Skip to comments.Obama Tiptoes Into Gun-Control Debate That Happened Two Months Ago(barf alert)
Posted on 03/15/2011 6:14:48 AM PDT by marktwain
President Obama has long supported "reasonable" gun-control efforts that protect the innocent while preserving the rights of the Second Amendment. Yet the belief that his real goal is to confiscate everyone's guns (perhaps as a way to end hunting and force everyone to subsist on an all-arugula diet) took hold in the gun community long ago. Obama's infamous remark about people "cling[ing] to guns and religion" during the 2008 primaries certainly didn't help convince gun owners that he respected or understood them, and when he was elected, paranoia-fueled gun purchases surged. So it has been with great care and timidity that Obama entered the debate over gun control that erupted in the wake of the Tucson shooting in January, which is to say he pretty much avoided it completely. Until now! Only two months after everyone stopped talking about the issue entirely, Obama has finally offered up his first extended thoughts via a huge national platform, an op-ed in the Arizona Daily Star.
After confirming that he believes "that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms," Obama tries to find common ground between gun advocates and gun-control advocates:
The fact is, almost all gun owners in America are highly responsible. They're our friends and neighbors. They buy their guns legally and use them safely, whether for hunting or target shooting, collection or protection. And that's something that gun-safety advocates need to accept. Likewise, advocates for gun owners should accept the awful reality that gun violence affects Americans everywhere, whether on the streets of Chicago or at a supermarket in Tucson.
After establishing this common ground, Obama, in typically Obaman fashion, seeks to occupy it, by proposing ways to improve background checks, which polls show is overwhelmingly popular, even among gun owners themselves. That's as far as Obama goes in this particular op-ed. He admits that, while "there's more we can do to prevent gun violence," he's merely hoping to start "a new discussion on how we can keep America safe for all our people." Except, we were having this discussion in January, and Obama sat it out, despite apparently not having anything particularly controversial to say.
President Obama: We must seek agreement on gun reforms [Arizona Daily Star]
GUN REGISTRATION IS GUN CONFISCATION (old but good)
Remember, kids...reasonable gun control always means taking an activity or object that is now allowed, and making it so if you do that activity or possess that object, armed men will come to your house and knock down your door and either kill you or take you to jail.
After a cold reception even among his congress critters, this dialogue has been recouched as a call for stricter enforcement of existing laws. Slow print journals are so 19th century. In no way does it mean that any of this is true. It just means that Obama needs to fire up his base (money) and he is not nearly as good at sending trial balloons attached to disposable minions as Slick Willey was.
The concept that the government could or should only allow certain people to have guns stands the very concept of American jurisprudence on its head. It presumes that the government knows all, controls all, and should be doing so. It is wrong and ineffective.
It is crazy to set up a huge expensive bureaucratic system, require everyone to jump though hoops and prove that they are *not* criminals in order to try, ineffectively, to prevent the few individuals who are not responsible, from having legal access to guns. This is a failed paradigm, and it should be abandoned. To accept the idea that the all gun sales should be monitored by the government, and only allowed to those it deems satisfactory is fundamentally wrong.
The entire idea of the enterprise has always been the death of a thousand cuts, where the restrictions on who can buy, and where, and how and what are continually increased until the number of gun owners is reduced to political insignificance.
Obama is a a barely concealed closet nationalist socialist.
He believens in the “power of protest” meaning that he thinks that unleashing disorder and bullying the citizens of our country with the threat of riot is a legitimate exercise of political power.
Of course Obama is against any social force which flies in the face of community organized mob rule.A single , brave patriotic gunman can stop a rioting mob in its tracks. This is why Obama wants to diminish 2nd amendment rights to the point that they are barely existing.
Obama’s mob rule thuggism is disguised by the image of “democracy movement,” “social justice,” “redistribution of wealth,” and “redefinition of history,” through imposed liberal fascist regimes of political correctness, defined by a traduced press and media.
Obama can take a long walk off a short pier. I wouldn’t even think of throwing him a life preserver.
This thread article is illustrative of how Obama works, slowly shoving his ice pick into the back of patriotic America, which remains loyal to the constitution.
Who is Obama? Read this. It paints a true picture.
“Why don’t you start by punishing criminals who ignore firearm laws and leave the law-abiding gun owners alone ya jackwagon “
You got that right.
Common practice for struggling Illinois Dem politicians is to reach for the gun control issue. My WAG is that the Kenyan’s admin is in meltdown mode and this is what they could come up with to keep atop the dung heap of DC.
“They buy their guns legally and use them safely, whether for hunting or target shooting, collection or protection. And that’s something that gun-safety advocates need to accept.”
No, it is not. It is something they say when they think they have an opportunity to take or register people’s guns.
I contacted my congressional reps on this and told them that this will only lead to gun registration and confiscation and to oppose anything that comes out of Obama regarding gun legislation.