Obama on CNN says he will ban Assault weapons


PDA






Waldo Pepper
November 11, 2008, 12:30 PM
Was at my friends gun shops this morning as he was putting away the last of his shipment from yesterday afternoon when CNN showed Obama saying he will reinstate the Assault weapons bill and ban the sale of them as in Clinton era. I looked at the new Bushmaster M-4 he had just got on that shipment and told him that I bet he could not replace gun for what he was selling it for. So he finally calls the supplier and his chin drops and he hangs up, and he said that a replacement for his cost would be $1,4xx and that they were sold out completely.

Anyway he ask me if I want the Bushie for the $995, if not he was going to add another $100 for the gun. I told him I didn't need another and was not wanting to invest for resale either, but I did give it some thought however. I did pick up 1550 rounds of 22 lr and 400 of 22 magnum for my toys.

If you enjoyed reading about "Obama on CNN says he will ban Assault weapons" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
oneeyenurse
November 11, 2008, 12:51 PM
I can't find that clip anywhere. When did he say it?

briang2ad
November 11, 2008, 01:05 PM
or at least you would think it - I am not saying he won't do the Clintonian ban, but....

As someone said before, its the economy stupid. Bill Clinton 'went left' early in his Presidency with leftist healthcare, gays in the military, gun bans - and look what it got him - a nice shiny new congress in 94. If Obama is awake (yet to see), he will not do the same - but Michael Moore, Harry Reid, and Nancy P will beg him to do so.

Ant-gun is not really that politically popular right now, during a HARD recession, war, etc.

But, if you walk in a gun shop, you'd think the bill already passed.

Another problem here is that now that everyone went out and bought up all the M4s, AKs, etc., it may mean a DEARTH of sales for gunshop owners who need a SUSTAINED business.

HorseSoldier
November 11, 2008, 01:19 PM
Barry-O & Co. seem to have taken down their stated intent to renew the Assault Weapons Ban that was on display as part of his urban renewal plan at www.change.gov. While the two events may be unrelated, this occurred after the media coverage of record sales of guns and gun accessories [/hank hill mode], but if they are this may be a positive sign that Obama and DNC leadership are picking up the idea that coming after gun owners may have a political cost they're not able to pay while they try to consolidate power.

Still going to be uncertain times with Barry-O in the White House and his "change, change, change" chanting drones still going all lovefest (at least in the short term). The lower his approval ratings drop, the less likely he is to tackle controversy, so hopefully his cultists will realize how little he really has to offer quickly.

elmerfudd
November 11, 2008, 01:20 PM
Obama won't have to push it forward. The 'rats have a knee jerk impulse to ban guns anyway, so it's inevitable that one of the far leftees will propose some sort of gun ban in the next congress and unless the committee chairs decide to stifle it, it will pass.

So, unless Obama or the party higher ups decide to work actively against it, out of fear of possible political fallout, we'll be looking at another ban. Now it could very well be that they will do just that. They remember '94 and what happened last time, but Obama is probably thinking right now that he has one hell of a mandate and oodles of political capital and with a strong 'rat majority in the house and senate he might just go for it.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 01:22 PM
can't find that clip anywhere. When did he say it?

You gotta be kidding.

He even has it as stated agenda on his President-Elect website.

Reinstating the assault weapon ban and closing the so called "gun show loophole" are specifically stated as first term objectives.

The election is over, let's cut the crap and be honest here.

Then, after the heat was turned up, it was removed.

It's all over the media:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10093042-38.html

SoCalShooter
November 11, 2008, 01:27 PM
The comment you are referencing was made in 2007.

FullEffect1911
November 11, 2008, 01:31 PM
The only thing that will stop Obama is the potential political fallout associated with another assault gun ban. The question we should be pondering is, is he too much of an idealist to worry about political fallout?

If that answer is yes, then we will see some anti 2nd amendment laws coming down the pike after about one year. These laws will happen after this new administration realizes it can't solve all of the problems it promised to and will need to go after "fringe"/"fluff" issues to make it seem they are working hard to protect us.

So if you aren't member of the NRA or GOA, what are you waiting for?

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 11, 2008, 01:33 PM
TR, in light of him running from his agenda and trying to cover it up in the last few days, it's a quite fair question to ask - "Where is this alleged video of him recently speaking publicly about gun buns?" I seriously doubt that he did, but am as interested as anyone to know whether he did.

