During the White House Press Conference on Monday, not only did Press Secretary Jay Carney put distance from Harry Reid’s comments concerning Mitt Romney’s failure to pay taxes for ten years, yet not disavow the remarks, but he also affirmed the fact that Barack Obama is also out to ban guns, something we’ve known all along. He affirmed Obama’s position to re-institute the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004.
Of course I warned about such calls for more gun control on Monday.
When asked whether Obama supported renewing the 1994-2004 federal ban of semi-automatic weapons for civilians, Carney responded,
“He does support renewing the assault weapons ban,” and he added that “there has been reluctance by Congress to pass that renewal.”
I will interject to say there is good reason that Congress doesn’t act. Banning supposed “assault weapons” does nothing to stop criminals from acquiring them. The Obama administration should know this best seeing that they delivered some 2,500 semi-automatic weapons into the hands of Mexican drug cartels, which were responsible for at least two U.S. federal agent deaths and the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans. As I’ve said before we need more politician control legislation rather than gun control legislation.
While Carney said that the administration intends to push for gun safety “under existing law” and “not infringe upon Second Amendment rights of citizens” the fact is that is the exact opposite of what such measures do. The issue is not “gun safety.”That is merely the marketing of the Obama administration. Gun safety is what an individual does, not what government does. The Obama administration is not interested in gun safety. They are interested in gun banning.
Understand something here. The call for the ban of semi-automatic weapons is a call for most modern guns on the market. According to Reuters, the shooter at the Sikh temple was using a simple Springfield 9mm semiautomatic handgun.
Josh Sugarmann, , executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a nonprofit group that advocates to reduce gun violence, said,
“There is no valid reason for civilians to have assault rifles, semiautomatic handguns and high-capacity magazines. We have to start ratcheting down the firepower in civilian hands in the United States.”
You see, this is just an echo of the Obama administration. There are plenty of valid reasons for law-abiding citizens to posses “assault” rifles, semiautomatic handguns and high-capacity magazines. If we are to believe Mr. Sugarmann, then if those semi-automatic guns are out of the hands of the population, then there is absolutely no need for any government official to have a body guard armed with a semi-automatic handgun. Furthermore, there is no need for police to be armed with them either.
If there is a cry from these people who want more gun control and gun bans, then they need to follow their “illogic” to its logical conclusion and that would mean there would be no need for any semi-automatic guns at all. That is not the case though and they know it. Their is no Utopia like liberals assume in our future simply because men are fallen and because they are fallen they need means of protection against those men who lack self-control.
I never know how I will have to defend myself in public or in my own home. This is why there needs to continue to be high capacity magazines as well as a variety of weapons to choose from. Against military it is small for sure, but against common criminals law abiding citizens should be able to purchase a weapon of choice without government cutting those options off.
Carney finished the section regarding the assault weapons ban with the following:
“The president’s approach is that we should work with Congress where possible — and administratively where allowed — to advance common-sense measures that enhance our security, that keep deadly weapons out of the hands of criminals and others who shouldn’t have them, under existing law, but that protects Second Amendment rights, which the president thinks is an important goal as well.”
You see, we hear the “where possible” type of comment on things such as the cybersecurity bill, which Obama is considering using executive order to implement, which would be a clear violation of the powers he has under the Constitution. Not only that but Carney uses the phrase “deadly weapons.” Isn’t that interesting? Well now, according to TSA box cutters are deadly weapons and so are plastic knives, nail files, fingernail clippers. I mean if we are going to use the term “deadly weapon,” that really is in the eye of the beholder. Everything in our lives can be a deadly weapon, including some very well trained people!
Personally, I don’t care if people say, “Well other presidents have issued Executive Orders like that.” That doesn’t make it right. Law is to be made in the Legislative Branch, not the Executive Branch. don’t think if it came down to it that Barack Obama would not seek to implement such an EO, if he so desired. The question is, how would our elected representatives respond to such a measure?
Ask for a definition of assault weapon from 1000 people and you will get 1000 different answers... ALL weapons are assault weapons if used that way, just like ALL weapons are defensive weapons when used THAT way... Iran has terrorist nuclear weapons and America has defensive nuclear weapons...
IP: Logged
10:13 AM
AkursedX Member
Posts: 2890 From: Lackawanna NY Registered: Aug 2000
For someone who is so pro-America, why on earth would you promote a foreign-built firearm? Especially when there are more than enough US manufactuers of high-capacity rifles, including AK-variant rifles. Buy American!
