|
|
|
|
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 1:28:38 PM | A recent commercial for Obama says that he will "Protect the 2nd Amendment". From what? Himself??
From his own words and deeds, I submit that he is being false in his ad.
On Self defense - Senator Obama voted to allow the prosecution of people who use a firearm for self-defense in their own homes. (Illinios Senate, S.B. 2165, Vote 20, 3/25/04)
Ammunition Tax - Senator Obama supported increasing taxes on ammunition & firearms by 500%. (Chicago Defender, 12/13/99)
Clinton Gun Ban - Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban. (Senate Debate #3: Obama vs. Alan Keyes 10/21/04)
Ammunition Ban - Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting & sport shooting. (U.S. Senate, S.397, Vote 217, 7/29/05)
Handgun Ban - Obama twice endorsed a ban on ALL Handguns. (Independant Voters of Illinois/Independant Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire 9/9/96 & Politico 3/31/08))
Right to Carry - Obama opposed right-to-carry laws in interview. (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 4/2/08
"I am consistantly on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry." (Obama to the Chicago Tribune 4/27/04)
"I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country" (Obama on gun ownership & gun bans to Politico, 2/11/08)
So can ANYONE explain to me how exactly Senator Obama wants to PROTECT our 2nd Amendment rights?? | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 1:32:51 PM | From FactCheck.org
NRA Targets Obama
September 22, 2008
Updated: September 29, 2008
It falsely claims in mailers and TV ads that Obama plans to ban handguns, hunting ammo and use of a gun for home defense.
Summary
A National Rifle Association advertising campaign distorts Obama's position on gun control beyond recognition.
The NRA is circulating printed material and running TV ads making unsubstantiated claims that Obama plans to ban use of firearms for home defense, ban possession and manufacture of handguns, close 90 percent of gun shops and ban hunting ammunition.
Much of what the NRA passes off as Obama's "10 Point Plan to 'Change' the Second Amendment" is actually contrary to what he has said throughout his campaign: that he "respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms" and "will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns."
The NRA, however, simply dismisses Obama's stated position as "rhetoric" and substitutes its own interpretation of his record as a secret "plan." Said an NRA spokesman: "We believe our facts."
Perhaps so, but believing something doesn't make it so. And we find the NRA has cherry-picked, twisted and misrepresented Obama's record to come up with a bogus "plan."
Update, Sept. 29: The Obama campaign asked broadcasters to take down ads from the NRA, citing this article and a separate Washington Post article that called the ads misleading. The NRA attacked us on its Web site, claiming that we are neither impartial nor independent. We respond in the Analysis section.
Analysis
The NRA announced it will spend $40 million during this year's elections, including $15 million to portray Sen. Barack Obama as a threat to gun rights. The NRA has been circulating fliers and mailers that claim to be "Barack Obama's 10-Point Plan to 'Change' the Second Amendment." And on Sept. 22 reports surfaced that the NRA had launched TV ads in several key states, also attacking Obama. They are false portrayals.
The flier looks almost as though it comes from the Obama campaign. It uses the same color and font scheme as well as the campaign's sunrise logo. And on some points it is right; Obama has called for national legislation against carrying concealed firearms, and he would revive and make permanent the expired ban on semi-automatic "assault weapons," for example. On other points it exaggerates. Obama has spoken in favor of government registration of handguns, for example, but has not called for registration of all "firearms" including hunting rifles and shotguns. But the TV spots and fliers also make claims that are directly contrary to what Obama actually says about guns.
What Obama Says
Obama lays out his basic stance on guns in a "Sportsmen" fact sheet and also in an "Urban Policy" paper on reducing gun violence. The NRA's claims find little support here.
Regarding a Constitutional right to guns, Obama says:
Obama, "Sportsmen": Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns.
You can go to Factcheck.org and read more there. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 1:58:09 PM | I don't like Obama, and think he would be a disaster, if elected. I also can't imagine anyone who really is vigilant to protect the rights of gunowners voting for him.