HorseSoldier
November 11, 2008, 01:38 PM
He even has it as stated agenda on his President-Elect website.

Reinstating the assault weapon ban and closing the so called "gun show loophole" are specifically stated as first term objectives.

Like I noted a couple posts ago, the discussion of a renewed AWB and gunshow loophole disappeared off his website shortly after the media picked up the "guns are flying off the shelves as fast as customers can find their credit cards" stories.

Why? Maybe they're not related at all. Maybe Barry and his handlers realized his position looked like it was already going to cost them in the midterm elections. Maybe they think that taking it off the website will cool gun sales, meaning less out there when they do enact the new AWB. Don't know for certain, but the second option seems fairly probable given the way politicians try to divorce themselves from things that hurt their poll ratings.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 01:41 PM
TR, in light of him running from his agenda and trying to cover it up in the last few days, it's a quite fair question to ask - "Where is this alleged video of him recently speaking publicly about gun buns?"

Obama's wish to reinstate the assault weapon ban has been documented by him and his election team for over a year in both print and audio/video.

To come in now after the election and be "surprised" that these things exist is just a bit ridiculous.

Obama stated many times in the last year that his agenda included both the reinstatement of the AWB and the repeal of the Tiarhrt Amendment.

Seriously, let's stop pretending these things are not out there and let's stop demanding 'proof' that they exist.

It's a 2 minute search on Google to find it in about 30 different places.

In case you haven't seen it enough, here is the text word for word from his change.gov website:

Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

The election is over, why continue the charade? Obama himself isn't denying it anymore, why are so many of you?

Certainly no law is yet in place but it's pretty naive to play like it's not likely to happen, given that the new President and current Speaker of the House have it as their stated goals.

And of course it may NEVER happen, but that seems remote.

goldie
November 11, 2008, 02:21 PM
what would happen to domesticly produced guns? the 94 ban just removed flash hiders,bayo lug,etc.unless they add to it & make it illegal to produce them domesticly :confused: the biggest fear i have is the 500% tax on ammo, & stopping imported ammo; 100.00 a box for 30-06 ? 50 bmg at 25.00 a round;unless they ban & confiscate that altogether! if this happened i think the future of guns would be in 22lr, it would be the most affordable to shoot,with big bore for hunting or defense; what a disaster waiting to happen !

mljdeckard
November 11, 2008, 02:24 PM
But he DID remove it from his website. He IS trying to hide it.

I'm with briang2ad and horsesoldier. The man is many things, but stupid certainly isn't one of them. He has a very limited window during which he can get things done with the majority in both houses. He's about to get a gut-kick reality check about how hard it is to get things done in D.C. Just to get done the 'high-priority' legislation he is planning is going to eat up a LOT of political capital. When he's done, I doubt he'll have the support, the favors, or the demand to start pushing an agenda that cost them both houses in 1994. Sure he'll WANT to, but he won't have the space to handle it.

2nd term is a different question.

oneeyenurse
November 11, 2008, 02:24 PM
The way you phrased it made it sound like he just said it. This isn't exactly news.

Shawnee
November 11, 2008, 02:29 PM
Seems if "assault weapons" are banned then they need to be banned from police too. After all, the Dams say they don't belong on our streets. Perhaps an outcry now to jerk them from the hands of police will show the Dams a wee bit more of the iceberg they are cruisin' up to. We, the People still have a voice - if we just use it.

See my thread on the "Activism" board.

;)

CRITGIT
November 11, 2008, 02:42 PM
He said it in all the gun shops in all 50 states

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

or at least you would think it - I am not saying he won't do the Clintonian ban, but....

As someone said before, its the economy stupid. Bill Clinton 'went left' early in his Presidency with leftist healthcare, gays in the military, gun bans - and look what it got him - a nice shiny new congress in 94. If Obama is awake (yet to see), he will not do the same - but Michael Moore, Harry Reid, and Nancy P will beg him to do so.

Ant-gun is not really that politically popular right now, during a HARD recession, war, etc.

But, if you walk in a gun shop, you'd think the bill already passed.

Another problem here is that now that everyone went out and bought up all the M4s, AKs, etc., it may mean a DEARTH of sales for gunshop owners who need a SUSTAINED business

Absolutely 100% pure accuracy!

