Skip to comments.Letter: Gun control opposition about Obama? (Retired union goon)
Posted on 02/16/2013 7:33:13 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
A majority of Americans voted for President Barack Obama, despite having to stand in lines for hours in many locations.
The presidents agenda, agreed to by most of America, is to limit ammo clips to 10 rounds, eliminate the further sale of assault weapons and require background checks on gun purchases, whether at a gun show or a sporting goods store a simple concept, agreed on by most Americans, gun owners or not.
What the NRA, the star salesman for the weapons manufacturers, hears is that we want to take away everybodys guns and leave them defenseless.
This is cognitive dissonance.
Everyone gets to keep their guns and even buy as many more as they can afford. This time, however, youll have a background check.
If you are a hunter, but you need an assault rifle to kill Bambi, you should turn in your gun...
(Excerpt) Read more at theadvocate.com ...
Unless you live in Missouri and the Democrats get their way...
Other states beating the confiscation drum? I forget...
And that would be one B.H. Obama - or whatever his name is...
California, Minnesota, New York, New Jersey...
“If you are a hunter, but you need an assault rifle to kill Bambi, you should turn in your gun...”
Our Bambis are pretty tough...
“Everyone gets to keep their guns and even buy as many more as they can afford. This time, however, youll have a background check.”
And now you’re in a file...
If for some reason, you object to having a background check before buying a new weapon, the police would like to know why.
Where is the "barf alert" on this letter to the editor? I don't "need" anything but if I want, I can have. After all, this is America, right? "Kill Bambi?" Another idiot who gets all his information on the wild natural world from Disney cartoons.
The 2nd Amendment has nothing to to do with hunting deer or any other animal. And it is none of any police departments business if I want to exersise a Constitutional right.
Anyone want to play the game of count the lies in that letter?
Joseph Piper, retired communications worker and now full time bed wetter.
No It is not.
It is an extrapolation of available evidence to come to a viable conclusion that the current Regime wishes to disarm the populace so as to be better able to further an agenda that ends with the USA being a fully socialized Marxist wet dream.
I live in Massachusetts. I've already have several background checks and am already "in a file".
We are expected to believe that the Barack Hussein Obama regime will be the contemporary enlightned first exception?
I suppose if you're addicted to kool-aid, sure.
For the rest of us, as the famous line goes, "Over my dead body!"
“you should turn in your gun...
No, I don’t think so, you pompous arrogant JERK!
Another dumbass liberal. Hey Joseph. You're a regular on the Advocate, so instead of spending all your time on the internet panting over pics of Obama come on over and put a few posts here.
There is also the small matter of "arbitrary and capricious" definition of 'assault rifle.'
The totalitarian tactic of redefining language in order to make a legal process illegal has been clearly used and abused in the last four years.
Fortunately, in a Constitutional Republic with a Bill of Rights, that can't work.
Attempting to neutralize our Constitution, without use of the proper explicit process, should be declared an impeachable offense.
Just for grins, may I ask the following question?
Can a representative democratic constitutional republic vote itself a change to a despotism or a dictatorship? ---- democratically, of course.
Sounds a lot like "Everyone gets to keep their health plan under my plan.".
All you people who's company was forced to either drop the medical plan or reduce your hours, How's that workin' out for ya?
Tell you what bub - why don't YOU try and take them from us yourself?
Of course we know Marxist goose-stepping seig-heiling stooges like yourself are too cowardly to attempt to do yourself what you want done. So, as always - you will petition the government to do it for you - and applaud the use of drones and tanks to destroy all of us whom you do not trust with liberty if you and your ilk get your way.
The time of reckoning is drawing very near bub. Once you arseholes make that last mistake - you and your ilk are gonna wish you never did.
I do not need the AR15 or double-stack Glock on the basis of deer and rabbits that might be crashing through my door because of mistaken address for a no-knock home invasion — phew!
True. This guy probably never fired a gun but he’s giving advice to hunters, etc.
The gun grabbers will do everything possible to limit gun ownership without outright banning them. They’d love to do the latter, of course, but they know they don’t have the political power to take all guns. Here’s a list of possible gun grabber approaches I made up:
1) Capture as many gun transactions/information as possible in national databases. If possible, 100% gun registration.
2) Background checks on all gun transactions including ammo.
3) Gun licensing and mandatory recurring gun safety training.
4) Extra (prohibitive) taxes on gun and ammo purchases.
