How Obama Silenced Gun Control Groups

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bartholomew Roberts

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
14,613
Location
Texas
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/how-white-house-quieted-gun-control-groups-88546.html

An interesting story from Politico. A few points I thought many members here would find interesting:

1. Apparently after our national conversation on guns led by Biden in which they at least pretended to be interested in the opinions of the NRA, NSSF, etc., the President has been having regular meetings with gun control groups and allowing them input on policy.

2. In return, the gun control groups have pledged to keep silent about the meetings and allow the President to control the message and campaigning behind recent attempts. The one group that would not play along (VPC) essentially got cut out of the process. This ban on going off message not only effects the groups but extends to individual Congress members as well (Carolyn McCarthy being an example).

3. Registration (background checks with all sales records retained) is the prime goal of the Administration and these groups. This may explain why Schumer recently filed a background check bill in the Senate that even NRA F-rated Mark Kirk would not sponsor.
 
Let them keep putting out the most extreme bills they can. They think 2 years is enough for this to be forgotten they are crazy. We know which races will be important.
 
Yo Mama said:
Let them keep putting out the most extreme bills they can. They think 2 years is enough for this to be forgotten they are crazy. We know which races will be important.
Click to expand...
I guess their plan is to put out numerous extreme gun control bills so that the other side will be more likely to agree to their "less extreme" registration/background check bill. I think that's a bad strategy and will backfire.

They would have been much better off with a very focused push on the registration/background check front.
 
It should be clear that if the expected political retaliation doesn't happen in the 2014 election (as it did in 1994) they would make a major push for additional legislation between 2014 and 2016 - and then onward if they were still in power.

Fortunately we have almost 2 years to get organized, and we'd had better do it.
 
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/how-white-house-quieted-gun-control-groups-88546.html
Reid J. Epstein, "How the White House silenced gun control groups ", Politico, Mar 2013.

Worth a few quotes:
.... So the White House offered a simple arrangement: the groups could have access and involvement, but they’d have to offer silence and support in exchange. The implied rules, according to conversations with many of those involved: No infighting. No second-guessing in the press. Support whatever the president and Vice President Joe Biden propose. And most of all, don’t make waves or get ahead of the White House. In exchange: a voice in the discussions, a role in whatever final agreement is made and weekly meetings at the White House with Biden’s chief of staff, Bruce Reed — provided they don’t discuss what happens there. .....

Anti-gun groups used to see Obama as a disappointment — he got an “F” for his first year from the Brady Campaign, and then after they gave him no grades at all. But advocates have reason to support Obama’s gun control proposals: they essentially helped write them. ....
Click to expand...

The White House has also decided to ignore both NRA and VPC.

Good read on the source, Politico: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politico
 
Last edited:
I believe Obama's original plan for gun control was always to keep quiet for his first term and address gun control in the second term. For the second term, the plan was to hammer the Republicans on the budget and the fiscal cliff and use that to win control of the House and a filibuster proof Senate in 2014. By then, the probability is that there would be the opportunity to make one or more appointments to SCOTUS that could swing the court to the left (Scalia isn't getting any younger). Then, with the Senate control in hand to confirm the SCOTUS appointments, the 2A could be safely gutted by the type of legislation we are seeing now.

We are seeing it now because Sandy Hook created "the crisis that could not be wasted" and several Senators jumped the gun and the legislation was introduced early. Obama isn't really ready for that to be happening right now but it is and he is trying to make the best of it.

If he moves too far, too fast, he could lose it all in 2014. If he can keep the lid on until then, the original strategy can still work. If he gets nothing passed this time around, he may actually be in better shape for 2014 because there is a danger that many gun owners will think we have won and go back to complacency on 2A issues while the antis will have continued incentive to push forward with the original strategy.

This will not be over, ever. "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom."
 
Whatever, the anti gun groups.are doomed. They'll.slowly.die,one cut at a time. Believe it.
Americans are never gonna give up their guns and freedom. Never,Comprende? Capiche? Never.
Click to expand...

Johnny Dollar
I imagine the gun control groups are saying the same, they will keep coming for our guns and will never quit. As our country's political power shifts more and more to the left this could easily become reality.
 
Well, if I understand, the adminstration claims it has the right to kill any Americans, anywhere, any time, in any numbers, for any reason or no reason. All it takes is a presidential whim. Of course administration "spokespersons" say that won't happen. Of course not.

So, "never"?

Jim
 
Some won't give up their guns and freedom, ever.

But a great many already have given up both, and have joined those who never wanted either.

And the second group won't feel safe and won't stop as long as the first group exists.

Believe it. As Colion Noir said, "Ostriches with their head in the sand get their necks cut off."
 
I don't like it. I prefer the anti's foaming at the mouth, ranting outrageous claims and threats of extreme measures.
Calm, limited, focused and unified is dangerous for us.

Although I agree we will never be "disarmed", there is lot of ways to make it difficult, expensive and harass us over time. Slow incremental chipping away is what I fear most. Not broad sweeping extreme changes. Those aren't as likely and would be easier to reverse if they did happen.
 
Jim K said:
Well, if I understand, the adminstration claims it has the right to kill any Americans, anywhere, any time, in any numbers, for any reason or no reason. All it takes is a presidential whim. Of course administration "spokespersons" say that won't happen. Of course not.

So, "never"?

Jim
Click to expand...
Then you understand wrong. Maybe that's what you "heard" somewhere, that's not what they "said". If that is the basis of your position, then you're mistaken.
 