CRITGIT

bender
November 11, 2008, 02:44 PM
what I'm wondering is how he wants to make guns "childproof"...

hso
November 11, 2008, 02:47 PM
This may be the video that the OP was referring to. Not exactly as recounted, but certainly understandable.http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/11/obama.gun.sales/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Tacbandit
November 11, 2008, 02:59 PM
More to think about....
www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=4227
:uhoh:

RP88
November 11, 2008, 03:05 PM
I thought that he said it recently. He said it a good while ago, and still supports it, despite it being taken down from his agenda website.

The only question is whether or not he'll go for it, given how things are now.

Sinixstar
November 11, 2008, 03:11 PM
but Michael Moore, Harry Reid, and Nancy P will beg him to do so

i'd have to disagree there.
Harry Reid is from Nevada, and knows if he pushes for this - or even allows it to become an issue in the Senate, he's out on his rear. He's up for re-election in 2010, and is on thin ice as it is.
That said, no way in the world would he let Nancy Pelosi move on it and put him in that situation.
Michael Moore is completely irrelevant. He holds no public office, and he has become such a toxic personality, even on the left, very few law makers will consider his advice seriously.
After 2010 - it *may* become an issue. That will largely depend on who's in congress at that time, and what the state of affairs looks like. As it stands I really don't think Reid is going to be around next cycle either way. Not sure who's next up in line to lead the senate behind him.. should probably look into it..

Old NFO
November 11, 2008, 03:14 PM
There was also another piece this morning on CNN, with the same comments- AWB and repeal of concealed carry. It's coming...

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 03:15 PM
AWB and repeal of concealed carry. It's coming...

Well let's slow down there. Gonna be hard for a Democratic President and Congress to repeal STATE laws regarding concealed carry.

There is enough real life to worry about without adding the silly stuff.

SoCalShooter
November 11, 2008, 03:19 PM
Well currently guys they have an almost super majority and its gonna be darn hard to keep'em from doing what they want.

Happiness Is A Warm Gun
November 11, 2008, 03:24 PM
Well let's slow down there. Gonna be hard for a Democratic President and Congress to repeal STATE laws regarding concealed carry.

Why exactly? From a states rights & constitutional standpoint I agree but we live in the real world.

One would say it would be hard/illegal for feds to tell states what speed limits they can have, but they did.

Here is a very EASY way to do it.

"The crime control & prevention act of 2009 (I just made that name up but it will sound like that"). Makes federal funding for states & local police programs (of which feds hands over BILLIONS) contingent on repeal of CCW and open carry.

That is 100% exactly how the feds "forced" a national speed limit. They never required the states to do it, they simply tied matching highway funds to a speed limit. No speed limit = no matching funds = billions of dollars lost to states. Every single state complied.

Should they be able to do that? No. I believe in a small fed govt. The reality is they do. As the fed gets bigger and bigger and budget gets bigger and bigger the idea of states rights becomes a sad joke.

Armed&Bitter
November 11, 2008, 03:26 PM
Talk of gun bans as a negative consequence from an (all but certain, be honest) Obama presidency was considered tooooo political here - before Nov 4.

Nothing's changed all that much (honestly, you expected a different outcome), yet now it's ok to talk about Obamination?

Like Oprah inviting Palin on AFTER 11/4.

Little too late now.

And don't say it was all pointless griping blah blah. If we can't express opposition to the most Marxist anti-gun candidate for president ever here, on a gun board that plays a key role in brining together our community, then...

BBQLS1
November 11, 2008, 03:33 PM
http://forum.ariakon.com/uploads/VeritechSquad/3BE_picard.jpg

DaveBeal
November 11, 2008, 03:34 PM
It wasn't just mention of an AWB that was removed from Obama's new website (http://change.gov/agenda/). Details on all topics were removed from the "Agenda" page. Rather than trying to hide his gun control intentions, a more likely explanation is that he and his staff are just trying to prioritize all the issues currently facing our country.

And the CNN video cited above does not contain Obama saying anything about assault weapons. It's about the recent boom in gun sales and contains only the reporter's statement about Obama's previously stated positions.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 03:36 PM
I argued that we should be able to discuss it openly but before the election there was too much bickering about if this and if that and the discussions got nasty in a hurry.

Well, now it is reality not politics.

Obama IS going to be President, Congress IS going to be Democrat controlled, and both the next President and the Speaker of the House have on their agendas to pass an AWB and kill off gun shows.

That is the reality we now live in. It's not politics anymore.

camslam
November 11, 2008, 03:40 PM
Any chance the Obama apologists are going to stick around and eat their crow after the new AWB is passed?

I'll be watching.