That being said, at this juncture, those who are seriously interested in 2nd Amendment issues, already know about Obama, and there are very few votes to be had tilling this field.
If McCain wins, it isn't going to be from people suddenly realizing that he's anti gunowner. It will be from people realizing that the man wants to take us down the path of Western European socialism, and, yes, that will include confiscating guns, and probably knives, like they do in the U.K. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 2:13:38 PM | "You can go to Factcheck.org and read more there."
Factcheck.org is owned and operated by the same people who gave Obama 55 million dollars to play with and share with Bill Ayers.The legacy of the late great Mr.Annenberg has been hijacked by people diametrically opposed to the beliefs of Mr. Annenberg.
Factcheck is nothing but an Obama lapdog.
The op has all the facts and msg.2 is using a propaganda site for Obama to try and refute Mr.Obama's VOTING record and recorded statements.
Maybe Obama should have voted present when these votes happened also. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 2:31:17 PM | AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN ERIC2000 you provide NO FACTUAL BASIS FOR YOU CLAIMS!
Show us a source, link, video, ANYTHING so we can believe you. And be educated on the man named Barack Obama. Otherwise pipe down. ONE LINK. Just ONE backing up your claim that Fact check is in the tank for Obama. I prefer one from your secret congressional files.
Thanks. Looking forward to your reply. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 4:49:40 PM |
Obama has promised to protect and uphold the constitution. When he cast those votes (all prior to June of 2008) the 2nd amendment stood solely on the 27 words it was comprised of:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
None of his votes attempted to renege on the promise of "A well regulated militia," nor is it apparent that he voted to infringe upon the rights to keep and bear arms.
What you meant by Clinton Gun Ban was Clinton's Brady Bill (targeting hand guns) and the Assault Weapons Ban.
In June of 2008 the supreme court set the precedence that (District of Columbia v. Heller ) self-defense is a central component of the right.
None of your examples show that he has voted in opposition to the new (Very New) interpretation of the amendment.
In that Pittsburg Tribune-Review article you listed, you'll read that "All three [candidates: Obama, Clinton and McCain] believe the Second Amendment gives individuals, not militias, the right to own guns. "
Concealed weapons is NOT in the second amendment. Obama DID NOT state that he is opposed to the "Right to Carry," in that Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_560181.html
"I do think we have to do a better job sharing information between local and federal officials," Said Obama.
"I am not in favor of concealed weapons," Obama said. "I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."
Those are the only quotes from him in that "Interview."
| |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 8:49:00 PM | I did notice that after the Heller decision Obama definitely changed his tune as far as the 2nd & 4th amendments went. He toned down his responses to gun rights completely after that.
I've been watching his comments & voting record for the simple reason that I WOULD vote for him if I could belive that he'd leave Gun Laws alone. I don't particularly want McCain in office, but if it means that my favorite sports (Single Action Shooting Society (that's Cowboy Style for you non-gun types out there), IDPA (International Defensive Pistol Assoc (Concealed Carry target shooting), IPSC (International Practical Shooting Confederation), & Military Rifle Competitions are affected in ANY way, I'm going to have to vote Republican.
Granted, I'm at the range more than most police officers as my hobby takes up a LOT of my spare time & money...and being ex-military I take shooting sports VERY seriously. It's not a game, it's just keeping my hand in Just In Case either I need to use my CCW for defense of Life, Liberty, or the Pursuit of Happiness (meaning crooks get shot dead, no arguments) or in the wild off-chance that some country gets insane and tries to attack us on our soil, in which case they will meet with heavier armed resistance than they ever could have imagined from longer ranges than their people can shoot (6.5mm Creedmore is effective up to 1500 yds, and so am I). Rarely I hunt, but only to put food on the table, I don't use a gun to do it, and I tend to spend more time perfecting my stalking technique than actually killing anything...it's a true challenge to Bowhunt....more even terms with the Deer. With my level of accuracy/distance I really don't think that it's fair if I use a rifle.
