Obama Shooting Himself in the Foot with Anti-gun Stance

Status
Not open for further replies.

Winchester 73

member
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
1,576
Location
Miami,Florida
Sounds about right.

http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/02/obama_shooting_himself_in_the.php


February 22, 2008 2:45 PM

by Bob Owens

As she clawed for survival against Barack Obama in Wisconsin’s Democratic primary this past weekend, Hillary Clinton lamely asserted her Second Amendment bona fides over that of her rival by claiming that she once shot a duck in Arkansas.

As pathetic a pander as that tale was, it did serve to point out one gaping weakness in the armor of the Illinois senator, a man who must rely on blue-collar white voters if he hopes to prevail first in the Democratic primaries, and later in the general election.

The weakness? Barack Obama’s utter disdain of firearms (especially handguns) and a refusal to recognize the rights of law-abiding Americans to own the most common and relied-upon types of firearms.

In his answers to the 1998 Illinois State Legislative National Political Awareness Test, Obama said he favored a ban on “the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.”

By definition, this would include all pistols ever made, from .22 target pistols used in the Olympics to rarely-fired pistols kept in nightstands and sock drawers for the defense of families, and every pistol in between. Obama’s strident stand would also ban all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, whatever their previously legal purpose.

In 1999, Obama proposed to make it a felony for the gun owner if a firearm stolen from his residence and used in a crime was not “securely stored” — effectively negating the homeowner’s right to self-defense.

That same year, Obama bravely voted “present” on a law that would require teens 15 and older to be tried as adults for firing weapons on or near school grounds. Obama also proposed the idea of banning businesses that sell firearms from operating within five miles of a park or school — restrictions that would treat gun shops worse than “adult” businesses trafficking in pornography.

From 1998-2001, Obama sat on the board of directors for the Joyce Foundation, a left-wing group which today funds grants to anti-gun organizations such as the Violence Policy Center (which advocates total handgun prohibition, reinstatement of the Clinton-era “assault weapons” ban, and the ban of other firearms), the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence (which favors the registration of all handguns, seeks to overturn Ohio’s “concealed carry” law, ban standard capacity magazines, and ban economical handguns along with many semi-automatic firearms based upon their appearance), and Handgun Free America (which advocates a complete ban on civilian handgun ownership).

All of these organizations seek to disarm law-abiding Americans. This is the idea of “change” that they share with Barack Obama.

On the federal stage, Obama’s brief U.S. Senate career has already seen him vote against a bill (S.397) to protect the firearms industry from those who seek to sue manufacturers, distributors, and importers for the criminal misuse of firearms by criminals, an idea akin to suing car manufacturers for damages caused by drunk drivers.

Tellingly, Obama’s presidential campaign has sought to hide his history of trying to disarm law-abiding Americans.

Buried deep in the “Issues” section of Obama’s web site under “Additional Issues” is a PDF document that can only be described as an attempt to talk around Obama’s real position on firearm ownership. In a section where the campaign claims to “respect” the Second Amendment, the document states:

Millions of hunters own and use guns each year. Millions more participate in a variety of shooting sports such as sporting clays, skeet, target, and trap shooting that may not necessarily involve hunting. As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama understands and believes in the constitutional right of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting.
Tellingly, Obama’s campaign only addresses the gun rights of hunters and specific shotgun-only shooting sports, and only then in vague terms.

At no point does Obama recognize an individual right to own handguns, or explicitly recognize a right for Americans to use a firearm to defend themselves or others. The site explicitly states that Barack Obama recognizes civilian gun ownership for two just purposes, “hunting and target shooting.”

Hillary Clinton, almost as liberal as Obama on the issue of gun control, could not take advantage of Obama’s radical, out-of-the-mainstream position on firearm ownership because she, too, holds many of the same liberal ideas.

As America moves toward the general election, however, John McCain will have no such problems in discussing Obama’s distrust of his fellow Americans on this issue.

McCain is hardly the poster boy for the National Rifle Association, but McCain claims to strongly support gun rights, stating, “Neither justice nor domestic peace are served by holding the innocent responsible for the acts of the criminal,” a position diametrically opposed to the record of Obama, who favors outright prohibition of many common civilian firearms.

