This is a GUN board, why are we debating Obama?

[Justus]

We have a few Obama debates going on in these threads.
There are some Obama supporters here.
My question is why?

If you are taking time out of your day to post or read a FIREARMS forum,
you must be a firearms enthusiast.

Here's Obama's stance on firearms:

• "Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama also favors commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. He supports closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. He also supports making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."

Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | UrbanPolicy


Everybody learned from the last AWB.
---We as gun owners learned it was ridiculous and ineffective.

---They, as gun grabbers, learned that they needed to include more guns
in the ban and make the ban permanent.

Why do we still need to debate our stance against electing Obama?
Apparently, gun ownership is important to everyone here or they wouldn't be
here reading and posting.
Isn't this one fact about Obama's intentions enough to stop any
gun owner from voting for him?

I'm done with this nonsense.

 

[Hoosier8]

Well said.

 

[4sarge]

Great Post

 

[Bigum1969]

Well stated, indeed.

If you are a firearm enthusiast, or simply believe in the Bill of Rights, Nobama.

 

[Paul]

Very good post and well said!

 

[Crystalship1]

What he said!!!!

 

[Bill of Rights]

We have a few Obama debates going on in these threads.
There are some Obama supporters here.
My question is why?

If you are taking time out of your day to post or read a FIREARMS forum,
you must be a firearms enthusiast.

Here's Obama's stance on firearms:

• "Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama also favors commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. He supports closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. He also supports making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."

Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | UrbanPolicy


Everybody learned from the last AWB.
---We as gun owners learned it was ridiculous and ineffective.

---They, as gun grabbers, learned that they needed to include more guns
in the ban and make the ban permanent.

Why do we still need to debate our stance against electing Obama?
Apparently, gun ownership is important to everyone here or they wouldn't be
here reading and posting.
Isn't this one fact about Obama's intentions enough to stop any
gun owner from voting for him?

I'm done with this nonsense.

To break that down a little further, the Tiahrt Amendment does not do what Obama says it does (no surprise there-he lied) Gun trace data is already available to LEOs in the course of a bona fide investigation. It is not available to others, however, like our good buddy Mikey Bloomberg, outside of a bona fide investigation.
Obama's "common sense measures" would require "safe storage", meaning your gun is unavailable to you when you need it most, owner liability if it is stolen, and of course, restriction of what you're allowed to own, probably even if you already own it. None of his policies would actually keep guns out of the hands of criminals or children, except for children whose parents want to take them to hunt or to a range.
There is no "gun show loophole", as we all know. He wants to make it unlawful to sell guns private party, so that the gov't has some way of knowing where all of them are. At least, the legal ones, held by people who use them responsibly.
"Make guns childproof"-Sure, by developing "smart gun technology" so that the gun can only be fired by one person. Of course, that would prevent either spouse from using the other's gun, and if it works on fingerprint reading, a sweaty hand or any dirt or blood would not permit the gun's use. Alternatively, he'd just say that to make them childproof, we'll only allow them where there are no children-like in police stations or National Guard armories.
As was pointed out, the AWB did nothing to control crime, it just shot prices out of the range of average citizens. Oh, and desensitized the public to the idea that gov't control of guns is somehow appropriate.

Are there Republican (RINO) gun-grabbers out there? Sure there are, and McCain's record is far from sterling on the subject, but basically, we have a choice between a President, a VP, two more Senators, AND a couple of Justices (Hillary, anyone?) or a President, a GREAT VP, maybe ONE Senate appointee (via Napolitano), and at least a chance at those Justice appointees being strong Conservatives who believe in the Constitution as written. (in other words, we can have six piles of , or we can have two. The choice is clear.)

Yes, Justus, this is a silly debate. There are third party choices, sure, but the fact remains that one of the above two scenarios WILL happen. It's not about making a choice so that your pick is the winner. It's about making your choice so that America won't be the loser.

On this BB, gun rights are the litmus test. The idea that any gun owner would vote to leave Obama any chance of attaining more power is beyond my comprehension. Those who would do so, if you just want to get rid of your guns, I'll give them a good home. But I'll do it under a President who knows what the costs of the defense of liberty really are, not under a candidate who's not even an American who has already announced his intention to violate not only his Senate oath but also his Presidential oath of office, if elected, to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. That's the one campaign promise Obama's made that I'll believe.

You don't preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution with a paper shredder, Hussein.

Blessings,
B

 

[JcJ]

IMHO, The guy is a douche nozzle with out the gun related issues.

 

[Dogman]

Well, we have to have somebody to talk bad about don't we? And Obama makes it so easy.

 

[Soundslikejosh]

Are there Republican (RINO) gun-grabbers out there? Sure there are, and McCain's record is far from sterling on the subject, but basically, we have a choice between a President, a VP, two more Senators, AND a couple of Justices (Hillary, anyone?) or a President, a GREAT VP, maybe ONE Senate appointee (via Napolitano), and at least a chance at those Justice appointees being strong Conservatives who believe in the Constitution as written. (in other words, we can have six piles of , or we can have two. The choice is clear.)