On a sidenote, I'm with Texas Rifleman, why do some of you people continue the charade? The gig is up, Obama has been, is currently, and will be clear on where he stands on gun rights. HE ISN'T FOR THEM!

Mat, not doormat
November 11, 2008, 03:40 PM
Someone's google-fu is weak. Found the statement in the cache.

Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:3xDrSzwwQ1cJ:www.change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy+site:http://www.change.gov+urban+policy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

shdwfx
November 11, 2008, 03:44 PM
Everything about the 2nd Amendment and our elected officials' stance on it is political.

revjen45
November 11, 2008, 03:45 PM
I read an interesting article on a blog by a Leftie activist in the DPRK. It was his contention that the Dems majority is due largely to newbies elected in pro-gun areas in the last election. They aren't well enough ensconced to ignore the wishes of the voters and the Reid/Pelosi axis does not wish to see them unemployed and replaced by Republicans. The results of the '92 AWB have not been forgotten (1st time since the Pleistocene that the Speaker was un-elected) and they have more pressing issues that won't irritate a vocal and well-organized group like the Gunnies. Expect a surge in NRA membership. I don't have the link to the article, and it's too long to post, but things just may not be as dismal as they seem.

revjen45
November 11, 2008, 03:51 PM
Found the URL. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/06/noted_californi.html Interesting reading from a liberal.

jws527
November 11, 2008, 04:28 PM
Quite frankly, I fully expect an an attempt at a renewed AWB or something similar within Obama's first term, regardless of the other issues at stake.

Why? Gun control is a powerful political trick, and Obama has already proven that he is a savvy politician. It's comparatively easy to implement (simply draft it, pass it, and sign it into law), which makes it a convenient way to score political points. Never mind the fact that it targets a virtually non-existent "problem" (rifles in general account for only a tiny fraction of the murders committed in the US each year) or completely fails to address any of the underlying causes of gun violence - most voters are incredibly ignorant (even more ignorant than most of the politicians who represent them), and will naturally think that something is being done in their interest. To somebody who knows nothing, a "ban" on "assault weapons" sounds like a good idea. It has nothing to do with actually getting anything done - it has everything to do with getting votes and/or pushing ideologies.

Float Pilot
November 11, 2008, 04:35 PM
1. Comrade O may have his hands full, but he will have plenty of staff members spinning of in various directions doing whatever their little committe wants to do.

2. Comrade O has already shown himself as paranoid by requesting S.S. protection long before he was a final candidate and now by increasing his security details.

3. His goofy comments about a special armed force (July 2008 in Colorado) are somewhat reflective of the Italian Black shirts or the German Brown Shirts.

4. And of course Pelosi, Biden, Boxer and Reed have their own plans for us.

I'm off to the Post Office to mail another money order to the NRA / ILA. I probably should have sent them the checks I wasted on the RNC.

rundm
November 11, 2008, 04:42 PM
Some of you are missing the point of trying to take rights away from you. In states where it has been added to the state constitution, the federal government can not take that right away from you.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 04:50 PM
In states where it has been added to the state constitution, the federal government can not take that right away from you.

Uhh, transfer of firearms from manufacturer to dealer to end user is interstate commerce and is 100% under control of the Federal government.

If there is an assault weapon ban at a Federal level there is nothing a state can do about it.

It's not about totally taking the right away, they know they can't do that. But they can incrementally weaken it until it's a right no longer worth having.

cornman
November 11, 2008, 04:52 PM
"I can't find that clip anywhere."

Does that supprise you?

Mr Crowley
November 11, 2008, 04:53 PM
But they can incrementally weaken it until it's a right no longer worth having.

Realistically that's spot on.

CRITGIT
November 11, 2008, 04:56 PM
After the The Pat Act and Military Commission Act 2006 anything's possible!
How come nobody here is as outraged over the those bad boys . One stripped us od habeas Corpus...which is little more than the basis for our democracy.:confused:
I bet if it were the product of "that one" we'd hear about it!:eek:

CRITGIT

rob b
November 11, 2008, 04:59 PM
obama better worry about fixing our screwed economy and other things the USA needs
NOT worry about stripping the rights of HONEST LAW ABIDING CITIZENS
because he is messed up in the head when it comes to guns

mgregg85
November 11, 2008, 05:02 PM
Dang, where is RPCVyemen now? I thought obama wasn't a gun grabber?:uhoh:

Oh ok, maybe not a gun grabber, but a gun banner for sure.

