User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/16/2012 10:46:15 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
take down the hotlink Heh...there's really no reason to...who cares if a couple of their admins can see where some of their traffic is coming from. Our adult supervision does. Yeah, that's retarded. I've maintained that it's a retarded conspiracy-nut level looney nonsense since I first heard of it. Quoted:
Quoted:
Haven't you been on here long enough to know not to do that?  Hope that does not give us a flood of more trolls.
It's a very minor shitty forum that does not give a half a fuck what we do. Hotlinking to it does absolutely nothing, other than entertain me with everyone's panicked reaction. It's hilarious how stupid you guys get about the most minor of things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2012 10:49:29 PM EDT
[#2]
Yep, as soon as he said it I told my wife he just fucked up.
Obama had absolutely NOTHING to gain by supporting gun control. If he had said our existing laws are fine, let's just enforce them better, he wouldn't have lost a single vote.....not one. Not one member of the Brady group would vote Romney anyways. I personally know a few liberal guns owners from other message boards I belong to that feel Obama is no threat to their guns cause he hasn't gone after them in the past four years and the economy is such a huge problem it would be political suicide to even waste time on gun control. Tipping his hand just hurt him with many of the gun owning liberals out there that have been less than pleased with his performance anyways. Poor political chess move......he gained nothing and lost hopefully quite a bit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2012 10:58:08 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? He said that, but then started rambling on about bipartisanship. Right, Romney has been trying to score points on bipartisanship in both debates. Doesn't change the fact that he said no new laws. Looking at his history, there is no reason to doubt him. None. There is every reason to believe him(his history is the evidence). |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2012 10:59:41 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Yep, as soon as he said it I told my wife he just fucked up. Obama had absolutely NOTHING to gain by supporting gun control. If he had said our existing laws are fine, let's just enforce them better, he wouldn't have lost a single vote.....not one. Not one member of the Brady group would vote Romney anyways. I personally know a few liberal guns owners from other message boards I belong to that feel Obama is no threat to their guns cause he hasn't gone after them in the past four years and the economy is such a huge problem it would be political suicide to even waste time on gun control. Tipping his hand just hurt him with many of the gun owning liberals out there that have been less than pleased with his performance anyways. Poor political chess move......he gained nothing and lost hopefully quite a bit. Of course he wasnt going to go after guns the first 4 yrs. He knew what happened to the dems in the clinton yrs. I do believe that if he were to get another 4 yrs. he would go after it...he has nothing to lose...you only get 2 terms. Thats not to say he would get anywhere with it tho. Congress, I hope, realizes the same. There would be a mass exodus of dems from congress if new gun legislation were to be inacted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2012 11:33:10 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? His voting record on guns makes it pretty unclear. This is what Romney said regarding the "assault weapon" ban; "Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
Yeah. Screw that noise. Obama hasn't made it any harder for me to get a gun in his last term, but Romney has made it much more difficult for anybody to get one in MA for the last eight years. He claims it was some magic work of bipartisan group hugs.
He doesn't get it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2012 11:35:38 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? His voting record on guns makes it pretty unclear. This is what Romney said regarding the "assault weapon" ban; "Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
Yeah. Screw that noise. Obama hasn't made it any harder for me to get a gun in his last term, but Romney has made it much more difficult for anybody to get one in MA for the last eight years. He claims it was some magic work of bipartisan group hugs.
He doesn't get it. Yeah, Romney said that. But it doesn't matter. Romney has never broken a campaign promise. He's against abortion(guns), but he kept his promise to uphold the existing abortion(guns) laws as governor, and did so. So tell me, what reason do you have to think that Romney can't be trusted to keep his word on guns(abortion)? What reason do you have to think he won't keep his word? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 12:01:58 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Yeah, Romney said that. But it doesn't matter. Romney has never broken a campaign promise. He's against abortion(guns), but he kept his promise to uphold the existing abortion(guns) laws as governor, and did so. So tell me, what reason do you have to think that Romney can't be trusted to keep his word on guns(abortion)? What reason do you have to think he won't keep his word? This. Romney is a politician, not a true believer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 12:32:08 AM EDT
[#8]
People like Candy Crawley are the only ones that consider this a high priority issue. It should never have been in the debate. She probably thought she was doing him a favor, though. I hope it wakes some people up at least.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 12:42:08 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
I doubt it'll do much. 
I still see him winning in November. Negative. I have a acquaintance who is a true Independent. She hadn't decided who she was going to vote for. She would even defend some of Obama's policies. After the first debate, she swung over to Romney's side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 1:00:58 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
I doubt it'll do much.