In short, I really don't want to see major taxes on guns/ammo enacted, major rule changes, or any other pain-in-the-rump legislation passed. We've got quite enough gun laws on the books already. Florida has some of the most restrictive gun laws outside of California, but Florida laws are properly AIMED at CRIMINALS, NOT LEGITIMATE GUN OWNERS like the California laws are!! | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/1/2008 9:25:40 PM | I want to state my bias first. That way all you who disagree with it can ignore my post if you wish. I believe in the right to own guns for self protection and for personal use. Protection from criminals and from a tyranical government. In my reading of the founding fathers this is what i see that they ment.
Now the idea that Obama feels that a person who uses a weapon for self-defense in their own home should be open for prosecution i find really objectionable.
If we have a right to own them is that then limited then by not having a right to use them? Does anyone know how he justified that view? | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/2/2008 4:53:07 PM | Dragonpat- Some people believe that having no legally owned guns (total ban, like England) would help solve the amount of gun crimes. This has been shown to be ineffective as crooks simply go buy their guns from other crooks in other cities and countries. Want an Uzi? Go to Juarez, Mexico. You've got a 1 in 120,000 chance of getting caught coming back across the border.
The US as the CONUS (Continental US) alone is twenty times the size of England and even England, small as it is, cannot properly secure it's borders and the CONUS has NO HOPE of ever putting up meaningful border protection due to the various factors involved...the issue of square mileage alone prevents anything serious from being done on a wide-scale basis...remember that Border Fence that was being installed between the USA & Mexico?? Look at how well and how fast it's being built...and that's NOTHING compared to the oceanic borders & Canada. So basically, one could try to legislate guns out of existance, but with porous borders as we have...that would mean literally that Only Criminals would then have Guns. And that's a situation that most Americans would literally fight over. That's the kind of thing that would bring about a second Civil War.
Further, after removing all the legitimate guns, the next problem is removing the guns from the criminals...and again, that's where our border situation would make the whole thing fall on its face.
With a free society changes in criminal behavior have to come from WITHIN. You have to have sufficient punishment to Deter criminals from committing crimes, you have to have reasonable alternatives to "Thug Life", and you absolutely have to have ALL communities coming out heavily against Gang Activity and Thug Life.
But since many people have eschewed the Religious Ethics, not to mention any ethics whatsoever...there really is very little societal pressure for criminals to stop being criminals. People wink & nod at minor criminal behavior simply because they don't agree with the rules...and when you teach people to ignore the rules...it gets steadily worse...as we've seen happen in the US since the mid 60's. It starts with little things, the next group takes it a step further, the next go even further...ad infinitum. So now we have a society where one in five actively scoff at minor laws and they're teaching that to their kids...who are going to blow off even MORE laws...because Daddy & Mommy did THIS, I should be able to do THAT too, PLUS some!!!
Our society created some real monsters...now we have to live with thier sons & daughters who see no real reason to behave like model citizens. And if someone wants to tell me I cannot defend my HOME? My LIFE? My FAMILY and the things I have worked all my life to attain (Pursuit of Happiness, baybee!)?? Screw that. Crook tries to come thru my window he's going to DIE. It's that simple. Whether by gun, knife, sword or axe...he's toast. And if the law EVER says that I'm not supposed to defend my home by any & all means...well...lets just say that there is a large Alligator Farm nearby where disposal of dead crook can be attained with EASE. Who really needs to call the cops if you handle it yourself?? Dang sure less paperwork that way... | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/2/2008 6:31:36 PM | I haven't read all of the posts so I have no idea if anyone has expressed the following. I believe that eventually our guns are going to be taken. For this reason, if for no other, I plan to buy several and make sure that they are in a place where they will not be available for confiscation.
I suggest that the rest of you do the same. It may be necessary at some point to use them, when civil war/unrest erupts against a government body who has overstepped the constitution and our rights as citizens of our United States of America.
Edit: Here's some information on factcheck.org
As we have seen multiple times on this blog that factcheck.org is non partisan and we have seen also that their facts are wrong more times than they are right. Now we know it is a Annenberg website. The same Annenberg who funded radical Ayers and Obama in Chicago.
