Wednesday, July 25, 2012
BHO Going After "Assault Weapons?"
Looks like it...from Politico tonight:
But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers and not in the hands of crooks. They belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities,” he added.
Obama bemoaned the lack of political will to tackle gun issues, noting how congressional leaders have so far shown little interest in advancing new legislation following the Colorado shooting.
I'd be amazed if he continued walking into this particular fan.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
expect the end run around congress with a executive order.
don't know that it's legal, but that hasn't stopped him in the past.
once again the buffoons in power think the way to stop crime is to disarm law abiding citizens.
to those media whores and hollywood know it all's who say i don't need a semi automatic weapon to hunt the furry creatures of the forest i remind them
"Washington didn't cross the deleware to get to his duck blind"
Well, if he's going down, he's going to go down pandering to the liberal statists who are giving him all his money, and the h - e - double toothpicks to all us bitter clingers in the swing states.
He keeps this up, and all he'll win are New York, California, Illinois, Minnesota, DC and his home state of Keny... er, Hawaii. ;)
Does anyone else notice that they are called "assault" weapons and not an AK47, or an AR15. Word play is HUGE here folks.
Great point Larry!
I believe Shawn may prove to be correct. Win or lose in November, BHO will use Executive Orders to foist all manner of "gun control" down our throats. He knows full well he could never get what he wants passed through the current Congress. But that didn't stop him defying the law in order to give illegals amnesty via EO. Why would anyone think he won't do the same with our Second Amendment rights?
When Washington crossed the Deleware the "Brown Bess" was the asault weapon of the day.
The Supreme Lord & Dictator will do anything, exectutive orders or whatever to go around congress and get what he wants. Gun control throught he UN, Fast & Furiousm green energy though pay offs. My guess & I hope I am wrong, is if this is truely a close election & His Majesty only wins the popular vote he will be reluctant & may not give up his power. People with his ego don't give up easily.
Rob Drummond
Hillsboro, NH
Rob,
I've used the Brown Bess point several times when discussing "assault weapon" bans. Inevitably someone will use the hackneyed argument that "AK-47's didn't exist when the Second Amendment was written." Obvious on it's face value but I quickly shoot down that red herring by noting the Founding Fathers didn't limit citizens to obsolete matchlocks and wheellocks. They were pretty smart fellows and I doubt they thought the flintlock would be state of the art forever. Yet they included no caveat to prohibit future firearms technology. They understood the Second Amendment wasn't about duck hunting. Unlike so many politicians, academics and media types.
Bill,
So right & yes I have used this argument before. I always say there was a reason the 2nd Amendment follows the 1st. You have fredom to speak & a way to back it up if necessary. Funny how the LEFT always mentions hunting where the 2nd doesn't.
Rob Drummond
Hillsboro, NH
He really has lost his base entirely on this issue, and have just thrown in the towel on the election. When the Seattle Times is putting up editorials like today's http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/dannywestneat/2018762877_danny25.html the debate has been significantly shifted.
All that said, there is a lot of damage that can be done by POTUS between now and inauguration day.
They also did not limit cannon ownership....
I'm just sayin'...the mass destruction weapon of the time could be legally owned by individual citizens and that's a heck of a lot more destructive an an AR or AK.
Just keep your eyes on the "other hand", as Glenn Beck so advises. Watch the progress of the UN "Small Arms Treaty", or "SAT". It looks like it will be endorsed by the Obama administration. It won't matter that it should also take ratification by the Senate for a treaty to trump our Constitution. The treaty will be "deemed" to have passed ratification, without an actual vote, or Obama will invoke executive privelege. It also won't matter what is actually legal, or not. When he controls all of the key players, he also controls the outcome if the treaty is challenged. And don't look to John Roberts to support the Constitution either.
We need to get Romney into the Whitehouse and take the Senate and reinforce our hold of the House'. No exceptions. We need to do this to keep our Second Amendment, but to also save our economy and American way of life.
Life Member
I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers
Sadly he's probably right.
The fudds will lap this pablum up.
Obama said " I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers and not in the hands of crooks. They belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities,”
If that is the case then he needs to explain why he and attorney general Holder placed those very guns in the hands of cartel members and on the streets of Mexican cities.
Their actions in operation "Fast and Furious" makes Watergate look like joke.
Contributing to the death of a US Border Patrol agent, and over 300 Mexican citizens, in Mexico should put Obama, not on the ballot for President, but on trial before the world court for crimes against humanity, just like Slobodan Milosivic.
I posted the above message but forgot to sign it
Tom Bogan, Laconia NH
". . . .not in the hands of crooks"??
All the crooks who pull a government paycheck already have them!!
What about the hypocrisy of Obama's pals in NBC News? They promote anti gun legilslation while promoting a TV show where civilians fire real machineguns.
I bet they would not be for confiscating TV guns right.
http://www.nbc.com/?stars-earn-stripes/
Post a Comment