I still see him winning in November. Never say never. LET'S GO DOWN SWINGING. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:05:07 AM EDT
[#11]
Just saw the Brady bunch finally got to use their press release
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:05:46 AM EDT
[#12]
Barry Soetoro won't reinstate an AWB to please the Brady bunch or anyone else. This is something he believes he needs to do as part of his fundamental transformation of America, just like he did with his trojan horse "health bill". People continue to make the critical mistake of thinking this SOB is just another democrat or liberal. All those labels do is provide him cover.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:10:16 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
They want the guns so they can herd the anti-socialists into train cars. DU consistently surprises me with how pro-gun they are. I really think guns are coming back around to being a mainstream, non-partisan thing for most people, despite what the MSM wants us to believe. If that happens, who knows? Maybe we can start getting them to see the light regarding personal responsibility and liberty as well. 
Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:23:47 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
I know and shoot with a few libs that own some fine firearms. Can't wait to hear them talk about it tomorrow. We are now watching the final approach of the Zero campaign approaching the center of the black hole. Time slows as we see deeper into the mind and watch it peacefully self destruct. There won't be anything peaceful about his campaign or his being kicked out of office. It will be a huge temper tantrum and he will have to be dragged from the WH. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:25:29 AM EDT
[#15]
I dont think either one of them really wanted to talk about it, they quickly dropped it when given the chance, I think Obama would have just as soon kept that cat in the bag until later.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:26:42 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Either way, I think most of GD was having some kind of sympathetic nervous system response to the word "ban" and didn't actually hear what Obama said, because it was the most non-committal pandering a politician has ever uttered, full of talk about enforcing the laws we have, a "broader conversation about violence", and what amounted to being an admission that gun control doesn't work in Chicago. Quoted, word-for-word: "I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced."
Here's the quote in context. Look at the closing paragraph. All of it is about societal causes of violence and enforcing the laws we have. He says 14 faltering words about a ban to reassure his constituents, and then quickly moves on to surround it with paragraphs worth of talking about anything else but a ban. Gun grabbers are weeping and wailing, I promise you. And I'm not saying there won't be a ban. I'm actually shocked at how surprised people seem to be. I assume he'll try, but because of who he is not because of what he said tonight. We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves. But there have been too many instances during the course of my presidency, where I've had to comfort families who have lost somebody. Most recently out in Aurora. You know, just a couple of weeks ago, actually, probably about a month, I saw a mother, who I had met at the bedside of her son, who had been shot in that theater. And her son had been shot through the head. And we spent some time, and we said a prayer and, remarkably, about two months later, this young man and his mom showed up, and he looked unbelievable, good as new. But there were a lot of families who didn't have that good fortune and whose sons or daughters or husbands didn't survive. So my belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we've already got, make sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we've got more to do when it comes to enforcement. But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns. And so what can we do to intervene, to make sure that young people have opportunity; that our schools are working; that if there's violence on the streets, that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we can catch it before it gets out of control. And so what I want is a –– is a comprehensive strategy. Part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But part of it is also going deeper and seeing if we can get into these communities and making sure we catch violent impulses before they occur. The part in red? That closing paragraph? That part where he confuses the issue even more by comparing our semi-autos to "automatic weapons". |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:28:08 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? He said that, but then started rambling on about bipartisanship. So, vote for Obama because his position is more clear?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:29:30 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Either way, I think most of GD was having some kind of sympathetic nervous system response to the word "ban" and didn't actually hear what Obama said, because it was the most non-committal pandering a politician has ever uttered, full of talk about enforcing the laws we have, a "broader conversation about violence", and what amounted to being an admission that gun control doesn't work in Chicago. Quoted, word-for-word: "I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced."
Here's the quote in context. Look at the closing paragraph. All of it is about societal causes of violence and enforcing the laws we have. He says 14 faltering words about a ban to reassure his constituents, and then quickly moves on to surround it with paragraphs worth of talking about anything else but a ban. Gun grabbers are weeping and wailing, I promise you. And I'm not saying there won't be a ban. I'm actually shocked at how surprised people seem to be. I assume he'll try, but because of who he is not because of what he said tonight. We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves. But there have been too many instances during the course of my presidency, where I've had to comfort families who have lost somebody. Most recently out in Aurora. You know, just a couple of weeks ago, actually, probably about a month, I saw a mother, who I had met at the bedside of her son, who had been shot in that theater. And her son had been shot through the head. And we spent some time, and we said a prayer and, remarkably, about two months later, this young man and his mom showed up, and he looked unbelievable, good as new. But there were a lot of families who didn't have that good fortune and whose sons or daughters or husbands didn't survive. So my belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we've already got, make sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we've got more to do when it comes to enforcement. But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns. And so what can we do to intervene, to make sure that young people have opportunity; that our schools are working; that if there's violence on the streets, that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we can catch it before it gets out of control. And so what I want is a –– is a comprehensive strategy. Part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But part of it is also going deeper and seeing if we can get into these communities and making sure we catch violent impulses before they occur. The part in red? That closing paragraph? That part where he confuses the issue even more by comparing our semi-autos to "automatic weapons". Beat me to it. Those are the classic statements of a rabid anti-gunner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:30:19 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? His voting record on guns makes it pretty unclear. This is what Romney said regarding the "assault weapon" ban; "Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
Yeah. Screw that noise. Obama hasn't made it any harder for me to get a gun in his last term, but Romney has made it much more difficult for anybody to get one in MA for the last eight years. He claims it was some magic work of bipartisan group hugs.