The Annenberg Political Fact Check is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg in 1994 to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state, and federal levels.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
FactCheck.org is a nonprofit[1], nonpartisan website[2] that describes its own goal as "[reducing] the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics." It is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, and is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation.[1]
Most of its content consists of rebuttals to what it considers inaccurate, misleading, or false claims by politicians. FactCheck has also targeted the misleading claims from various partisan groups.
FactCheck.org became a focus of political commentary following the 2004 vice-presidential debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards. Cheney cited the website, claiming that the independent site defended his actions while CEO of Halliburton. Although FactCheck.org did note that Cheney had not profited directly from Halliburton's Iraq contracts, the issue in question during the debate — criminal investigations and fines levied against Halliburton — was not addressed on the site until after the debate.
Cheney's reference created some controversy because he incorrectly cited the web site's address as "FactCheck.com." At the time of the debate, factcheck.com was controlled by Frank Schilling's company Name Administration Inc., who quickly redirected the address to point to an anti-Bush website owned by Bush critic George Soros.[3]
NRA Criticism
On September 22, 2008, Factcheck.org issued a report entitled "NRA Targets Obama" [4] which discussed television spots and mailers circulated by the National Rifle Association. Factcheck.org concluded that the NRA had "distort[ed] Obama's position on gun control beyond recognition".
In response, NRA member David Kopel published an online article entitled "FactCheck flubs Obama gun fact check". Kopel offered a detailed critique of the Factcheck.org piece, concluding that "The September 22, 2008, FactCheck on the NRA criticism of Obama is marred by the omission of crucial facts, one-sided and misleading presentations of issues, and thinly-concealed political advocacy".[5]
[edit] Partisan political ties
Barack Obama was a founding member, chairman, and president of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was also funded by the Annenberg Foundation.[6] The president and chairwoman of the foundation, Leonore Annenberg, born in 1918, has endorsed John McCain in the 2008 presidential election. [7]
[edit] Fact-Checking On The Web and Spin-Offs of FactCheck.org
• FactCheckEd.org[8] -- An educational resource for high school teachers and students. Sister site to FactCheck.org, and project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. [9] Created September, 2005[10]
| |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/2/2008 6:50:59 PM | "I believe in the right to own guns for self protection and for personal use. Protection from criminals and from a tyranical government. In my reading of the founding fathers this is what i see that they ment. "
As posted above Factcheck.org has analyzed and concluded that NRA has seriously distorted Obama's position.
Every right comes with responsibilities. A car is considered a weapon. As a potential weapon it has a requirement that it be both registered, require passing a written and physical test to use it, and be reported if lost. I am a proponent of applying the same kinds of requirements for responsible gun ownership as we apply for cars.
I don't like 15 year olds killing people with guns or cars. In my area the gang issue is a serious issue that can be addressed without total success but with some success without the loss of any rights by simply requiring responsible and accountable ownership. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/2/2008 7:38:18 PM | I continue to be disappointed in those who base their vote primarily on NRA propaganda. I got a robocall today from the McCain campaign on that very issue, and here in WV, as usual, we'll probably go for whoever the NRA tells us to vote for, never mind all the issues that really matter that ought to be determining our votes.
Don't get me wrong. I support the right of citizens to own guns. But I also support reasonable regulations on gun ownership. Ironically, one of the ways I've been spending my time in recent days is butchering the three deer neighbors have graciously given me now that bow season is in full swing here. One more and I should have enough to once again meet all my red meat needs for the next year.
I hunt on occasion, but am just as happy to let more avid hunters help me keep the freezer full. I get no joy from the kill, but as a carnivore am willing to take responsibility for the entire process.
More to the point, I have no fear that my rifle or shotgun are in any danger of being taken from me, regardless of who gets elected. I never saw any effort by Carter or Clinton to threaten hunting weapons, and wouldn't expect any from Obama. He'll have too many other things to worry about, and as he has repeatedly stated, has no interest in limiting responsible gun ownership or use.