IP: Logged
10:17 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Q Just returning to guns for a moment. You’ve said, in response to a bunch of questions, that he supports enforcing -- better enforcing existing laws. His position in the past has been in favor of renewing the assault weapons ban, which would, at this point, be a new law. He also said in New Orleans that AK-47s belong on the battlefield, not on the streets. Does he still support that legislation?
MR. CARNEY: He does. And I’ve said that before from the podium in the last week, that he does support renewing the assault weapons ban.
IP: Logged
10:19 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
The Dumbs always start screaming about gun control any time there's a shooting. The shouting started up again with the Sikh temple shooting. Wasn't that shooting done with a pistol? How would an assault weapons ban have made a difference?
IP: Logged
10:33 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
The Dumbs always start screaming about gun control any time there's a shooting. The shouting started up again with the Sikh temple shooting. Wasn't that shooting done with a pistol? How would an assault weapons ban have made a difference?
I guess they'll have to ban pistols too. I've heard various Congress people say "nobody needs a semi automatic gun." Of course, some of these same people want to ban any weapon with a barrel shroud, because a barrel shroud makes it an assault weapon, or something.
IP: Logged
10:35 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
For someone who is so pro-America, why on earth would you promote a foreign-built firearm? Especially when there are more than enough US manufactuers of high-capacity rifles, including AK-variant rifles. Buy American!
If you find any good deals, on any high-capacity rifles or AK variants, please post them here. Defending oneself from tyranny does not mean owning US made weapons only, although I understand your sentiment.
IP: Logged
11:08 AM
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
You are so full of manure yourself that your eyes are brown. Obama is a known liar and you just eat his propaganda up. He is the reason arms sales are so great in our nation.
IP: Logged
11:38 AM
NEPTUNE Member
Posts: 10199 From: Ticlaw FL, and some other places. Registered: Aug 2001
The Facts On his campaign Web site, Obama says he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and "will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport and use guns." As CNN reported, Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, told supporters at a Virginia rally on Saturday, September 20, "I guarantee you, Barack Obama ain't taking my shotguns. So don't buy that malarkey. They're going to start peddling that to you. I've got two and if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem."
Troll: any member that doesn't add to a discussion and follows others around in their threads just to insult them and to try to discredit them. Seems to fit you! Thanks for bumping my threads to the top again! Now go back to sucking Obamas lies and parts again.
IP: Logged
11:44 AM
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
On his campaign Web site, Obama says he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and "will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport and use guns." Troll.
Oh gee, well I guess I beleive him then.
Afterall, Obama has such a great reputation for keeping his word
IP: Logged
11:45 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
So you think Press Secretary Jay Carney is full of crap? Well, I can't really disagree with that assessment, but it doesn't change the White House's press briefing.
For someone who is so pro-America, why on earth would you promote a foreign-built firearm? Especially when there are more than enough US manufactuers of high-capacity rifles, including AK-variant rifles. Buy American!
Are there any AK variants that are US built?
And i don't have the details with me but i remember he saying that he was for gun bans back when he was still a senator.
IP: Logged
12:15 PM
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
Sorry, I have to call here. Obama has stated on many occasions that he does not want to ban guns. Your source is full of manure.
Since when did any truth come out of his mouth ? Hes lied on everything hes ever said. He tells so many, even he cant keep them straight. Name something of importance hes said that was true.
Sorry, I have to call here. Obama has stated on many occasions that he does not want to ban guns. Your source is full of manure.
I agree. Your news sources are often, more than questionable.. And I call BS on this as well. Obama has stated over and over, he is NOT interested in taking the guns. He has his own
This is getting ridiculous. 40% Of the topics on the first page of TO/T are made up of your political copy & paste posts. Since I'm pretty sure every single one of those threads carry the same message ("Obama sucks"), I'm going to consider this as a violation of the following posting rule if you don't tone it down:
quote
Do not start threads about other threads. So you get in a heated discussion in one of the threads. You get the feeling you are not getting your point across. So you feel the need to start a new thread explaining what you meant in the first thread. Don't. Since there's already a thread on the subject, say it there.
So either tone it down, or create a single thread (you can call it "Avengador's Politics Corner" for all I care).
IP: Logged
05:45 PM
Aug 10th, 2012
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
If we as a free nation do not stand together, fight the attack going on right now against our Second Amendment to the Constitution, this will be the next headline news!
