Skip to comments.President Obama signals quiet surrender on gun control
Posted on 03/18/2011 10:42:28 AM PDT by marktwain
This past Presidential election, gun owners had much cause for concern. John McCain, a lukewarm gun supporter or gun banner, depending upon the day, was running against eventual winner Obama, a former member of the Joyce Foundation board of directors, the Joyce foundation being a leading financial supporter of gun control activism.
Since that time, President Obama has surprised his suitors by signing more pro-gun legislation in one year than Bush 43 signed in eight years. This earned him a solid "F" rating from the Brady groups, and others disappointed that the black helicopters were not immediately dispatched against gun owners upon his ascension.
In a laughably ineffectual gesture towards his gun control base, President Obama this week published an op-ed in the Arizona Daily Star, some two months after the shooting of a congresswoman in Arizona. In this op-ed, our President, the supposed, hoped-for new leader on gun control, took the radical positions that we should 1.) enforce current laws, 2.) encourage states to report their own data to the NICS system (i.e. criminal convictions and mental disability adjudications) and 3.) make our current "instant check" system somehow more, um, instant.
Take his name off the byline, and you'd have trouble separating Obama's op-ed from NRA talking point memos.
The fact that president Obama is reduced to mere spin-parroting of the positions of pro-gun groups is an important indicator for 2012. Two years into his term, in the face of stern rebuking from gun control groups that zealously supported him, the best he comes up with is an echo of an NRA press release.
And the fact that his pro-gun control sycophants in the national media are all breathless with his "bold call to action" in the area of gun control leads me to believe that President Obama actually understands what pro-gun activists understand - there is no up-side to gun control. Despite Time, Newsweek and Associated Press editorials to the contrary, this op-ed was not the opening salvo in a new gun control offensive.
The President's op-ed was, instead, a "shoo fly" gesture to the gun control extreme wing of his party. "You NRA trypes better shape up, or I shall write a (sort of) angry letter to small, regional newspaper."
At least someone on the far-left understands the all-cost no-benefit calculus of gun control. We now wait to see if Republicans in Ohio's General Assembly understand the same message.
Ken Hanson is a gun rights attorney in Ohio. He serves as the Legislative Chair for Buckeye Firearms Association, and is the attorney of record for Buckeye Firearms Foundation, which filed friend-of-the-court briefs in the Heller and McDonald Supreme Court cases. The National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) has awarded him with its 2008 Defender of Justice Award and 2009 Jay M. Littlefield Volunteer of the Year Award. He is the author of The Ohio Guide to Firearm Laws, a certified firearms instructor and holds a Type 01 Federal Firearms License.
Nobama’s campaign staff is going through the motions of trying to get him re-elected just in case Repubs somehow snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Anything they can do to give him talking points where he can spew lies about his positions.
We have indeed been fortunate so far with this President.
As the article points out, even GBII was not as friendly.
Obama is a lot smarter politically than many of his predecessors.
He understands what he said about middle America being fond of their bibles and guns. He also knows the rest of America isn’t Chicago.
What his attitude might be in a SECOND term however, when freed of the constraints of a re-election campaign, is anyone guess.
Right now we should just be thankful.
In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Perhaps someone read this to the jerk, Obama.
From the Declaration of Independence:
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”.
It doesn’t matter that he doesn’t believe in these words, he knows that we do.
I'll be curious to see who the NRA endorses in 2012.
I think that Obama has always intended to enact sweeping gun regulations, and timing is everything.
I also think that Obama is way too determined and arrogant to just allow himself to be be defeated by a bunch of people he hates.
If he didn’t after Arizona, I really doubt it’ll happen ever. The country was a bit primed for a few weeks for a mag ban, the media was really putting out feelers and endorsing the idea but it still didn’t get much support from the non-ultra left areas.
On this subject it’s hard to say anything negative for now. It could always change and very possibly might if he gets a 2nd term and doesn’t care about the public’s opinion at all.
I think you are correct. What President Obama says, and what he intends, are almost always two very different things. With the MSM to cover for him, he can easily deceive with his words. He says “improved information” and means national registration. He says “improved instant check” and means outlawing all private sales of firearms. I cannot prove the above assertions, but I believe that they are the most likely interpretations of what he intends.
If he was waiting for the right time, he pretty much let that window of opportunity close with the previous midterm election cycle.