He doesn't get it. What's your point? Trying to discourage people from voting? Trying to discourage people from voting for Romney? Trying to encourage people to vote for Obama? What IS your point? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:31:15 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: If he had his choice, he would have talked about guns just as much as he talked about fast and furious- not at all. He was asked the question. Or maybe DU is saying that the questions were picked by the administration. Either way, I think most of GD was having some kind of sympathetic nervous system response to the word "ban" and didn't actually hear what Obama said, because it was the most non-committal pandering a politician has ever uttered, full of talk about enforcing the laws we have, a "broader conversation about violence", and what amounted to being an admission that gun control doesn't work in Chicago. I simply can't imagine how people can get alarmed about any of it, unless it's because it sounds too good to be true. Which it might be. I think all the other pandering shit he said after mentioning a ban, which I believe he would like FWIW, came after he realized what he just said and he was trying to backpedal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:33:07 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
I doubt it'll do much.
I still hope to see him winning in November. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:35:15 AM EDT
[#22]
Shockingly stupid to allow those words to fall from his lips. I believe that is, game, set, and match!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 2:39:49 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? His voting record on guns makes it pretty unclear. This is what Romney said regarding the "assault weapon" ban; "Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
Yeah. Screw that noise. Obama hasn't made it any harder for me to get a gun in his last term, but Romney has made it much more difficult for anybody to get one in MA for the last eight years. He claims it was some magic work of bipartisan group hugs.
He doesn't get it. What's your point? Trying to discourage people from voting? Trying to discourage people from voting for Romney? Trying to encourage people to vote for Obama? What IS your point? Well, of course that's what he is trying to encourage. He said it. Plus, misleading.........VERY misleading statement about Romney's signing of the AWB. Although I could NEVER sign a AWB like Romney did or say the things he did..............they had one before he got in and he didn't make it "much worse" to get a semi-auto rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 4:20:59 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here's the quote in context. Look at the closing paragraph. All of it is about societal causes of violence and enforcing the laws we have. He says 14 faltering words about a ban to reassure his constituents, and then quickly moves on to surround it with paragraphs worth of talking about anything else but a ban. Gun grabbers are weeping and wailing, I promise you. And I'm not saying there won't be a ban. I'm actually shocked at how surprised people seem to be. I assume he'll try, but because of who he is not because of what he said tonight. We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves. But there have been too many instances during the course of my presidency, where I've had to comfort families who have lost somebody. Most recently out in Aurora. You know, just a couple of weeks ago, actually, probably about a month, I saw a mother, who I had met at the bedside of her son, who had been shot in that theater. And her son had been shot through the head. And we spent some time, and we said a prayer and, remarkably, about two months later, this young man and his mom showed up, and he looked unbelievable, good as new. But there were a lot of families who didn't have that good fortune and whose sons or daughters or husbands didn't survive. So my belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we've already got, make sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we've got more to do when it comes to enforcement. But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns. And so what can we do to intervene, to make sure that young people have opportunity; that our schools are working; that if there's violence on the streets, that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we can catch it before it gets out of control. And so what I want is a –– is a comprehensive strategy. Part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But part of it is also going deeper and seeing if we can get into these communities and making sure we catch violent impulses before they occur. The part in red? That closing paragraph? That part where he confuses the issue even more by comparing our semi-autos to "automatic weapons". Beat me to it. Those are the classic statements of a rabid anti-gunner. Yeah, that closing paragraph. The one at the end. Even Romney didn't get that stuff 100% right, I certainly don't expect someone who we all know is a rabid anti-gunner to get it right. Again, I'm not saying he doesn't want a ban. I, like everyone else with two functional neurons to rub together, have assumed from day one that it was on his list of things to do. I'm saying he wanted nothing to do with the topic and only mentioned a ban because his constituents want him to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 4:32:58 AM EDT
[#25]
None of this means anything in the real world.