I was especially disturbed to read in recent days that the founder of Cooper Arms was forced out of his own company simply because he let it be known he supports Obama. The degree of fanatacism of too many gun owners is far more disturbing to me than any farfetched theory that I or anyone else faces any threat of someone confiscating our guns.
We've got an economy in desperate shape. We are way overdue enacting intelligent energy policy. We've got a lot of ground to make up restoring our reputation in the world. We have both a health care and an education crises. These and many others are far more pressing than unfounded concerns that our second amendment rights will face any threat under the next administration.
But that's just my view. Alas, a whole lot of folks feel differently.
Dave | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/2/2008 8:04:55 PM | | The second amendment isn't about hunting. It's about the security of a free state. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/2/2008 8:38:49 PM |
The second amendment isn't about hunting. It's about the security of a free state.
And it's not under attack regardless.
But the NRA has specifically accused Obama of wanting to making hunting weapons and ammunition illegal, so they must think it's about hunting, among their many other lies and distortions. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/3/2008 6:57:33 AM | It's not just the NRA questioning Obama's record.
Those who were paying attention just prior to the SCOTUS-Heller decision watched Obama CAREFULLY...much as I did. He made MANY anti-Bill of Rights (2nd & 4th amendments) statements prior to Heller...now he's All For Sportsmen?? I have to question that. I want to hear WHY he changed his position so drastically.
If he is just abiding by the decision of the Supreme Court and intends to make no legislation against gun owners rights, I'd be glad to see that.
But, if he still wants to re-institute the Clinton Gun Ban which he stated previously to the Heller decision (and from the list, the venerable Ruger 10/22 ((a .22 caliber rifle used widely by Boy Scouts)) is on the New Brady Hit list)...it'd peeve me off. During the time since the failed Gun Ban was instituted, I purchased from druggies & other miscreants several items that were on that original ban...taking them Off the Streets and into my safes. No bad guys get to use them anymore.
On the other hand, if the Gun Ban is re-instated & expanded, as the Brady folks prefer, I can't even enjoy using them at the range anymore. And that would annoy the heck out of me. If such a ban were to pass, I'd bury them deep and wait for a time when they were no longer illegal or if they were needed to unearth them. Since they were purchased from bad guys...there is no paperwork on 'em whatsoever-which is also perfectly legal in Florida...so by having a law-abiding retired military citizen keeping them in a safe manner...what's the harm?? | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/3/2008 6:58:03 AM |
But I also support reasonable regulations on gun ownership I agree with most of your views on firearms and I am an avid sportsman myself. I live just a few blocks from Chicago and own a business in the city. CCW is illegal in IL. Daley wants to put more restictions on guns. The suburb I live in outlaws all handguns. CCW works. If you look at the records of all handgun violations of law involving CCW holders and bad guy's illegal possesion of handguns. CCW violations are outnumbered hundred's if not a thousand or more to one. I carry and break the law everyday because I work after dark in a very dangerous city. I handle considerable amounts of cash and the cops are not going to help me in a situation that takes split seconds. I rather be judged by 12 than carried out by 6. I'll risk the 3 to 7 years than be dead. | |
|
dmotz
|
Joined: 7/25/2006
Msg: 17 | |
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/3/2008 7:34:35 AM | Obama is a typical democrat. He wants your money, your guns and everything else he can get his hands on.
I will keep my guns, my freedom and my money....you can keep the change! | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/3/2008 8:24:36 AM |
Obama is a typical democrat. He wants your money, your guns and everything else he can get his hands on.
I will keep my guns, my freedom and my money....you can keep the change!
It matters not, if its a Dem, or Republican that is in favor of Gun Bans,..because their both involved,....what matters is that,....they are there.
We finally get a ruling from the Supreme Court, in Gun Owners favor,..that it is an individual right, to be allowed to own, and keep guns,....buy yet, there arer still those among us that want to create "Bans" on certain type of "Guns",...
As mentioned ,..the Ruger 10/22 Rifle has come under assult,...WHY?
