Gun enthusiastics stock up now

[random3434]

I don't know if you just didn't understand the analogy there or what. The point is, what he says he is for and what his record shows on the issue are two different things. So what would you like me to believe? What he says he's going to do or what the record shows he has tried to do?

Why don't you try and not get so hysterical and know that he's not going to take away your guns. How many times do I have to say this, unless you are a criminal you shouldn't have to worry.


Quit "jumping the gun" before anything happens.

 

[Bern80]

Why don't you try and not get so hysterical and know that he's not going to take away your guns. How many times do I have to say this, unless you are a criminal you shouldn't have to worry.


Quit "jumping the gun" before anything happens.

Did you actually look at what I posted? Those are the things he has actually voted for. Case in point semi-automic firearms which he voted to ban, which my family happens to have several of, so yes I do need to be worried about him actually taking our guns.

How can you look at what he has voted for and say that no one should be worried about their guns? Get the blinders of your eyes man.

 

[LOki]

You are cordially invited to go fuck yourself, you little faggot.

Clear?

No. Make it clear.

Bring your guns to my house and I'll shove them up your ass, lad.

Presented, dishonestly, as if I suggested I would bring my guns to your house.

It has yet to be demonstrated that I'm little faggot, but you've certainly not refuted the notion that you're a dishonest little faggot.

 

[random3434]

Did you actually look at what I posted? Those are the things he has actually voted for. Case in point semi-automic firearms which he voted to ban, which my family happens to have several of, so yes I do need to be worried about him actually taking our guns.

How can you look at what he has voted for and say that no one should be worried about their guns? Get the blinders of your eyes man.

Bern, did you read the link I provided? Here is a quote from Obama:

As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns.
What I think we can provide is common-sense approaches to the issue
of illegal guns that are ending up on the streets. We can make sure
that criminals don't have guns in their hands. We can make certain that
those who are mentally deranged are not getting a hold of handguns. We
can trace guns that have been used in crimes to unscrupulous gun dealers
that may be selling to straw purchasers and dumping them on the streets.
The point is, is that what we have to do is get beyond the politics
of this issue and figure out what, in fact, is working.
Look, in my hometown of Chicago, on the south side of Chicago, we've
had 34 gun deaths last year of Chicago public school children.
And I think that most law-abiding gun owners all
across America would recognize that it is perfectly appropriate for
local communities and states and the federal government to try to figure
out, how do we stop that kind of killing?

 

[Bern80]

Bern, did you read the link I provided? Here is a quote from Obama:

You aren't listening, that or you just don't want to acknowledge the reality of Obama's actions and actions speak far louder than words in politics. It isn't what someone says that counts Echo, especially in politics. It's what they do. And what Obama has done in the past in terms of voting for and supporting this and that gun restriction is far more aggressive than the statement you provided. It doesn't make any sense to put any faith in what he says, when his record on what he has done in the past is so long and undeniable.

Obama is a hell of a speaker and smart. He knows how to leave himself open to more options without being called a liar and he leaves himself open to greater restriction in that very statement. It leaves it open to ban guns in certain communities. He says he isn't going to take everyone's guns away, but it's okay for certain communities to ignore the 2nd ammendment? It isn't okay to violate people's rights, but it's okay to do it in certain areas? How can you honestly defend that?

 

[random3434]

You aren't listening, that or you just don't want to acknowledge the reality of his. It isn't what someone says that counts Echo, especially in politics. It's what they do. And what Obama has done in the past in terms of voting for and supporting this and that gun restriction is far more aggressive than the statement you provided. It doesn't make any sense to put any faith in what he says, when his record on what he done in the past is so long and undeniable.

Obama is a hell of a speaker and smart. He knows how to leave himself open to more options without being called a liar and he leaves himself open to greater restriction in that very statement. It leaves it open to ban guns in certain communities. He says he isn't going to guns away, but it's okay for certain communities to ignore the 2nd ammendment? It isn't okay to violate people's rights, but it's okay to do it in certain areas? How can you honestly defend that?