It is the economy, stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 7:40:20 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? He said that, but then started rambling on about bipartisanship. So, vote for Obama because his position is more clear?
Where did I say that? I've supported Romney ever since he got the nomination. That doesn't mean I can't critique what he said. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 7:55:05 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I hope he did, but Romney didn't exactly make his position very clear either. How is "I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns, and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal." unclear? His voting record on guns makes it pretty unclear. This is what Romney said regarding the "assault weapon" ban; "Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people." Yeah. Screw that noise. Obama hasn't made it any harder for me to get a gun in his last term, but Romney has made it much more difficult for anybody to get one in MA for the last eight years. He claims it was some magic work of bipartisan group hugs. He doesn't get it. Mittens did what the majority of MASShole voters wanted him to do. He represented his electorate. I think he understands that the US as a whole has a differing perspective on the matter.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 7:58:11 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
<don't hotlinnk to DU> Ya, they might learn about arfcom. Big deal. They should get to know their enemy
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 8:38:11 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117279713 and they are right  They are absolutely correct. The President stupidly advanced gun control as a major 2012 campaign issue. Democratic candidates, both incumbents and challengers, know that the issue of Gun Control is the "Kiss of Death" from voters. Since the debacle in 1994 the dims have been smart enough to avoid this issue like the plague. If you were a democratic candidate for the House or Senate what do you say to voters when they ask "Do you support the president and the democratic parties stance on gun control? Are you going to vote for another failed Assault Weapons Ban? Why are you trying to destroy my Second Amendment Rights? " "Ostupid" has just handed Republicans a second major issue besides the economy. This is a club that every republican candidate should use to bludgeon their opponents with. Dims are going to pay, and pay dearly for obamas advancement of an issue, into Congressional races that wasn't even in play. Yes "ITS' THE ECONOMY STUPID!." but now its also "YOU BASTERDS WANT TO TAKE AWAY MY GUNS TOO!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 8:40:20 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
DU consistently surprises me with how pro-gun they are. I really think guns are coming back around to being a mainstream, non-partisan thing for most people, despite what the MSM wants us to believe. If that happens, who knows? Maybe we can start getting them to see the light regarding personal responsibility and liberty as well. Some of my liberal friends are getting into them (independently, I fly under the radar for now) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 8:41:26 AM EDT
[#31]
Obama just fell on his swored AK!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 8:42:19 AM EDT
[#32]
I can't believe the NRA has not issued a statement yet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 9:04:05 AM EDT
[#33]
We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment,......................................................................................................................... Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns. ...................................................................
So will he also be going after cheap handgus? Or all handguns? Or just evil hi-cap handguns.................? a-bare |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 9:25:07 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
How is re-enacting the assault weapons ban gonna lower the crime rates when the people who are using those weapons in that manner aren't purchasing them legally to begin with. Do you think home boy that is using the AK to shoot other homies went down to the local gun store and paid full price and registered it in his name. Hell no!! There are too many assault rifles circulating in the wrong hands to think that something this simple is gonna solve any problems. I never heard Romney state for sure which way he was leaning on the topic I may have missed it, but he definitely didn't sound as strong favored as Obama. All I know is I am glad I went ahead and recently purchased my AR. Now if only I could find a nice AK to keep it company  Yep, you missed it. Mitt said in no uncertain words. NO NEW FEDERAL ANTI GUN LAWS. Barry clearly said RENEW CLINTON'S FEDERAL DEMOCRAT AWB NOW. ..... and the (d) UN small arms and ammo import ban treaty. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 9:35:38 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Either way, I think most of GD was having some kind of sympathetic nervous system response to the word "ban" and didn't actually hear what Obama said, because it was the most non-committal pandering a politician has ever uttered, full of talk about enforcing the laws we have, a "broader conversation about violence", and what amounted to being an admission that gun control doesn't work in Chicago. Quoted, word-for-word: "I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced."