Maybe the AHSA will save our black rifles?:banghead:

pharmer
November 11, 2008, 05:04 PM
As of Nov. 4, the Looney Left is making policy on the federal level. Fact. Act accordingly. Joe

Seenterman
November 11, 2008, 05:15 PM
After the The Pat Act and Military Commission Act 2006 anything's possible!
How come nobody here is as outraged over the those bad boys . One stripped us od habeas Corpus...which is little more than the basis for our democracy.
I bet if it were the product of "that one" we'd hear about it!

+10

This is my own personal view about our political system I will share with all of you.

Democrats seek to weaken the individual, Republicans seek to empower the Government, both work towards the same goal. Weakening the People.


There both doing the same thing, just going about it different ways, if this was a war on the people of the US, wouldnt the best stratagy be to weaken and divide us internally? Split us into two groups that hate each other, and foster the belief that the other party is trying to "ruin" the country. Think about it, and watch what both parties do. Didn't your mothers ever tell you not to trust a politician?

SHE WASN'T TALKING ABOUT JUST ONE OF THE PARTIES!!!

Ron Paul '12

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 11, 2008, 05:22 PM
Democrats seek to weaken the individual, Republicans seek to empower the Government, both work towards the same goal. Weakening the People.


There both doing the same thing, just going about it different ways, if this was a war on the people of the US, wouldnt the best stratagy be to weaken and divide us internally? Split us into two groups that hate each other, and foster the belief that the other party is trying to "ruin" the country. Think about it, and watch what both parties do. Didn't your mothers ever tell you not to trust a politician?

Amen, + 100000000!!!

We as civil right supporters must be 100% diametrically opposed to BOTH wings of the Republicrat Uniparty, and 100% supportive of third party candidates, to the extent that they can get on the ballot.

Rifleman 173
November 11, 2008, 05:31 PM
Don't forget, guys, it will be the liberal MEDIA that will be pushing this assault rifle ban more than the politicians. Look for NBC, CBS, the Washington Post and so on to call upon "our nation's leaders" to ban "all those evil black rifles and handguns." What the media goons fail to understand is that, without a doubt, in a few more years we're going to NEED each and every firearm that we can lay our hands on when things suddenly start to really get bad because of economic problems around the world and outside of our country. For many years, people from overseas have looked at our nation like it was a piece of fruit ready to be plucked from the tree and consumed by them. I know because I've actually talked to and met some of those people...

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 05:46 PM
Any chance the Obama apologists are going to stick around and eat their crow after the new AWB is passed?
No, they'll either deny it ever happened or say George Bush did it. Witness the AHSA discussion.

CRITGIT
November 11, 2008, 06:04 PM
because he is messed up in the head when it comes to guns

..and the existing clowns are "messed up" in the head on everything else!
That's why Obamamania is taking over this country and the world.
Won't be hard to look good after the existing act...and that will have an effect on how the jury sees our issue.

CRITGIT

lionken07
November 11, 2008, 06:08 PM
I hope he understand that "Assault weapons" are fully auto weapons, not semi auto AR15s...but then again who am i kidding...

camslam
November 11, 2008, 06:26 PM
Critgrit wrote:

After the The Pat Act and Military Commission Act 2006 anything's possible!
How come nobody here is as outraged over the those bad boys . One stripped us od habeas Corpus...which is little more than the basis for our democracy.
I bet if it were the product of "that one" we'd hear about it!

Since you are so passionate about how lousy Bush is, and I agree, though for different reasons; could you please enlighten those of us that are interested, as to just how the Pat Act and Military Commission Act have ACTUALLY impacted or effected your life?

Enquiring minds want to know.

There is a big, big difference between the Patriot Act and Military Commission act and an AWB that affects upwards of 80+ million of the population.

Edited to add: I'm not looking to argue with you over the merits of either provision, I just want to know how either one has remotely affected you.

plinky
November 11, 2008, 06:46 PM
Don't forget, guys, it will be the liberal MEDIA that will be pushing this assault rifle ban more than the politicians.

I think that is the key factor that will allow him to pull off mega gun control when he chooses. In a country of 300,000,000 people, a few will screw up and commit a high profile murder. The media can amplify that (or whatever else they choose) X 1000.