Johnny Dollar said:
Whatever . Some are gonna go down with me. Hopefully.a lotta some, believe that. :evil:

May the Schmoes be with me! :D
Click to expand...
No need. Not going to happen. There are too many of us.
I have always said that simply because the people are armed limits tyranny and external threats. Without firing a shot. We have repeatedly dissuaded external invaders and internal tyrants simply because they know we are armed and they would fail if they tried.

It would be physically impossible to "disarm" America in just 2 years. No matter how draconian they get or how compliant we get. 300 million guns is big pile of steel. Just knocking on every door takes a lot of time and energy. Certainly the refusal of some to surrender and some refusing to enforce would slow that down to a crawl.

"Disarmed"? Not within this life time. Harassed into an ever shrinking minority so that maybe 50 years from now they can finally go for "it"? Maybe.

ETA; No, I would never surrender my arms. I don't care what laws they pass.
 
Americans have already given up most of the freedoms. We are not free economically, with most of what we produce and earn being taken away and "redistributed," we are not free socially, with thousands of laws telling us what we cannot do; we cannot even think freely as the thoughts may not be politically correct. Taking away the arms is just the last step in codifying the slavery. Perhaps even just a half step.

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good" -- George Washington
 
It's easy to form an opinion when all you hear is one side of a debate.

I wrote about this in my Examiner.com column. These people....sheesh.


:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
 
Is Obama's "tell us your story" site still up? The one that has people tell their stories of how family members have been killed by people with guns. I ask because I don't even know what it is called and would like to see if they are still censoring it.
 
Americans will never give up their rights? Really?

NY gave up their rights, Chicago gave up their rights. California, DC, and many more are lining up.
Despite the jokes we make here, those places are still part of America and they gave up their rights without a peep.
You may not give up your guns for your own sake. What about when the threat of prison or cold blooded execution by the police (as has happened several times when people said "Come and get them") threatens your family with not having a father or husband and no way to make their way in the world. And possibly imprisonment themselves. Will you give up your guns for their sake.
When thinking in terms of just yourself, it's an easy decision to make to be a patriot. However the government has no intentions to make any of your decisions easy.
 
JRH6856 said:
I believe Obama's original plan for gun control was always to keep quiet for his first term and address gun control in the second term. For the second term, the plan was to hammer the Republicans on the budget and the fiscal cliff and use that to win control of the House and a filibuster proof Senate in 2014. By then, the probability is that there would be the opportunity to make one or more appointments to SCOTUS that could swing the court to the left (Scalia isn't getting any younger). Then, with the Senate control in hand to confirm the SCOTUS appointments, the 2A could be safely gutted by the type of legislation we are seeing now.

We are seeing it now because Sandy Hook created "the crisis that could not be wasted" and several Senators jumped the gun and the legislation was introduced early. Obama isn't really ready for that to be happening right now but it is and he is trying to make the best of it.

If he moves too far, too fast, he could lose it all in 2014. If he can keep the lid on until then, the original strategy can still work. If he gets nothing passed this time around, he may actually be in better shape for 2014 because there is a danger that many gun owners will think we have won and go back to complacency on 2A issues while the antis will have continued incentive to push forward with the original strategy.

This will not be over, ever. "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom."
Click to expand...
Amen to the price of freedom being eternal vigilance.
Last time (1994), the anti-2as got hammered when they tried to take our guns away. We need to punish the anti-2As in the 2014 elections. In state elections like NY and Colorado, and also at the national level.
To do this, all my political contributions are going to the NRA, the GOA and SAF.
Please Consider contributing the price of a 100 round box of 9mm to each of these organizations (around $40 each).
:)
 
I don't think that the President cares about gun control one way or the other.

I think he's trying to get the "Bubbas" riled up so he can slip something past us. Probably a tax increase or some other sort of "I want this" rule.

He might also be trying to "wedge" the GOP. Get the urban Elitists like Bloomberg angry at the "Rubes" who are represented by Senator Paul, Senator Cruz and the rest.

Might also be that he has no plan at all. There is a lot of amateur thinking at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. right now.
 
Old Fuff said:
It should be clear that if the expected political retaliation doesn't happen in the 2014 election (as it did in 1994) they would make a major push for additional legislation between 2014 and 2016 - and then onward if they were still in power.
Click to expand...

This is the key.

The negative political fallout from the 1994 AWB (or the perception of negative fallout, at least) is what has kept the lid on gun control legislation for a decade or more.

If there isn't a similar reaction in 2014 -- or perception/fear of one -- then the push will be on for more and more and more until the next elections.
 
Hacker15E said:
Unfortunately, if current demographic shift trends continue, the opposite will be true.
Click to expand...
What demographic shift? That the country is getting older? Or browner? Both should lead to more conservative trends in the future. Not less.
I also don't buy into all the doom and gloom claims/predictions. About the past, present or the future. The anti's are making some gains, but in the end they will lose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Brady Campaign grades Obama: "F" in gun control
2 3 4
Replies
84
Views
5K
Redneck with a 40
R
R
  • Locked
Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG)
Replies
11
Views
1K
Shadow 7D
S
G
  • Locked
President Unveils Gun Policy Plans Tomorrow
Replies
8
Views
853
Art Eatman
A
A
  • Locked
Article: Gun Control Doesn't Survive Christmas
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
Cosmoline
C
Yo Mama
  • Locked
bs gun control/safety groups
Replies
18
Views
1K
MedWheeler
M
Back
Top