Here's the quote in context. Look at the closing paragraph. All of it is about societal causes of violence and enforcing the laws we have. He says 14 faltering words about a ban to reassure his constituents, and then quickly moves on to surround it with paragraphs worth of talking about anything else but a ban. Gun grabbers are weeping and wailing, I promise you. And I'm not saying there won't be a ban. I'm actually shocked at how surprised people seem to be. I assume he'll try, but because of who he is not because of what he said tonight. We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves. But there have been too many instances during the course of my presidency, where I've had to comfort families who have lost somebody. Most recently out in Aurora. You know, just a couple of weeks ago, actually, probably about a month, I saw a mother, who I had met at the bedside of her son, who had been shot in that theater. And her son had been shot through the head. And we spent some time, and we said a prayer and, remarkably, about two months later, this young man and his mom showed up, and he looked unbelievable, good as new. But there were a lot of families who didn't have that good fortune and whose sons or daughters or husbands didn't survive. So my belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we've already got, make sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we've got more to do when it comes to enforcement. But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns. And so what can we do to intervene, to make sure that young people have opportunity; that our schools are working; that if there's violence on the streets, that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we can catch it before it gets out of control. And so what I want is a –– is a comprehensive strategy. Part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But part of it is also going deeper and seeing if we can get into these communities and making sure we catch violent impulses before they occur. The part in red? That closing paragraph? That part where he confuses the issue even more by comparing our semi-autos to "automatic weapons". You missed the part in blue where he plans on profiling us for pre-crimes. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 10:02:40 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Either way, I think most of GD was having some kind of sympathetic nervous system response to the word "ban" and didn't actually hear what Obama said, because it was the most non-committal pandering a politician has ever uttered, full of talk about enforcing the laws we have, a "broader conversation about violence", and what amounted to being an admission that gun control doesn't work in Chicago. Quoted, word-for-word: "I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced."
Here's the quote in context. Look at the closing paragraph. All of it is about societal causes of violence and enforcing the laws we have. He says 14 faltering words about a ban to reassure his constituents, and then quickly moves on to surround it with paragraphs worth of talking about anything else but a ban. Gun grabbers are weeping and wailing, I promise you. And I'm not saying there won't be a ban. I'm actually shocked at how surprised people seem to be. I assume he'll try, but because of who he is not because of what he said tonight. We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves. But there have been too many instances during the course of my presidency, where I've had to comfort families who have lost somebody. Most recently out in Aurora. You know, just a couple of weeks ago, actually, probably about a month, I saw a mother, who I had met at the bedside of her son, who had been shot in that theater. And her son had been shot through the head. And we spent some time, and we said a prayer and, remarkably, about two months later, this young man and his mom showed up, and he looked unbelievable, good as new. But there were a lot of families who didn't have that good fortune and whose sons or daughters or husbands didn't survive. So my belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we've already got, make sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we've got more to do when it comes to enforcement. But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns. And so what can we do to intervene, to make sure that young people have opportunity; that our schools are working; that if there's violence on the streets, that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we can catch it before it gets out of control. And so what I want is a –– is a comprehensive strategy. Part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But part of it is also going deeper and seeing if we can get into these communities and making sure we catch violent impulses before they occur. The part in red? That closing paragraph? That part where he confuses the issue even more by comparing our semi-autos to "automatic weapons". You missed the part in blue where he plans on profiling us for pre-crimes.
When asked at the 08 DNC primary, Joe Biden said gun owners need help. Now they have obamacare. @50 sec
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 10:13:12 AM EDT
[#37]
Which state has the highest per-capita NRA membership? Pennsylvania - though Florida and Ohio aren't slackers in that respect either.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 10:16:16 AM EDT
[#38]
The base has been mad because he hasn't went far enough with their agendas. This appeases them a little, but screws him in the big picture.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 10:21:32 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
I generally believe that Owebama is clever, anti-American, and evil, but shit like unzipping his fly and throwing out the idea for a new AWB during a townhall debate makes me think he's just plain dumb  I have tended to share your view as well; but after the first debate when Obama said he thought that he won, I thought that maybe Occam's Razor was correct after all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2012 10:24:03 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: While it does nail him down on that position, I doubt any of the Romney people here would vote for a third party in 2016 even if Romney pushed for and signed a new AWB.Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If he had his choice, he would have talked about guns just as much as he talked about fast and furious- not at all. He was asked the question. Or maybe DU is saying that the questions were picked by the administration. Either way, I think most of GD was having some kind of sympathetic nervous system response to the word "ban" and didn't actually hear what Obama said, because it was the most non-committal pandering a politician has ever uttered, full of talk about enforcing the laws we have, a "broader conversation about violence", and what amounted to being an admission that gun control doesn't work in Chicago. I simply can't imagine how people can get alarmed about any of it, unless it's because it sounds too good to be true. Which it might be. It may just be pandering but when you ask "why do people need weapons designed for soldiers" or something similar you scare the shit out of a lot of people. Agreed, which is why given the choice I think he would have avoided the whole thing. He got cornered by a gun grabber on live television. Oh, the irony. On the plus side Romney had to take a position as well. And now we have Romney on live TV stating that he didn't support a weapons ban. Would be kind of hard for him to back out of that one. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