Remember, an awful lot of Americans aren't very good problem solvers. They make decisions based on the last emotion that they felt. Easy prey for the media. I'd mention the recent election here but that would be rude. :D

The major media hand carried "the messiah" to victory and as long as he remains in favor with them we are going to be like speed bumps to him.

user3214
November 11, 2008, 06:58 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB6jDCpV-yA

Quote: "Don’t tell me we can’t uphold the 2nd amendemnt while keeping AK47s out of the hands of criminals"

By that he means no AK47s for anyone

KBintheSLC
November 11, 2008, 07:31 PM
I can't find that clip anywhere. When did he say it?

Right on the campaign website... under "urban policy".

"Don’t tell me we can’t uphold the 2nd amendment while keeping AK47s out of the hands of criminals"-Obama
This is a quote regarding the only gun he knows the name of... by saying "criminals" he really means American citizens.

Dienekes
November 11, 2008, 08:26 PM
Just because Hitler didn't come to power immediately after writing Mein Kampf didn't mean that he had had a change of heart.

In this case, the man has made his position clear, has a track record to support it, and has given me no reason to believe otherwise. By putting a worst case assumption on it I am only protecting my own interests.

Everything else is speculation. There's enough of that as it is.

Gunnerpalace
November 11, 2008, 08:35 PM
Assault weapons

Helmke CREATED that term,

Technically a/an assault weapon is a rocket launcher of some sort,

SSN Vet
November 11, 2008, 09:06 PM
These laws will happen after this new administration realizes it can't solve all of the problems it promised to and will need to go after "fringe"/"fluff" issues to make it seem they are working hard to protect us.

this is an insightful comment

crazy-mp
November 11, 2008, 10:20 PM
The liberals want "change" and they want it fast, the big O and I donít mean Oprah, will give them want they want so he can have a place to call home in another 4 years. I saw him on TV saying he was not coming after my grandfathers shot gun, oh yeah its not registered, that why heís not coming after it

Remember, its not what you say, its how you donít say it. :D

buckeye8
November 11, 2008, 11:00 PM
Am I the only one who is troubled by the constant use of the phrase "hunters and sportsmen"? I can't count how many times I've heard Obama/Biden say that America's "hunters and sportsmen" have nothing to worry about. By "hunters and sportsmen", they undoubtedly mean low-capacity long-gun users. Seems to me that, by simple deduction, the rest of us could have plenty to worry about.

I've lived in Britain, and from what I understand, the language of the media and the politicians sounded very similar to this while thier gun rights were being taken away. Gun-owners simply haven't caught onto the divide-and-conquer language of the media and politicians. If the "hunters and sportsmen" have "nothing to fear"... those who own guns for other purposes probably do.

If the clay-shooters/deer hunters don't stick up for the EBR and personal defense-oriented shooters, I think it is very likely that we will take a step in the wrong direction in the not-so-distant future.

cliffy
November 11, 2008, 11:09 PM
A disarmed American Citizen would become the beginning of Communism in America. Are we ready for that? Do we have a choice? How can we fight back? Can even GOD fight Communism? cliffy

Prince Yamato
November 11, 2008, 11:18 PM
I think the points about withholding federal funding alla 55mph speed-limit are valid. The economy is in a recession and it would be really easy to say something like, "Well, we want to give the states money, but we want to make sure it doesn't go to criminals. Therefore, if the states want this money, they have to ban CCW and AWs, which as we all know, only criminals conceal weapons and those weapons are AWs."

Keep fighting folks, we're in for a long haul.

akodo
November 11, 2008, 11:22 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/11/obama.gun.sales/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

from that clip, Obama's stance is listed as
-revive and make perminant assault weapon ban
-nationally ban concealed carry
-rights of local governments to set it's own gun laws

Don't the first 2 contradict the third?

If he is for local gov setting their own gun laws, he should then support a city, county, or state that wants to have concealed carry and assault weapons

chihuahuatn
November 12, 2008, 12:18 AM
Oh Boy, I usually don't bit on these threads but tonight I will.

The bottom line is that at some point during Obama's presidency gun control is going to come up. Who knows if it will be a new AWB or some other gun control law. There is good news and there is bad news depending how you want to view it

Obama was elected to fix the economy....period. The fact of the matter is that people care more about the amount of money in their pocket (or how will the government make "my" costs less) than about anything else including their constitutional rights. Gun control is not one of his forefront issues in fact I am stunned about how little gun control was covered in this election it's a hot button issue that no politician wants to talk about. Yes I know its been mentioned nationally but compared to everything else going on its gotten little coverage.

