Obama on guns
“I believe in the Second Amendment, and if you are a law-abiding gun owner you have nothing to fear from an Obama administration,” Obama said. “This has been peddled again and again. Here’s what i believe: The Second Amendment is an indvidual right. . . people have the right to bear arms. But I also believe there is nothing wrong with some common-sense gun safety measures.”
No mention of the AWB, even though it’s officially part of the party platform. Which means they don’t believe in the second amendment.
Continuing:
“That kind of thing is common sense and has nothing to do with the guy who has got his rifle and wants to go hunting,” Obama said. “Now the NRA — I’ll be honest and I’m sure there are NRA members here — their general attitude is that we don’t want anything, and if you even breathe the words ‘gun control’ or ‘gun safety’ then you must want to take away everybody’s guns. Well, that’s just not true.”
But you use the terms ‘gun control’ or ‘gun safety’ synonymously. I have no issue with ‘gun safety’. Four rules should be taught in school, along with Eddie Eagle programs. Gun control, however, is what you do instead of something.
September 5th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
“….people have the right to bear arms”
Then why does he support a Federal ban on bearing arms, even if the person bearing jumps through unconstitutional licensing hoops?
Obama is flagrantly lying. McCain lies about supporting our natual rights as protected by the Second Amendment too, but Obama is even more of a threat.
Obama will end that “awkward stage” America is in much much faster. Maybe that could be McCain’s slogan for us SNBI’ers? “McCain 2008: Extend the Awkward Stage!”
September 5th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Don’t forget that Obama has no problem with his Secret Service security detail carrying concealed firearms.
Hypocrite.
September 5th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Here’s how the Federal Government’s “delegated authority” over the “militia” is defined:
To provide for CALLING FORTH THE MILITIA to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing SUCH PART OF THEM AS MAY BE EMPLOYED IN THE SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; –Article I, Section 8.15-16
Notice that only such part of the organized militia which is called forth, organized and employed is under any Federal laws applying to the militia. The purpose of the unorganized or state organized militia’s being part of the Bill of Rights are withheld from any Federal jurisdiction. The sentence of the 2nd Amendment read by standard English grammar presents “the militia” as synonomous with “the people” in the indpendent clause. According to teh context of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, the U.S. Government “SHALL NOT INFRINGE on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Andy Federal gun laws are an infringement UNLESS they only apply to “such part” mentioned Article I, Sewction 8.
Obama supposedly taught Constitutinal Law so he should know this and speak according to the oath of office he hopes to take. Now that would be some real CHANGE!
September 5th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
I suppose you can say you believe in the Second Amendment (but not agree with it). I mean, it’s hard to claim that it never existed. I “believe in” Marxism, which is to say that I acknowledge the fact that it exists, but I, unlike Obama, disagree with all of its defining premises.
The NRA teaches gun safety. Obama and his ilk wouldn’t know gun safety if they saw it.
September 5th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Screw you, you lying bastard! We ain’t buying your song and dance!
September 5th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
“if you are a law-abiding gun owner you have nothing to fear from an Obama administration,””
Please note that if you poses a handgun, or a long arm in Chicago without a State-issued firearms permit you AREN’T “Law -abiding”
Nice little trick of the gun grabbers. Say you’ll support lawful gun owners…then ban guns and jail the people who now own contraband.
They did it in Massachusetts. FIDs were good for life…then one day they were junk and a new permit needed to be applied for and new fees needed to be paid.
Lots of people didn’t even know about it, and they certainly were never contacted. Those people are now felons in the state and are looking at jail time if their guns and For-life FIDs are found.
Oh we have nothing to fear all right!
September 5th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Perhaps, this asshole could enlighten us about all the steps he took to restore the 2A rights of the folks living in those communities in Chicago he was so busy organizing.
I’d settle for ONE.
Hey, Barry, tell me ONE thing you’ve done to help defend and restore the Second Amendment rights of the people of Chicago. JUST ONE.
Lying little cunt.
September 5th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
“Don’t forget that Obama has no problem with his Secret Service security detail carrying concealed firearms.”
Great point, kaveman.
Another point of ignorance for this supposed instructor of constitutional law… whatt about “the equal protection of the laws” -14th Amendment. Shouldn’t the gun control laws he wants to impsoe on us apply to him and his hired guns?? If we applied the Constitution there, then all of this gun control would go away….
September 5th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Yo, Barack. I still don’t understand. Explain it to me again about the guns, the hunting and the Second Amendment.
September 5th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
It’s unclear to me who he’s speaking to with these statements. I mean, I’m an Obama supporter. I’ve given him cash and might even vote for the guy. But any gun-toting voter who hears him mince words on the 2nd amendment can see he’s not looking to protect us from the gun grabbers. So he’s not reassuring gunnies. The gun grabbers are going to vote for him anyway. What votes does he sway with mealy-mouthed support for hunters and the 2nd amendment?
September 6th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Here’s what i believe: The Second Amendment is an indvidual right. . .
What I believe: is this subject, is above obama’s paygrade.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:47 am
BH: his speech is directed at two groups: gun-grabbers and moderates who don’t pay much attention to the gun issue anyway. Gun-grabbers listen carefully, hear all the usual qualifications, and are reassured that he hasn’t budged an inch on the issue. Flaky moderates here the “I’m not going to take away your guns” malarky and become equally convinced that he has softened his stance and isn’t anything to worry about.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Here’s what i believe: The Second Amendment is an indvidual right. . . people have the right to bear arms. But I also believe there is nothing wrong with some common-sense gun safety measures.”
Interpretation: “common sense safety measuers” = a total ban of private firearm ownership. Except for the elites like himself.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Hmmmm.
Of course the 2nd Amendment is an individual right.
What government ever needed a Constitutional amendment to arm itself?
Does anyone, anywhere, think Ben Franklin slapped himself in the head saying “Hey guys! We forgot to add in something so we can give the Army some muskets!”.
September 7th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Definitions:
Gun Control – hitting what you are aiming at.
Gun Saftey – making sure of what you are aiming at.
Anyone who uses those two definitions gets my vote.