Obama suggests Republicans unwilling to compromise in gun control debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
I had a big laugh from my Sunday paper today. There was a letter to the editor from a woman who is evidently as blind and deaf as Obama on politics. She was ranting that all four Republican congressmen and both Republican senators from KANSAS were against gun control and were not representing the majority views of their constituents.:what:

If you've ever lived in Kansas long, you know that this woman is off her rocker. I haven't seen a Kansas specific poll, but I'm betting that, outside of Johnson County (which I blame on Missouri), it would be about 75% anti-gun control.
 
“The House Republican majority is made up mostly of members who are in sharply gerrymandered districts that are very safely Republican

Of course, in Illinois, we don't have gerrymandering, we have "redistricting".

Northern Illinois University political science professor Matt Streb said the big win for Democrats was partly because redistricting by Madigan and other party bosses shifted Republican voting blocs around to improve Democrats’ chances of winning more seats in the legislature.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/11/07/expert-redistricting-a-big-factor-in-Democrats-wins-in-illinois/

Obama also said he can get 50 percent of public support for many of his upcoming initiatives, but “I can't get enough votes out of the House of Representatives to actually get something passed. … I think there is still shock on the part of some in the party that I won re-election.”

To paraphrase Mark Levin, The winner of the election doesn't get to rewrite the constitution.

I really don't want to read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, but if I'm to understand this president's tactics, I had better buy a copy.
 
Last edited:
What do you think BLB? Think they will end up with special bans for the urban areas?

No. Our most densely-populated urban areas already have strict gun control. They've already sold the Big Lie to a lot of huge voting blocks. If a few large cities can control the direction of an entire state, even though the balance of the population is more evenly split on the issue, then they gain an advantage.
 
Just to throw this out there, how would you guys feel if there was an honest compromise and dialogue? I.e., reducing class 2 or class 3 restrictions, relaxing import restrictions, or doing something to ensure the carry and ownership rights of people traveling through restrictive areas in exchange for requiring a background check for all non-family exchanges?
 
Where was his compromise on spending or voter ID?

I'd hope any background check bills get voter ID put in along with it by our "friends".
 
Just to throw this out there, how would you guys feel if there was an honest compromise and dialogue? I.e., reducing class 2 or class 3 restrictions, relaxing import restrictions, or doing something to ensure the carry and ownership rights of people traveling through restrictive areas in exchange for requiring a background check for all non-family exchanges?

I'd be interested in debate, no bans of any kind, make the C&R license with no change in requirements equivalent to an FFL-01 for individual buying and selling, re-open the machine gun registry and I' could live with that!
 
Just to throw this out there, how would you guys feel if there was an honest compromise and dialogue? I.e., reducing class 2 or class 3 restrictions, relaxing import restrictions, or doing something to ensure the carry and ownership rights of people traveling through restrictive areas in exchange for requiring a background check for all non-family exchanges?


you have $1000.......over the years i steal $500 from you....today i try to steal another $200 from you, and you catch me.....i tell you "let compromise here, ill give you back some of the money i stole from you if you let me continue to steal from you".........sound like a good idea? hell no, why does the same apply to your 2A rights?
 
Compromise for Obama means he gets mostly what he wants and you don't get hardly any of what you want.
 
Simply put, to "compromise" with Obama, means we lose all our freedoms. Remember the first rule when dealing with a Terrorist, NO COMPROMISE!
 
Milamber said:
There is no compromise. What is so damn hard to understand in the sentence "shall not be infringed". Current gun control laws are unconstitutional at best. If I was in congress or senate I would be pushing for repealing the NFA and Lautenberg.

As a card carrying member of the Republican party I can tell you straight. I will actively campaign and vote out any member of the Republican party who votes for any new gun control.

Edit

As I see it we either have the right to arms or we dont, which is it. You cant compromise away a right they wont stop nibbling. No AWB No magazine limits. They should never have got the NFA

My sentiments exactly.
 
Obama wants to compromise?:eek:
There are 20,000 gun control laws in America. Given what he wants I suggest that if he wants a compromise he ought to select a fairly good size chunk of those laws and offer them up as a "compromise" on his part.
Every time a "compromise" is made with govt. on the second amendment our rights diminish and become more constrained.
I hardly define THAT as "compromise.":fire:
 
No such thing as compromise on this issue. Seeing's how nobody at the federal level has any intention of expanding gun rights, any new gun control is all loss with no gain. Compromise=give and take, gun control=just take.
 
Here was my facebook post regarding this article earlier today

Wow. Where do I start with this interview with Obama? He says he supports the traditions of hunting. Good for him. Does he know that the Second Amendment was not written for hunters?

He says that House Republicans are unwilling to work with him on this issue because they are only concerned about their constituencies. Does he know that there are also Democrats in both chambers who will not support a new assault weapons ban because they fear that they will not get re-elected if they do? Does he know that his right hand man, Harry Reid (a pro-gun Democrat), virtually killed any chance of an assault weapons bill passing the Senate by not eliminating the filibuster?

He says that the realities of guns are different in urban areas than in rural areas. Does he know that there are urban areas that have strict gun control laws and high rates of violent crime and rural areas that have lax gun control laws and low rates of violent crime?

He knocks Fox News and Rush Limbaugh for their coverage of the gun control debate. Why doesn’t he condemn NBC News anchor David Gregory who committed a felony in order to further the anti-gun agenda…and got away with it?

He argues that Republicans need to be willing to compromise on the gun control issue. I view a compromise as both sides giving up something and getting something in return. What do pro-gun supporters get in this debate? After seeing the proposed bills, pro-gun supporters are the only ones giving ground. That is not a compromise. That is a concession.
 
Not to hijack the thread, but did anybody see Di-Fi on Face the Nation today? She said her bill was "moderate" :banghead::fire::cuss::barf:
 
I have a better idea for compromise...

Bad Check Barry can go suck a dog turd. THEN we'll talk about repealing GCA, repealing the Hughes ban, reducing NFA transfer taxes to a flat $50... universal issuance of a select-fire M16 and marksmanship training to all high-school seniors not otherwise prohibited by criminal record or mental illness upon graduation...
 
Where starting to win the war i think as all this gun buying is freaking him out..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top