5) Requirements to carry liability insurance to own a gun, with increasing premiums based on the types and quantities owned.
6) Limits on the kinds of guns that can be manufactured, including guns locks keyed to owner DNA, fingerprints, etc. (single shot weapons preferred).
7) Requirement to store guns in government approved safes when not in use. Ammo must be stored separately.
8) Random home inspections and certifications to ensure #7 or...
9) Requirement to store all guns at federally owned storage sites with waiting periods to draw gun out for use.
10) Waiting lists to buy even approved guns.
11) Limits on the number of guns that can be purchased per year and/or total number that can be owned.
12) Anti-gun curriculum added to schools (children, doctors, and others encouraged to report gun owners).
13) Requirement to send guns back to manufacturers for annual serviceability checks (this one would be a boon for gun manufacturers, sort of like Obamacare for health insurance companies—a potential way to get gun manufacturers to support legislation).
14) Requirement to file plans prior to transporting any gun across state borders (with a long wait for approval of course).
15) Requirement to buy government approved container and pay for professional installation in vehicle prior to transporting any gun.
16) Pressure companies to put financial pressure or stop doing business with gun manufacturers, merchants, and owners.
17) Heavy fines and permanent ban from ever owning another weapon for violating any of the above infringements.
18) Mental health checks for owner and everyone in household prior to approval to buy a gun subject to the other restrictions above. Record of treatment for PTSD, addiction, depression, etc., gets one banned from ever owning guns.
19) Whatever else they can think of to make it extremely difficult to own a gun without infringing on the right to bear arms!
You’ll hear the 2nd Amendment, like the 1st, is not absolute. Reasonable (LOL!) restrictions on gun ownership will be sold as necessary for public safety. You’ll still have the right to bear arms. It might be a prohibitely priced, single shot muzzle loader (subject to the slew of restrictions above), but technically you’ll still have the right to own a gun.
Your two graphics say it all.
Whe you’re a goon
You’re a goon
All the way
From your 0bamanite check
To your last dying day..
I have no major issue with background checks, but what does cause me concern is that the background check includes data on the firearm being purchased, and that in and of itself is de facto registration.
The data supplied for a background check should be the purchaser’s ID (includes address, etc.) and the fact a firearm is being purchased. That’s it. And I allow the inclusion of the entry that a firearm is being purchased because there are laws on the books that disallow certain pesons from possessing a firearm (felons, lunatics, etc.). But the inclusion of the make, model, serial number, etc. is de facto registration.
Up in the Soviet of Washington, as State law banning so-called assault weapons has been introduced. Unfortunately, it allows for annual visits by the local sheriff for those who own assault weapons, to make sure that they are law abiding citizens. Now liberals are starting to realize that maybe they have gone too far in their orgy of gun control.
“...One of the major gun-control efforts in Olympia this session calls for the sheriff to inspect the homes of assault-weapon owners. The bills backers say that was a mistake...”
Oh, thank you, dear overlord! You are so very gracious and benevolent!
Wait, who the hell are YOU? You have your worthless, condescending opinion, We have the US Constitution. I know which of the two matters to me.
This guy is amazing! How could he know what "most of America/Americans" wants? Oh, wait...it's that "our Democracy" thing again instead of "our Republic". Majority rules so deal with it, suckers.
Besides, gun control didn't come up until after Sandy Hook and that was in DEC...not NOV...where America would have had an opportunity to voice their opinion through their vote.
Or am I wrong?
This time, however, youll have a background check.
Has he never bought a gun? You have a background check performed on you NOW!
If you are a hunter, but you need an assault rifle to kill Bambi, you should turn in your gun...
Silly man. I use something much more powerful than a .223 for hunting deer. I want to make sure it's dead with the first shot.
And as far as Bambi goes...you can't shoot a fawn, dumb )@(, it's illegal!
Just because youre a Southern conservative doesnt mean you have to disagree with everything the different from us president suggests.
News flash, dumb )@(, I disagree with a not-so-closeted socialist, not a man who just happens to be black.
I thought Minnesota or one up there was trying to mirror Missouri and also to ban "expandable" ammo. The crux is that hunting for some game specifically requires hunters to use expandable ammo...
It's not about "hunting",you filthy Communist union punk.It's mainly about protecting myself from my government.A well known politician once put it very well...see if you can guess which one:
"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used, and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible".
Give up,you union thug? It was senator Hubert H Humphrey.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.