In August 2007, writing at the liberal blog Daily Kos, “BlueDotRedField” shared his lament on Obama’s gun control history coming back to haunt him in the diary entry “Obama gunning to lose in 2008”:

The clear implication of this statement is that Obama believes that Chicago’s violent crimes are to be solved at a national level — since Chicago & IL already have VERY tough gun control laws that have not stopped their crime problems, and to be solved by gun control legislation specifically mentioning the 1994 “Assault Weapons Ban” and blaming Bush for that ban’s lack of renewal.
This statement is very important for those of us lifetime Democrats who not only are more libertarian leaning (especially after 8 years under the imperial presidency of George Bush), are more rural, and who own firearms or have family/friends who do. This statement is also the battle cry that figures on the right have been waiting for from Obama just in case he could actually beat out Hillary.

[…]

Common political wisdom has been that gun control legislation, and specifically the AWB, was [the] key handing the Congress to the right in 1994. Additionally, it played a strong part in the election and re-election of George Bush. Only recently, as we have run more centrist and rural understanding Democrats, were we able to retake Congress and have any chance at countering Bush & Co. in any way.

And we stand at a precipice where we can hand it all right back to them.


There seems little chance that Barack Obama can hide his real record and views of gun ownership from the American public though November’s presidential elections.

Once his prohibitive views of firearms ownership become known to America’s millions of gun owners, they may well decide that a gun-grabbing Barack Obama promises the kind of “change” that they can’t believe in.

Bob Owens blogs at Confederate Yankee.
 
I think they misspelled his name. I believe the correct spelling of his name is "Berserk Obama."
 
No. The correct spelling is OSAMA. Though I think he would treat gun owners worse than the Taliban treated women.


Len
 
He's talking to his base and they believe what he does. That we aren't entitled to be armed. And , there a whole lot of them.
Wonder what he's going to do when Heller comes down in favor of us gun owners?

AFS
 
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance. -- from Declaration of Independence 1776

He will send the BATFE, FBI, IRS, FDA, and whatever else he can think to harass the people of course. Thee are 20,000 gun laws on the books in this country, not matter what SCOTUS rules, he will have many many avenues to attack us. How about a government mandated monopoly on copper/lead supplies both foreign and domestic to "protect" our national interests. There is always the infamous commerce clause as well, imagine the havoc he can wreck with that.

Well lets throw dice and see what happens, "we are going to be living in interesting times" to borrow from the ancient Chinese curse.
 
He is, well intended, or not, your worst nightmare, 2AM-wise:


1) Although Obama supports gun control, while campaigning in gun-friendly Idaho earlier this month, he said he does not intend to take away people's guns.

2) At his news conference, he voiced support for the District of Columbia's ban on handguns, which is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court next month.

3) "The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't born out by our Constitution," Obama said.


http://www.examiner.com/a-1223172~Obama_Supports_Individual_Gun_Rights.html

**********

1) Premise: Obama will not take your guns away.

2) Premise: Obama supports DC and Chicago-style gun bans.

3) Premise: Obama would allow municipalities to stomp all over your 2AM Rights, like Chicago and DC has, like San Francisco, Madison WI, Milwaukee WI and Wauwatosa WI want to! :uhoh:

Conclusion: Slippery politician. He won't mess with your gun rights--he'll empower your local Libs to do it! :eek:

--Ray

**********

Oh sure, Obama told Iowa radio listeners last year that he is a "strong believer" in the rights of hunters and sportsmen, and that homeowners should have a firearm "to protect their home and their family." But then in the next breath, he says, "It's hard for me to find a rationale for having a 17-clip semiautomatic [sic]."

In 2004, Obama said he supports a national ban on concealed carry because the states that allow it are "threatening the safety of Illinois residents."6 Never mind the fact that concealed carry laws have improved the safety of citizens in the states that have enacted such laws.

Obama has also taken a strong position in favor of the Clinton semi-auto ban which sunset in 2004. "I believe we need to renew -- not roll back -- this common sense gun law," Obama said.

Well, there's nothing that's "common sense" about the Clinton ban. Not only did it outlaw almost 200 types of firearms, legislators like Senator Chuck Schumer of New York tried to amend the law (before it sunset) to include additional types of semi-autos -- even banning classic (wood-stock) long guns such as the Remington shotgun which Senator John Kerry received as a gift during his 2004 presidential bid.

http://gunowners.org/pres08/obama.htm

**********

By contrast, McCain is a gun advocate, not supporting magazine or semi-auto bans, not supporting assault weapons bans, and supporting concealed carry. Like him or not, if guns matter to you, he's your man.

You snooze you lose, people! Don't be a tourist in your own country! Do whatever you can to actively derail this leftist-socialist Obama, while you still have an active voice! Wishes don't count! After the fact whining is useless!