This November, I am voting for 2 Piles of ****!

Can we make lawn signs that say vote for 2PoS ?

 

[MACHINEGUN]

IMHO..

All politicians are big piles of trash... every single one of them are self serving elitist pigs.

 

[mar_2343]

EXCUSE MY SPELLING ERRORS IN ADVNCE

I am not as articulate as some here ar nor am I as learned as others, but I do understand there are bad people and good people. I like to think of myself as a good person. Having said that here goes.
If for one minute anyone would consider voting for this person Barrack, then I have to say thank you Jimmy Carter and your Dept of Education. What I refer to is Jimmy Carter pushed this onto the American Public, with the hidden, to some, agenda of controlling future generations of Americans thinking process or understanding of the CONSTITUTION. Carter's V.P. Walter Mondale was raised in the second largest SECULAR HUMINIST CHURCH IN AMERICAN (it was the 2nd largest in the 1970's) Mondales father was the leader some say pastor of that church. I know conspiricy, conspiricy, and thats what some say. Just because someone says conspiricy theory dosen't mean it isn't still the truth. The point about the Dept of Ed is who has been hired (teachers) under their policies how local input has been stripped away as to what is taught in the classroom.( VALUES ) You hear all the time we need more parental involvement in the classroom. Don't you believe that for a minute . If you question a policy or ask why., then your involvement in the classroom is no longer wanted or needed. Gun grabbers are the worst next to the MIND GRABBERS. Extend that though out, if johnny or janey america, are taught something is wrong or bad in the early years of their lives those teachings or lessons learned become core beliefs later in their lives and then they vote or don't vote according to those beliefs. If you think I'm wrong walk into your local middle school or Jr High find the history or social studies room look at the posters on the walls. You might be surprised to find how many have the murderous Bast@rd Che Guevera on the walls ask about the poster and you may be surprised at the answer you may get about why he is on the wall on a poster. I have personally seen this in a few schools and the answer is wanting to show other countries patriotic figures. The attempt at blurring what our founding fathers did and at what price they paid and comparing them with Cuba and its revolution ignoring how many were imprisioned or murdered after the revolution by new goverment) is just one shinning example of the influence of a liberal in our goverment.
The one campiagn promise Reagan dropped the ball on. He said if elected he would do away with Dept of Education. I wish he had
Thursday night The Craig Fergusion Show in the monolouge Fergusion had some interesting things to say........

The point to this whole rant is (if you still reading this WOW ) is that the Dept of Education is partly responsible for why some people here say they are thinking about voting BHO

 

[txgho1911]

I agree with the OP. There is nothing to debate. We know the oppositions position on RKBA and religion and foreign policy.

McCain is a joke and we all know this so well. Even with all good intent he is fed with bad info and not any real viable options. Palin may be one home run is this train wreck and she may be the best possible chance to start repair of the republican party. We may see a new movement of conservatives splitting the R party. Let the Rinos identify theme selves as a group. Then maybe they will stay away and not hide among the conservatives.

 

[Hoosier8]

I agree with the OP. There is nothing to debate. We know the oppositions position on RKBA and religion and foreign policy.

McCain is a joke and we all know this so well. Even with all good intent he is fed with bad info and not any real viable options. Palin may be one home run is this train wreck and she may be the best possible chance to start repair of the republican party. We may see a new movement of conservatives splitting the R party. Let the Rinos identify theme selves as a group. Then maybe they will stay away and not hide among the conservatives.

Could be. Good point.

 

[BloodEclipse]

I agree with the OP. There is nothing to debate. We know the oppositions position on RKBA and religion and foreign policy.

McCain is a joke and we all know this so well. Even with all good intent he is fed with bad info and not any real viable options. Palin may be one home run is this train wreck and she may be the best possible chance to start repair of the republican party. We may see a new movement of conservatives splitting the R party. Let the Rinos identify theme selves as a group. Then maybe they will stay away and not hide among the conservatives.

The Conservatives have been challenging the Rinos in the primaries with Conservative candidates and have been successful in removing some. The Rinos know they have a target on their back.

I'm not sure a Conservative got this one...... it may well have been Ted Kennedy.

 

[Hoosier8]

Was going to ask what Rino was but figured it out. Duh!

Any examples of Rinos?

Hey, Rino also means Reimbursement in-house orders!

 

[BloodEclipse]

Republican In Name Only

 

[CarmelHP]

We have a few Obama debates going on in these threads.
There are some Obama supporters here.
My question is why?

Because there are a lot of people with their hands out looking to be given other people's money. Sad, but true.

 

[rhino]

Classic example of a rino: Dick Lugar

And never confuse rhino for a "rino," as he is not a Republican, even in name only.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Classic example of a rino: Dick Lugar

Oh so true. He is past his prime and it's time for him to be replaced.