Perceptions of Obama's agenda reduce crime rate.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Skeptik, Feb 24, 2010.

  1. Skeptik
    Offline

    Skeptik Astute observer

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    The late great Bear Flag Republic
    Ratings:
    +98
    This one has some interesting twists and turns.

    The perception that our new pres is against gun rights has increased sales of guns. Gotta get them before the socialist tries to take them away, you know.

    Not only that, but states have loosened gun regulations in response to the perception that Obama, being a Marxist and anti second amendment and all, wants to restrict guns.

    Meanwhile, the president has been silent on the issue.

    The result? Violent crime is at its lowest point in 50 years, proving.. proving??

    Perhaps that the gun advocates are correct about the benefits of law abiding citizens having weapons, but what else? Could it be that perception is far more important than actual actions and substance?


    Fearing Obama Agenda, States Push to Loosen Gun Laws


    Isn't all that a delicious irony?
     
  2. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124

    Uhhh....no.

    This is a trend that began LONG before Obama...culminating in 2005 while Obama was a state senator attempting to outlaw handguns...nice try attempting to give Obama the credit though.


    I posted this 7 months ago.



    Fact 1:

    Nearly every state issued Concealed Carry permits by 2005.

    [​IMG]


    Borrowed this with permission from Wikipedia here.​




    Fact 2:

    In 2005, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, violent crime hit the lowest levels ever recorded in the United States:


    Fact 3:

    In 2008, according to the FBI, police officers killed in the line of duty were reduced to a 50 year low:


    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2010
  3. beowolfe
    Offline

    beowolfe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,793
    Thanks Received:
    204
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +204
    Looks like it started with Clinton's putting that extra 100,000 policemen on the streets. WTG Slick Willie!!
     
  4. beowolfe
    Offline

    beowolfe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,793
    Thanks Received:
    204
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +204
    I think some states may live to regret some of the laws they passed, like allowin people to carry guns into bars. If the employment situation doesn't improve quickly (and I don't think it will), I can see that becoming a real problem.
     
  5. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124

    Just for the record, President Obama HASN'T been "silent on the issue".

    His administration through Attorney General Eric Holder attempted to permanently re-institute the ill-crafted Clinton Assault Weapons Ban...and was slapped back so hard by his own party that he has "been silent" ever since.
    Pro-Gun Democrats Oppose New Assault Weapon Ban

    Pro-gun Democrats warn administration not to revive ban on assault-style weapons

    By JIM ABRAMS Associated Press Writer

    WASHINGTON March 18, 2009 (AP)

    Sixty-five House Democrats said Wednesday that they would oppose any attempt by the Obama administration to revive a ban on military-style weapons that President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1994 and President George W. Bush let expire.


    The pro-gun Democrats, led by Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., wrote Attorney General Eric Holder that they would "actively oppose any effort to reinstate the 1994 ban, or to pass any similar law."



     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2010
  6. Dr Gregg
    Offline

    Dr Gregg BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    2,901
    Thanks Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +200
    Yeah, the "they are going to take away our guns" type of people are just nutjobs. It's a constitutional right, so unless there is plans to wrute a new amendment, that's not gong to happen.
     
  7. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,620
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,215
    The states that allow it have done so for many years and they have never had a problem. Why would it be a problem? What are we afraid of?
    We're afraid someone will carry a gun into a bar.
    We're afraid that person will have a drink (which is probably illegal in every state that allows people to carry into establishemtns selling liquor)
    We're afraid he will then have another and another until his judgment becomes impaired.
    Then we're afraid he will become enraged or whatever.
    Then we're afraid he will pull the gun and fire it and hit some innocent bystander.

    I don't buy it.
     
  8. Skeptik
    Offline

    Skeptik Astute observer

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    The late great Bear Flag Republic
    Ratings:
    +98
    Don't ever believe that a right that is in the Constitution can't be taken away. The government tramples on Constitutional rights all the time. Take asset forfeiture, for example. If the police suspect that a piece of property, say a car or an airplane, is being used for illegal purposes, such as drug running, they can take the property and pay nothing. They don't have to indict, let alone convict the owner.

    Now, wasn't there something about a citizen not being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process?

    Nevertheless, this article is about how gun rights have actually been expanded due to fear that the president is against gun rights. I thought that was a bit of interesting irony, didn't you?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. ihopehefails
    Offline

    ihopehefails BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    3,384
    Thanks Received:
    228
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +228
    Since everyone has been arming up I have noticed that violence has gone down.
     
  10. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,576
    Thanks Received:
    8,171
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,220
    Which is exactly why 4 Justices of the Supreme Court nearly took away that right last year.
     

Share This Page