The Ruger 10/22,..is just a small "Varmint Rifle",....its not an "Assult Type Weapon",
yet there are thoses that want to ban it,..and many more non assult type firearms.
When Bill Clinton,..took away more gun rights, with the stroke of a pen, than any other President in History,....it was a major blow to Handgun Owners in America.
The Chinese Norinco clone, of the Colt 1911 45 Caliber Semi Auto,....was one of the handguns on that list, and was banned,......WHY ?
Norinco 1911 45 Caliber Semi Auto,....Price $219.00
Colt 1911 45 Caliber Semi Auto,..........Price $520.00
In my opinion, and many other gun owners, the Norince was the preferd choice for personal protection, over the Colt,..and not just because of price,...but the Norinco was built under slightly tighter tolerences, which made it more accurate.
And of course Colt Manufacturing Company, just couldnt have that ! Abetter gun, at half the cost.
So Obama has flipped flopped on the Gun Issiue,...WHATS NEW ?
Almost ALL POLITICIANS talk sideways out of their mouths,..it just depends on who they are addressing at the moment,......
But rest assured,..the "Powers The Be",......WANT YOUR GUNS,...BY HOOK, OR BY CROOK,....reguardless who is in Office........there will be efforts and attempts made by the "Powers The Be",...to persuade our Leaders, to "REMOVE", this Gun,..and That Gun,.....till we dont have anymore.
Even the little Rugar 10/22.
How do you chop down a tree ?
One chop, at a time.
And this is how their taking away our guns,....ONE AT A TIME. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/3/2008 8:40:05 PM | If McCain wins, it isn't going to be from people suddenly realizing that he's anti gunowner. It will be from people realizing that the man wants to take us down the path of Western European socialism, and, yes, that will include confiscating guns, and probably knives, like they do in the U.K.
I live in the UK and don't want a gun or a knife. I don't want my neighbours to have one either. It's strange to hear of a lack of the right to possess the means of blowing your neighbours' head off described as a "socialist" trait.
Diff'rent culture over there I s'pose..
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Try as I might, when I try to picture a situation in which this sagely delivered pearl of wisdom becomes a reality, I can only imagine a fear crazed, hysterical and unregulated militia of 300 pound fear crazed behemoths, waddling about sweating profusely and shooting at anything that moves, mostly each other.
Mister Obama is such an intelligent and impressive individual, it wouldn't surprise me if he does realize that citizens don't really need guns, and are largely too hot-headed and immature to be trusted with them anyway; he may also for obvious reasons not wish to see a resurgence in the once popular sport of blasting iconic public figures to kingdom come, but I doubt that he would jeopardize his chances of a second term by trying to take gun lovers' toys away when the belief that they need these things is so deeply ingrained in the culture.. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/3/2008 10:36:21 PM | Obama might not try to ban all of our guns, remember Biden said he would stop him. He will try to keep them from us though. Like in higher taxes and regulations for guns and ammo. Banning many different types of ammo, will be easier then weapons. Allowing lawyers to sue gun manufactures out of business for crimes committed with guns. Slowly making it harder for Americans to own any weapon, except for decoration. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/4/2008 6:18:26 AM |
... a fear crazed, hysterical and unregulated militia of 300 pound fear crazed behemoths, waddling about sweating profusely and shooting at anything that moves ...
It sounds like you have encountered the Michigan Militia. | |
|
dmotz
|
Joined: 7/25/2006
Msg: 22 | |
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/4/2008 6:36:32 AM | I have several weapons ...12 to be exact. And over 4000 rounds of ammo total...I am safe from the higher prices for a while!
I will keep my freedom,my guns and my money...you can keep the change! | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/4/2008 7:22:05 AM |
The second amendment isn't about hunting. It's about the security of a free state.
And it's not under attack regardless.
But the NRA has specifically accused Obama of wanting to making hunting weapons and ammunition illegal, so they must think it's about hunting, among their many other lies and distortions
Here it is..straight from the Congressional Record. Obama & Biden both vote in lockstep.
