link in here to Emily Miller's column today in the Washington Times...

<broken link removed>

 

[mcm1979]

Yup, and, Massachusetts passed an AWB when Romney was Gov. doesn't matter either way.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Yup, and, Massachusetts passed an AWB when Romney was Gov. doesn't matter either way.

Here we go again.

Sorry, but that didn't happen.
Look around at a few other threads in this section for the straight scoop.

Or, you could try reading this:
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

 

[Slobray]

I’m really surprised at the lack of concern along with the “it’ll never happen/he doesn’t really mean it/Romney is worse, he’s already signed a ban” responses in the post, especially from the WA folks.

First, let’s look at how WA is only a gubernatorial election away from the same (or worse) restrictions that plague the People Republick of Kalifornastan, NY, NJ and MA. Don’t believe it’s that close? Let’s compare the similarities of legislatures in WA and the closest perpetrators’, the PRK. Both have a Democrat run House/State Assembly and Senate. So if WA elects anti-gun Democrat Jay Inslee, there is no one to stop them from enforcing their masters (Democratic party) anti-gun will upon us peasants, which includes… “reasonable regulation”, “commonsense improvements—like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole” (quotes from the Democratic Party Platform) especially if their messiah gets reelected. Remember it takes longer to get the rights back than it does to lose them, so vote wisely.

Now on to the National level…
Yes, Romney did sign an “assault weapons ban” bill (Here’s what the Gun Owners Action League of MA said about that The Romney Record, Mitt Romney's Record as Governor of MA. ), ran his mouth a few times and said some pretty damning things. He also rose the “state’s gun-licensing fee” as an effort to eliminate the budget deficit.

Let’s look at 0bama’s record, state and federal. He was a board member for the anti-gun Joyce foundation. He supported banning the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic firearms, increasing state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms. In 1996, during 0bama's run for the Illinois State Senate, he was surveyed by a Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois about criminal justice and other issues. His questionnaire showed that he supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns. In 1999, he urged prohibiting the operation of any gun store within five miles of a school or park, which according to advocates would eliminate gun stores from most of the inhabited portion of the United States. He sponsored a bill in 2000 limiting handgun purchases to one per month. He voted against a 2004 measure that allowed self-defense as an affirmative defense for those charged with violating local laws making it otherwise unlawful for such persons to possess firearms. He has supported restricting the purchase of firearms at gun shows. 0bama voted against legislation protecting firearm manufacturers from certain liability suits. 0bama has also stated his opposition to allowing citizens to carry concealed firearms and supports a national law outlawing the practice, saying on Chicago Public Radio in 2004 "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws". 0bama initially voiced support of Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and said that it was constitutional. Let’s not forget the executive order he used to keep a lid on “Fast and Furious”. Now he mentioned "cheap handguns" and permanently reinstating the expired Assault Weapons Ban again. The worst thing he has done is to appoint Sotomayor and Kagan to the SCOTUS and both justices voted against Heller and McDonald.

I do know that politics is one big game of lies, deceit and pandering on both sides, but the problem I see with 0bama getting reelected is.....
1) He actually is against the RKBA and is a true definition of an anti that believes that no one should own a gun
2) His party believes the same
3) Most of his base believes the same
4) If reelected he will be a lame duck with nothing to lose, giving him free reign to bully the Congress and the House and follow his and his parties anti-gun agenda.
Those 4 factors give him all the motivation and “flexibility” he needs to get rid of all things he sees as evil (guns) and to "make this country a safer place for the children". I’m not willing to take that chance with my civil rights.

I know a lot of you are going to say “I’m not a one issue voter; there are other factors in determining who I vote for”. I understand and respect that (I, myself have other issues, like who supports the Military), but let’s look at the “hot” issues realistically; jobs, the economy, gas prices, foreign policy, etc, etc. Both parties are going to feed us the same regurgitated BS they always have, so not much is going to change on that front. With that being said, there really should only be one issue that matters to the RKBA community right now;
WHO GETS TO APPOINT THE SCOTUS JUSTICES!
And the choice is clear because 0bama has already put in 2 that would take our rights away.

I said it before and I’ll say it again... It takes longer to get the rights back than it does to lose them, just ask the law abiding citizens of Chicago and DC.

Sorry for the novel, but I just had to express myself on this one.

Ray