This guy, Obama, could render this website and forum moot! :fire:

--Ray
 
Obama scares me more in other areas than in gun control. The few tidbits you get telling what he really wants to do are frightening.

His goal seems to be to bring the US down to the status of a 3rd world dictatorship.
 
Barak is "Berserk" to me only in the area of gun control. In other areas he seems to be proactive and practical. I don't know why he's morphed into the new 3rd world dictator; it's Bush who said in a televised interview that leading a dictatorship would be so much "easier," and who then proceeded to pass the Patriot Act and numerous other insidious laws that have destroyed our freedoms. Look it up. We no longer govern ourselves. If the US of A turns into an outright dictatorship, it's our current man who set the stage. And a lot of people voted for that dumb ****. (Remember, it's Bush who reminded us that "The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for 'entrepreneur.'" :))

I'm curious--what did you all think of Bush during the time of his original campaign? And if he and Obama were running against each other, how would the 2 compare? Perhaps that is fodder for a new thread, but let's see what happens.
 
this thread is going nowhere fast...back on topic....

it seems like most Democrats have realized the gun issue is a loser for them if they wish the support of rural voters. I think they've also realized that their "Blue dog Democrats" won't support them if they're wrong on this issue either.
 
I better make this fast. In before threadclosed.gif

I'm curious--what did you all think of Bush during the time of his original campaign? And if he and Obama were running against each other, how would the 2 compare? Perhaps that is fodder for a new thread, but let's see what happens.

I probably shouldn't accelerate the closing of this thread which is enevitable anyway...but here goes.

I thought President Bush was a man of honor and principle when I met him face to face at a campaign stop before his first election. I will be the first to say that he has since disappointed me on several occasions, mostly over border issues, and drunken sailor spending policies.
But, to think that Barrak Obama is anything other than a socialist with a penchant for delivering platitudes is simply cognitive dissonance. He is what he is. And if you, or anyone else is willing to vote for him because he espouses "change and hope" , will deserve the REAL loss of freedoms that follow. I'm not crazy about the Patriot Act, and perhaps it should be tweaked. But we aren't even remotely close to a dictatorship in this country. Elect either Barrack or Hillary, and we WILL take a huge step in that direction.

My $ .02
 
Obama is 100 times worse then Clinton and she is 100 times worse then Bush. I can't belive that anyone would even compare Bush to being as bad as Obama.
 
1) Calling a Christian, American born citizen "Osama" is THE LOW ROAD, and is indicative of odious prejudices. Hit him on his idiotic gun policies, and leave the bigotry to those of lesser standards. Plus, the man is a friend of slum lords and endorsed by Chicago politicians like Daley. The odious stink of his policies are what should be attacked, not some foreign sounding name. After all, Roosevelt was a good GERMAN name.

2) Rancid - George W. Bush is supporting the DC handgun ban, and PROMISED to extend the Clinton Ban. NO Presidential candidate could be a greater TRAITOR to the Constitution in that regard, let alone countless other Bill of Rights violations with the so-called PATRIOT Act. A so-called "Republican" President SO WILLING to abrogate the American citizenry's rights to self defense is no better than the most despicable tyrants in history who ALSO advocated the disarmarment of the sheep he lorded over. As Americans are CITIZENS not SUBJECTS, I can never abide by any decision of Bush's as in the best interests of our country when the right to defend oneself and the right to freedom of speech have been so savagely raped.
 
The Bush administration is the most corrupt one we have had. Ever. To be fair, it's also been the most entertaining, what with Bush's non-sequiturs and idiotisms.

I don't like Obama, Clinton, or McCain--what the hell kinds of choices are those?

And why is Bush any better? Sigh. I guess no one will ever agree. :)
 
But, to think that Barrak Obama is anything other than a socialist with a penchant for delivering platitudes is simply cognitive dissonance. He is what he is. And if you, or anyone else is willing to vote for him because he espouses "change and hope" , will deserve the REAL loss of freedoms that follow. I'm not crazy about the Patriot Act, and perhaps it should be tweaked. But we aren't even remotely close to a dictatorship in this country. Elect either Barrack or Hillary, and we WILL take a huge step in that direction

rickomatic,thank you for that very insightful observation.
Obama is the most serious threat to our Republic since at least the Civil War,IMO.Guns will go first and the first(Amendment)will go second.Forums like this will no longer exist and as ilbob astutely pointed out, Obama will lead us down the path to, perhaps not a third world, but at least a 2nd world Dictatorship.
A slightly more prosperous East Germany lies in our future if he's elected.But
I'm an optimist.We're going to keep it from happening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top