Politicians will say: Now that the Second Amendment is gone, I think we should do away with the search and seizure part of the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment stands in our way and makes it harder for the government, police, FBI, and CIA to do their jobs properly. While officers and government officials are waiting on an approved search warrant to go into and search a person’s private home, or business, the criminal could be getting rid of the evidence we need to prove them guilty. On many occasions we (the police, and government) try to obtain a search warrant and are not given one due to lack of evidence. When we know they(civilians) are doing illegal activities. How are we (the police, the government) going to catch the murderer, drug dealer, rapist, thief, gun holder, if we are not given the extra power to go into their (civilians) homes, places of business, to get the evidence we need? It should be up to law enforcement and government officials discretion whether or not to enter into the home or place of business. The following people would be exempt from this law: The President of the United States, FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, Supreme Court Justices, Judges, and any and all law enforcement (state or local).
Many people may think that is extreme thinking and very far fetched. This would never happen here in the United States! Were just trying to use scare tactics to have our guns. Not true. Wake up, it has already started! On April 2, 2012 The Supreme Court ruled on a case entitled Florence vs Board of Freeholders in a 5 to 4 decision that allows police officers to strip search people whom are arrested for any offense before admitting them to jail. This decision holds true even if the officials have no reason to suspect illegal activity. If we the people allow our constitution to be altered by those that are trying so hard to destroy it, our land will no longer be free, our freedoms an illusion, and dictatorship will rule. Our Children and grandchildren will learn how our country used to be free in history books only. That is if the government allows it (then goes Freedom of Speech).
After Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, LA this actually happened. On September 8, 2005 the Police and National Guard were given the order by the Governor to go street by street, house by house and confiscate all weapons. Martial law had been put into effect. They were entering homes with their guns drawn, as if all the victims of this tragedy were criminals. They went door to door confiscating law abiding citizen’s legal weapons. They handcuffed law abiding citizens as if they were criminals, later letting them go without their weapons of coarse. The police and National Guard (under orders) entered homes without permission of the owner/resident (illegal search and seizure) to confiscate all weapons. This happened in both the poor and rich neighborhoods alike. Is anyone seeing a pattern here?
Some may say that this is just an isolated incident and that it was due to the storm. Does that make it alright for our Constitutional right to be infringed upon? Does that give the government the right to take our weapons, to search our homes without permission, to assault law abiding citizens? No, it doesn’t! As always there is a double standard when it comes to government officials, and police officers.
Staff Sgt. Joshua May knew this was wrong and refused to be involved with the gun grab. He said it was a direct violation of our constitution and he would not do it. Thank you for standing up for Our Constitutional Rights, and for defending us against both foreign and domestic enemies.
There are many great police officers in our country. They work hard, believe in what their badge stands for, they serve and protect our families and communities, and are true Americans. However, there are some police officers out there that are crooked, do not follow the law, and use their badge as a source of power to tromp on the rights of the people. This is where the problem lies.
If we as law abiding citizens are unarmed, how are we to protect ourselves against crooked police officers, politicians, government, tyranny, or foreign enemies? We will not be able to. (Hitler vs Jews). This is why the Second Amendment is so important for all people. The Second Amendment was written for that very reason. It guaranteed the citizens of the United States a way that we the people would never again be an oppressed people by a tyrannical government. We the people have the right and duty to uphold our Constitution. God gave us our rights and the Founders enumerated some of those rights, including our Second Amendment which outlines people’s right to own, carry, and bear arms with no restrictions. Why, no restrictions? Because our Founding Fathers knew if there were restrictions, it would create a more powerful government. The Founding Fathers of this country wanted us to be able to be protected, and for us to be able to protect our country in which they fought so hard to establish, a free nation. Our right to bear arms shall not be infringed! Their wording was very strong for a reason. They wanted to make sure that no form of government would ever be able to dispute, change, or alter our right as American Citizens to protect ourselves, our families, our Country, from those whom would gladly destroy it.
If we as a nation allow our Second Amendment to be torn apart, destroyed, or altered in anyway, then our other rights guaranteed by our Creator and outlined in our great Constitution will also be in jeopardy. Once the process has started, it will not end with just the Second Amendment. It will create a spiral downfall disintegrating our Constitution and everything we as a nation stand for. We are called the “Greatest Nation in the World.” There is a reason for that. So now is the time for all American citizens (gun-activists and anti-gun activists) to see the bigger picture, to stand up for what is right, and stand together as one nation defending our Constitution.
Defending oneself from tyranny does not mean owning US made weapons only, although I understand your sentiment.
here.