109th Congress / Senate / 1st session / Vote 219
Question: On Passage of the Bill
Bill: S 397
Vote description: Passage of S. 397, As Amended; Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act
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.
Democratic Party Voting NO
Max Baucus, Robert Byrd, Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan, Tim Johnson, Herb Kohl, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, Kenneth Salazar Daniel Akaka, Evan Bayh, Joseph Biden, Jeff Bingaman, Barbara Boxer, Maria Cantwell, Thomas Carper, Hillary Clinton, Jon Corzine, Mark Dayton, Christopher Dodd, Richard Durbin, Russell Feingold, Tom Harkin, Daniel Inouye, Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, Frank Lautenberg, Patrick Leahy, Carl Levin, Joseph Lieberman, Barbara Mikulski, Patty Murray, Barack Obama, Jack Reed, Paul Sarbanes, Chuck Schumer, Debbie Stabenow, Ron Wyden Dianne Feinstein
Of course they would vote NO on this bill....its about protecting the firearms & ammunition industry from lawsuits due to the misuse of their products. BUT.....
S.AMDT.1615 to S.397 To expand the definition of armor piercing ammunition and for other purposes.
This amendment was ingeniously added by Sen. Kennedy. The NEW definition would include ANY ammo that would pierce armor. That would include just about ALL of your hunting ammo, since most hunting ammo can pierce body armor.
S.AMDT.1615 to S.397
Sponsor: Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] (introduced 7/27/2005) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 7/29/2005 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 1615 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 31 - 64. Record Vote Number: 217.
Democratic Party Voting YES
Daniel Akaka, Evan Bayh, Joseph Biden, Barbara Boxer, Maria Cantwell, Thomas Carper, Hillary Clinton, Jon Corzine, Mark Dayton, Christopher Dodd, Richard Durbin, Russell Feingold, Tom Harkin, Daniel Inouye, Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, Herb Kohl, Frank Lautenberg, Carl Levin, Joseph Lieberman, Barbara Mikulski, Patty Murray, Bill Nelson, Barack Obama, Jack Reed, Jay Rockefeller, Paul Sarbanes, Chuck Schumer, Debbie Stabenow, Ron Wyden Max Baucus, Jeff Bingaman, Robert Byrd, Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan, Tim Johnson, Mary Landrieu, Patrick Leahy, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, Harry Reid, Kenneth Salazar Dianne Feinstein
Now they vote YES. What a deal!! They now deem it OK to sheild gun & ammo manufacturers from lawsuits, as long as their products are considered illegal & banned.
Its this type of underhanded trickery that fools the general public, you included. Not me.
| |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/4/2008 7:59:36 AM | Someone explain why you need an AK47? Obama has clearly stated he doesn't want to ban your hunting rifles or guns for protection, but wants to make it harder for criminals or psychotics, etc. to so easily purchase assault type weapons or for those groups any weapon. ..still who needs an AK47..and why are you opposed to more stringent checks on who is purchasing these? Do you want suitcase nukes allowed to be sold to everyone too?
I take offense at the comment someone made that Dems don't support the military. My son was in Afghanistan and many friends are in Iraq, exhausted from stop losses, etc. ..Some of us can be against a trumped up war, and still fight hard to make sure our military has the protection it needs, in planning and equipment. Seems to me it was a Republican that is responsible for millions of deaths...or does everyone forget the innocent Iraqs that were also killed...not to mention the wounded. And the Evangelical supported Republicans have pretty much destroyed the christians in Iraq who have either been killed or fled out of fear. Some of you really need to find better sources for checking your facts instead of taking propaganda for fact. | |
|
| The 2nd Amendment & Obama
Posted: 11/4/2008 11:55:28 AM | If McCain wins, it isn't going to be from people suddenly realizing that he's anti gunowner. It will be from people realizing that the man wants to take us down the path of Western European socialism, and, yes, that will include confiscating guns, and probably knives, like they do in the U.K.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
European socialism?
Quite a few Euro countries have conservative governments and have gun laws.
Australia has strict gun laws as does japan, no where near socialism. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