Well, first off, I would like to thank you for posting your thoughts without flaming and name calling. See, 2 people can disagree without the 3rd grade tactics some like to use on here.

I see your points, but I also agree with his stance too. I am not anti-gun, and believe in the Second Amendment.

I honestly don't think he wants to violate people's rights, but try and get guns out of criminal's hands. Now I think that is going to be a hard task, because if someone wants a gun, they can get one, be it legal or not.

 

[Merlin]

I'm don't like assault weapons on the street either, but in my humble opinion, the way is is written and the words used in the second Amendment, it would be illegal to make even one gun law, much less the 20,000 on the books now. I think to get the assault weapons off the streets we need to vote on another amendment to do so.

 

[Bern80]

I honestly don't think he wants to violate people's rights, but try and get guns out of criminal's hands. Now I think that is going to be a hard task, because if someone wants a gun, they can get one, be it legal or not.

It's hard to say what he thinks. I just got done saying he's smart guy, so let's follow one possible train of thought. He states he has seen an inordinate level of gun violence in a community. There is a wide variety of possible solutions to limit (and I'm going to carefully word this) the number of crimes involving guns commited against innocent people in that community. One solution is to simply ban guns in that community. The (faulty)logic being that if the guns aren't allowed to be there then the violence will go down. In my opinion that isn't going to change anything at all in that community. Law abiding citizens won't have guns, the criminals still will. We both know that's what will happen, yet of the variety of solutions, this is one WE KNOW OBAMA HAS SUPPORTED.

As for other solultions, I'd support funding for more police. Or how about really thinking outside the box. How about instead of banning them, we REQUIRE EVERYONE TO HAVE A GUN that can pass a background check. Give them the guns and classes in firearm safety and advertise that this is an armed community. Think if you were gonna steal something from someone, break into a home or maybe a car and you see a sign on the corner that everyone on the block has a gun.

Back to what Obama is thinking, I honestly believe he is a product of his environment. I know I probably am where guns are concerned. I grew up in northern Minnesota hunting all my life and needless to say have been around a lot of guns. I've never had a negative experience and no one I know has had a negative experience with guns, so naturally I can't see any logic in restricting them. Obviously I see the evening news and here about crimes and deaths involving guns, so i do know the good and the bad.

Now imagine you are Obama, or anybody for that matter, growing up in Chicago. What is your exposure to guns going to be? Probably pretty negative for the most part. Growing up in the inner city where are you ever going to be exposed to anything else? You never see anything good where guns are concerned (even though the guns aren't really the problem). All you ever exposed to is bad. That becomes your reality despite that those events constitute a small minority where all guns and gun owners are concerned.

 

[random3434]

It's hard to say what he thinks. I just got done saying he's smart guy, so let's follow one possible train of thought. He states he has seen an inordinate level of gun violence in a community. There is a wide variety of possible solutions to limit (and I'm going to carefully word this) the number of crimes involving guns commited against innocent people in that community. One solution is to simply ban guns in that community. The (faulty)logic being that if the guns aren't allowed to be there then the violence will go down. In my opinion that isn't going to change anything at all in that community. Law abiding citizens won't have guns, the criminals still will. We both know that's what will happen, yet of the variety of solutions, this is one WE KNOW OBAMA HAS SUPPORTED.

As for other solultions, I'd support funding for more police. Or how about really thinking outside the box. How about instead of banning them, we REQUIRE EVERYONE TO HAVE A GUN that can pass a background check. Give them the guns and classes in firearm safety and advertise that this is an armed community. Think if you were gonna steal something from someone, break into a home or maybe a car and you see a sign on the corner that everyone on the block has a gun.

Back to what Obama is thinking, I honestly believe he is a product of his environment. I know I probably am where guns are concerned. I grew up in northern Minnesota hunting all my life and needless to say have been around a lot of guns. I've never had a negative experience and no one I know has had a negative experience with guns, so naturally I can't see any logic in restricting them. Obviously I see the evening news and here about crimes and deaths involving guns, so i do know the good and the bad.

