Obama and Gun Control: effective and Shrewd

MaverickNH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
5,477
Likes
4,062
Location
SoNH
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2010/12/barack-obama-and-gun-control-effective-and-shrewd/

David Kopel on Obama's gun control record to date

"During the 2008 election, many people warned that Barack Obama was hostile to Second Amendment rights. Two years into the Obama presidency, has the warning proved accurate? Yes, it has—but with the important caveat that President Obama, unlike President Bill Clinton, has been thrifty in his expenditure of political capital to advance gun control..."
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,691
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
Lot of truth to that to the idea that he's been active here, but done so quietly through appointments to the regulatory and judicial branch. The battle for the future is always more difficult to gauge and usually more important.

These people have no intention of upholding their oath to the Constitution - they are just regrouping to find another way to destroy it...

The attempt to do so through treaty is especially disconcerting in that it will add some volatile fuel to the civil war fire... So, far that's on the back burner, but the bottom line there is treaties are signed (but not ratified) that should be torn up and more are being negotiated that are clearly unconstitutional, counter to our national interests and all-around unacceptable on any terms...
 
Last edited:

pdm

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
10,510
Likes
2,375
Location
Taxachusetts
He won't have to pass gun control if he can regulate all facets of your activity through a health care takeover.
 
Rating - 96.8%
30   1   0
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
11,352
Likes
3,361
Location
Texas
This administration is the largest threat to individual American liberty we've seen in a very long time. This is the culmination of 100 years of collectivist thought.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
1,338
Likes
193
He won't have to pass gun control if he can regulate all facets of your activity through a health care takeover.

This.

Can you imagine if they made tobacco illegal? Neither could they. So they've made it all but impossible to afford.

Thats one of the directions that they seek to push gun control and anything else that they don't want you to have as well.

Alcohol and candy many other items will see the same fate if the health-care takeover comes to pass. And, although it will be done under the guise that it will make you safer and healthier, like the tobacco horror show, it will be done because government wants to control the health care and insurance industry, and it will force you to give up certain activities so that it can afford to do so.
 
Last edited:

cb1

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
1,010
Likes
159
Location
Southeastern MA
This.

Can you imagine if they made tobacco illegal? Neither could they. So they've made it all but impossible to afford.

Thats one of the directions that they seek to push gun control and anything else that they don't want you to have as well.

Alcohol and candy many other items will see the same fate if the health-care takeover comes to pass. And, although it will be done under the guise that it will make you safer and healthier, like the tobacco horror show, it will be done because government wants to control the health care and insurance industry, and it will force you to give up certain activities so that it can afford to do so.

I would actually take it further than that. If SCOTUS finds the individual mandate to be constitutional and that the commerce clause gives congress the power to regulate economic inactivity, then Congress will certainly be able to regulate the activity of buying and consuming everything and anything at all. Back door regulatory bans and increased taxes and fees on things like cigarettes won't be necessary.
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
7,311
Likes
561
Location
Ma.
I would actually take it further than that. If SCOTUS finds the individual mandate to be constitutional and that the commerce clause gives congress the power to regulate economic inactivity, then Congress will certainly be able to regulate the activity of buying and consuming everything and anything at all. Back door regulatory bans and increased taxes and fees on things like cigarettes won't be necessary.

This is what happens when your enemy is an ends justifies the means type of guy. In other words, they clearly do not care about the rule of law and will implement sneaky long and short term plans to get what they want.
 
J

Jose

Which is why it is key in 2012 to:

Make the Mack Daddy a one-termer

Strengthen the pro-freedom majority in the House and take the Senate back

Elect a pro-freedom (not pro business) president

Fire every single one of the Mack Daddy's political appointees
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,691
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
This administration is the largest threat to individual American liberty we've seen in a very long time. This is the culmination of 100 years of collectivist thought.
Goes back further IMHO to the European socialist movement that began in earnest with German thinkers who created the first "Social Security" system...

The ongoing "globalism" movement is a profoundly dangerous one because its outward appearance of promoting "free trade" and "universal human rights" appeals (on the surface) to a broad spectrum, but when you get down to the nuts and bolts of what they really want to do, its a genocide machine in the making...

We do not agree on BASIC human rights with Europeans. They do not accept the right to defend one's self against violent attack.

If we cannot agree on such a basic thing, we cannot have a common government. Any attempt on their part to force us to accept their (or a new common) governance when they do not respect such fundamental rights is unacceptable and an attempt to overthrow the US government as defined by the Constitution... Whether that is attempted from without by force or with help from within by treaty, the result is the same.
 

ochmude

Marine Veteran
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
6,315
Likes
1,799
Location
Yuma, AZ
Which is why it is key in 2012 to:

Make the Mack Daddy a one-termer

Strengthen the pro-freedom majority in the House and take the Senate back

Elect a pro-freedom (not pro business) president

Fire every single one of the Mack Daddy's political appointees

Okay, first you ditch the wheelgun and start carrying a fricken Glock. Then you recommend that someone attend an Appleseed. Now you're advocating the ballot box as a viable solution. What the hell, dude? Did someone hack Jose's account?
 
J

Jose

Make no mistake, there will be a revolt in this country if we do not change course.

Once that day comes all bets will be off.
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,691
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
Reasonable self defense to a clear and present danger is covered by law and this does include any appropriate means of defense.
The UK would say otherwise... They have literally prosecuted people for doing so in their own home...