The bad news is it will take one messed up teenager with his dads CIA Romanian AK to have a school shooting and 100 years of gun rights will be erased in the name of "protecting our children" by the dems in power...bottom line (yes we all cringe at that thought)

I view the wost case scenario as 'starting' to take effect a year form now, when new 'serious' legislation takes effect in 2010 (and Gun Control is on the medias agenda) after Obama has had a year to add band-aids to the economy. And an additional 1/2 year till it's rammed through congress and eventually take effect. This could or could not happen...I mean if everyone purchased one less magazine and joined NRA/GOA and wrote there representatives... life for us would be better.

One needs to plan however you see it. Personally I've been planning since the last ban ended. I'd like to go shoot my AUG with my future Son (or Daughter). If your new to firearms make a list of what you might want for the future get what you can NOW...cause it wont get any better. If your a serious collector chances are pre-85 and pre-91 stuff price wise wont change much out side of normal inflation and you've been ready out side of that Valmet mag you need. The real killer for us is the new shooter generation and the new stuff like the FN SCAR ect. that we wont be able to have.

The next few years will be challenging, i hope it works out for us.

HeavenlySword
November 12, 2008, 12:29 AM
If we can 'Change, change, change' his mind which is NOT IMPOSSIBLE and is a very real probability (he is an Harvard intellectual with an IQ value only 18 under my own. He has changed his positions on some policies after new findings recommended it)

Start here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=404323

modifiedbrowning
November 12, 2008, 12:37 AM
he is an Harvard intellectual

That makes me feel better.

Kymasabe
November 12, 2008, 12:56 AM
Not to worry, according to the Mayan calender and other dooms-day prophets, Dec 21, 2012 is the end of the world as we know it so buy the best rifle you can now, stock up on ammo now and be ready for worldwide disaster, famine, disease, plagues, etc....:D

American_Pit_Bull
November 12, 2008, 02:30 AM
I hope he understand that "Assault weapons" are fully auto weapons, not semi auto AR15s...but then again who am i kidding...No... "Assault Rifles" are full auto... An "Assault Weapon" is a fabricated term used to push legislation.

kfire
November 12, 2008, 03:45 AM
I don't see why some are surprise. He always said he was for the AWB (scary looking guns) and repeal of CC. Look for high taxes on Ammo. I would not be surprised if they quickly come up with laws saying you can only have 50rnds. Don't forget Ammo Serialization

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gppekgor-jE

Tacbandit
November 12, 2008, 11:14 AM
Quote by rob b:
"obama better worry about fixing our screwed economy and other things the USA needs NOT worry about stripping the rights of HONEST LAW ABIDING CITIZENS because he is messed up in the head when it comes to guns."



Having said that, and having vented your feelings..you're right...
However, he still has an agenda, and he doesn't care what we think about it.
Stay pro-active..............:uhoh:

Ben86
November 12, 2008, 11:22 AM
I'm not too worried, I live in a gun loving state run by conservatives.

I think it would be difficult for him to do that, it doesn't fit the times. Gun and CCW permits are much more popular today than they were in '94. Plus the guy looks like a deer caught in headlights, he looks so much more nervous now that he won. I doubt he would tackle something so large, and unimportant so quickly. His main focus has to be the War on Terror and the economy.

But, lets not get caught with out pants down.

jerkface11
November 12, 2008, 11:23 AM
Obama was elected to fix the economy

Your definition of fix must be different from mine.

SuperNaut
November 12, 2008, 11:32 AM
he is an Harvard intellectual

Whew, at least he's not a stinkin' Yalie...

I don't know how many more Bonesmen America can take.

Coronach
November 12, 2008, 11:40 AM
I think this one has run its course.

Given: Obama wants to ban guns.

Given: Obama is on record in various places as wanting to ban guns.

Given: These on-record statements have a habit of vanishing once they are found and reported in the popular media.

Given: Obama's on-camera rhetoric has been studiously centrist on this issue ("I am not going to take your guns").

The question is what this all means. The problem is no one knows, and absent new information we just chew over the same old facts like a dog with a bone.

Find something new, and we can discuss its implications for RKBA. Otherwise, you want to be in the Activism forum doing something besides sitting on your kiester and posting strongly worded missives on a gun board.

Get active, or be silent about this. Because, make no mistake, putting a sic semper tyrannis post on a gun board will not change what is coming.

Mike

If you enjoyed reading about "Obama on CNN says he will ban Assault weapons" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!