Now imagine you are Obama, or anybody fort that matter, growing up in Chicago. What is your exposure to guns going to be? Probably pretty negative for the most part. Growing up in the inner city where are you ever going to be exposed to anything else? You never see anything good where guns are concerned (even though the guns aren't really the problem).

You make some good points Bern. As one who WORKS in the inner city, and knows children who were killed by guns here, I see both sides of the coin. It's a Catch 22, it really is.

Everyone in my family (but me) owns a gun legally. I have hunters in my family, and my sister has her gun for safety issues.

I just think we need to give him a chance before we go into panic mode.

 

[Walt]

Obama has a contridictory stance on guns. On one hand he says he is behind the 2nd amendment. On the other hand he says he is behind a mayors right to ban guns from city limits. What? How can you be behind the 2nd and then say a mayor can override it?

 

[KGB]

Why don't you try and not get so hysterical and know that he's not going to take away your guns. How many times do I have to say this, unless you are a criminal you shouldn't have to worry.


Quit "jumping the gun" before anything happens.

so paying A LOT more (due to increased taxation) for ammo isn't a back handed attempt to ban guns....or better still, blaming gun manufacturers for a crime isn't a back handed attempt.....

 

[Chris]

Guns will never be banned here.

They should be sensibly regulated, however.

 

[Bern80]

Guns will never be banned here.

They should be sensibly regulated, however.

To an extent. The problem is there is a lot of wiggle room with the word 'sensible'. Based on his record, sensible to Obama is banning semi-autos (which would essentially ban most guns used for hunting), allowing communities to decide whether they want to ban guns, and makeing ammunition for guns outrageously expensive.

Based on that I would say Obama is rather disingenuous. No he may not ban guns, he just wants to make it nearly impossible to get one. There is nothing 'sensible' about Obama's record on guns.

 

[Annie]

Is the Obama team trying to figure out how far they can go, without alienating a lot of electorate?

Clayton Cramer's BLOG

 

[editec]

Little touchy are we?

Regardless, it doesn't matter whether you personally know a thousand people that were killed with a gun. To advocate for their control and/or restrictions based on that is an argument that comes from a purely emotional, void of logic place as clearly evidenced by how emotional you indeed got when called on it.

You can go fuck yourself, too lad.

That little gun queer just called me a liar.

I don't advocate gun control, you dipshit.

But you guns queers keep flailing at straw men of your own device for the same reason you live in fear.

Because you're cowards.

 

[Bern80]

You can go fuck yourself, too lad.

That little gun queer just called me a liar.

I don't advocate gun control, you dipshit.

But you guns queers keep flailing at straw men of your own device for the same reason you live in fear.

Because you're cowards.

And you've never called anyone a liar here have you. So one false statement (I guess it could be remotely construed that way) justifies you making one yourself? What strawmen am I flailing at exactley? What exactley is cowardly about my position?

I for one never called you a liar. I said you were touchy about the subject which says to me that those did indeed happen in your life. The problem with that is indeed your touchiness about it. People in general form irrational opinions about things when they experience traumatic or emotional events around those things. People have a friend killed on a plane so they start to fear all planes, illogical as that is given their safey record. This is exactley why I beleive Obama, and possibly you, are seeking greater regulation on guns. I would agree that there is a fear motivating my opinion on the issue. Fear of my rights being infringed upon. I believe, based on Obama's record, that said fear is logically founded. IMO opinion fear is also motivating Obama and perhaps yourself, I wonder how logical that fear is.

 

[LOki]

That little gun queer just called me a liar.

Between you and I, I'm certainly not the gun-queer here.

And I didn't call you a liar, I said you were being dishonest--and I demonstrated that you were.

 

[glockmail]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L3kMuN8sjk]YouTube - Criminals For Gun Control part 1 Home Invasion[/ame]

 

[DiveCon]

You can go fuck yourself, too lad.

That little gun queer just called me a liar.

I don't advocate gun control, you dipshit.

But you guns queers keep flailing at straw men of your own device for the same reason you live in fear.

Because you're cowards.

dude, chill out, you're looking like a moron

 

[PoliticalChic]

Just picked up my shotgun permit today! Now I need to go shopping...