Not only that, but saying I cannot own or carry a firearm, knife, mace, etc... is also depriving me of the right to defend myself as many of those who would pose this "clear and present danger" will be armed as well...

There are some European states which have varying views on the topic, but the UN and globalization crowd have made it clear their agenda is a disarmed public. So, you can put all the nice words around it you like, but if you disarm me, my right to defend myself is infringed.

Lastly, there is the more unpleasant (for the liberals) matter of the 2nd amendment also protecting my right to defend myself against a tyrannical state - there's nothing "clear and present" about that most of the time. It's a matter of the population rising up against its government if it ever came to that.
 
Last edited:

JuergenG

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,503
Likes
1,398
Location
3,660 miles East of Beantown
The UK is a different animal....

In Austria for example, "self defense" is an accepted reason for issuance of a firearms license. Not here, though.
Just 3 days ago there was an incident in Northern Germany in which a handicapped 77 y/o hunter shot one of the 5 intruders into his house dead. Unfortunately the perp had the bullet hole in his back, so this will likely get prosecuted. We'll see,how this will turn out.
 

pdm

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
10,510
Likes
2,375
Location
Taxachusetts
The UK is a different animal....

In Austria for example, "self defense" is an accepted reason for issuance of a firearms license. Not here, though.
Just 3 days ago there was an incident in Northern Germany in which a handicapped 77 y/o hunter shot one of the 5 intruders into his house dead. Unfortunately the perp had the bullet hole in his back, so this will likely get prosecuted. We'll see,how this will turn out.

"Don't run, you'll only die tired." [wink]
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,691
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
JuergenG, some light reading if you actually think the euro-socialist world driving globalization believes in a right to defend yourself (which BTW includes Australia and NewZealand now):

http://www.safe-nz.org.nz/carvellselfdefence.htm
safe-nz said:
In a recent UK case where an isolated farmer Tony Martin shot a thug who had repeatedly terrorized and assaulted him in his own home, police were asked the same question; what should someone in this same situation have done? “Shout loudly” was the best the Chief Constable could come up with.

There's a debate going on in the UK finally, but its too little too late since they are already unarmed:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2010/feb/02/self-defence-burglary-conservatives

Here's a messy one, but I can't fault the guy one bit...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/beds/bucks/herts/8413787.stm
Munir Hassian (from above) - freed, but after serving 30 months...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/p...r-hussain-freed-well-done-lord-chief-justice/

Here's some horse hockey for you describing the finer points of the rights of the home invader - some pretty words around your "rights" as a home-owner, but I think we've seen the courts view of this which is convict until there is public out-cry.
http://www.saferhouses.co.uk/what-rights-homeowner-intruders.html

Their version of "any appropriate means of defense" (your words) is a laughable castrated version of the right I enjoy - even in MA...

I'm glad to see some of them are starting to ask this question and in the last 5 years, there has been some progress (Italy, IIRC passed a self defense law), but too many European states still operate on the "state granted right" scheme which is unacceptable.

The state does not grant me rights, the Constitution guarantees the government will not infringe upon those rights which are inherent to my existence...
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,691
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
The UK is a different animal....

In Austria for example, "self defense" is an accepted reason for issuance of a firearms license. Not here, though.
Just 3 days ago there was an incident in Northern Germany in which a handicapped 77 y/o hunter shot one of the 5 intruders into his house dead. Unfortunately the perp had the bullet hole in his back, so this will likely get prosecuted. We'll see,how this will turn out.
It's not just the UK though, its also the rhetoric coming out of the UN...

p.s. there's also the non-trivial matter that in those nations that prohibit carry (concealed or otherwise), you can defend yourself all you like, but you will likely lose if your attacker(s) is/are armed...
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
12,482
Likes
2,378
Location
Let me check my GPS
Stop getting your knickers in a twist boys. There will be a Black Market for anything you desire. We folks that live on the borders will leave the Country and smuggle whatever you want back in and sell it to you AND we'll thumb our noses at .gov while we do it. You see .gov is impotent to stop us. Look at the Southern border and you'll start to get the picture.
 

JuergenG

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,503
Likes
1,398
Location
3,660 miles East of Beantown
It's not just the UK though, its also the rhetoric coming out of the UN...

p.s. there's also the non-trivial matter that in those nations that prohibit carry (concealed or otherwise), you can defend yourself all you like, but you will likely lose if your attacker(s) is/are armed...

Full ack on the U.N./IANSA and their anti-gun movement.
My comment was rather about defense in the home/on the own premises than carry.
The latter is a big no-no in most all European countries and will likely be for all eternity.
We're fighting to keep our guns first and foremost, before even thinking of carry for self-
defense which stands a snowball's chance in hell in this political climate.

Re "Their version of "any appropriate means of defense" (your words) is a laughable castrated version of the right I enjoy - even in MA... "
It's ridiculous in the UK, we know about that.
However, it's quite different in most of continental Europe.
 

ARV

Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
4,597
Likes
416
Location
Scotchtown NY
This.

Can you imagine if they made tobacco illegal? Neither could they. So they've made it all but impossible to afford.

Thats one of the directions that they seek to push gun control and anything else that they don't want you to have as well.

Alcohol and candy many other items will see the same fate if the health-care takeover comes to pass. And, although it will be done under the guise that it will make you safer and healthier, like the tobacco horror show, it will be done because government wants to control the health care and insurance industry, and it will force you to give up certain activities so that it can afford to do so.

Andd thats why I learned to brew my own beer, wine, etc.[smile]
 
Top Bottom