You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Good News, Obama not reinstating ban
- Thread starter warnerwh
- Start date
and anyone actually believes this
This is political speak. He is saying "I want to attack this problem in a different way." He means, "I really know what I want to do, get rid of all guns." He wants everyone to think he is going to try this approach and after a while will come back and say, "geez, we tried everything and the only solution left is to ban guns."
This is political speak. He is saying "I want to attack this problem in a different way." He means, "I really know what I want to do, get rid of all guns." He wants everyone to think he is going to try this approach and after a while will come back and say, "geez, we tried everything and the only solution left is to ban guns."
ThorntonMelon
New member
Thing is: That cuts both ways. Desperate times provoke people into providing for their own defense. The recent demand for guns and ammo isn't all from people that used to be gun-owners. A lot of it is people newly-purchasing the stuff. A recent Gallup poll indicated public support for gun control is lower than ever.
Support or no, ultimately it won't matter. The Dems control everything but the Supreme Court. And they're just one heart attack, stroke, or new tumor away from controlling that too. What kind of replacement do you think Obama will stick in there if the wrong one drops dead or retires? They'll package and sell their registration scheme to the public just like every other gun control measure that has ever been made law. And, like Romans at the Coliseum, the masses will cheer them for it.
The average American wants the gov't to do everything for them...we've created a culture of entitlement. And, as absurd as it is, the biggest thing that everyone seems to think they're entitled to is safety. We beg for it. Safer cars, safer medicine bottles, and the pills that go in them. Safer this and safer that. No one will lift a finger themselves, they'll just scream about it until some "savior" with an expensive suit, a smile, a teleprompter, and most importantly a personal agenda, stands up and says..."I will provide the safety that you seek." They never deliver, because it's impossible, but that is irrelevant. The promise alone is enough to satisfy the typical voter. Results don't matter as long as everyone feels better.
Pelosi and Holder will push for registration instead.
Pelosi has also shot down re-instating the ban. I don't think there were will be any new gun legislation, other than the supposed "Gun Show Loophole", passed until Obama makes his second term. Right now, the only thing they care about is votes.
Chipperman
New member
Results don't matter as long as everyone feels better.
Because it's much more important to FEEL safe than to actually BE safe. :barf:
PoorSoulInJersey
New member
Because it's much more important to FEEL safe than to actually BE safe.
funny. that's the same discussion going on under the Thread about why there is so much marketing for defense products these days....
Heepstress
New member
Assault? Tactical? All devices used in defense or offense or meat gathering is "TACTICAL"!
If a person has no intended tactic for defense, offense or hunting they will go unsuccessful!
Hotdogs, you have a good point. My personal reason for despising the term "assault weapon" instead of "tactical weapon" is the uneducated fear the ANTIs invoke with the word "assault". Is a firearm necessarily an assault weapon? Only when it's used for an assault. My tactic is to shoot it for fun, practice and self defense (hopefully not needed).
May I shine a big bright light here?
This is VERY good news. Look at the way the anti-gun talking heads are wording their responses. They are afraid of a repeat of the Clinton era reaction to the AWB, and they simply cannot afford that right now with everything on their plate. They cannot afford to lose control when most of what they're starting is going to take so long to come to fruition.
This gives us nearly 4 years to change the general public's opinion about gun control. This gives us nearly 4 years to make the term "assault weapon" meaningless, and educate them on the meaning of "semi automatic".
This is GOOD NEWS EVERBODY! It shows us that there is a core fear in approaching this situation. It shows us that the rhetoric that they so careless tossed around before is now being met with a huge brick wall of opposition.
Most of us are aggravated at how long it takes for an ordered gun to come in, and at how bare the shelves are of ammo, and even how hard reloading supplies are... THIS IS ALL GOOD NEWS, especially when combined with these statements. Watch the body language, watch their words, they are nervous about answering, and no where near acting. This means people who never owned a firearm previously is now joining our ranks. From the casual .22 father and son first timers to those like myself who have only recently entered the fold. The unavailability hints at an explosion of new gun owners. I point mostly to the recently high prices of .22 ammo and unavailability, as most new gun owners tend to start with the smaller,less scary calibers. Father and son stuff. It's aggravating personally, but very good news generally.
We have 4 years to change the tidal opinion, to open their eyes, to make it make sense to those who are completely removed from the concept.
And when I say them I do not mean Democrats, and when I say 4 years I do not mean ousting Obama. "Them" and "4 years" are our targets of education. I personally would like to see Obama have a second term, one that's influenced by the education he's received from conservatives and one that finds him with a new respect for the 2nd amendment. That's not said to stir controversy. I personally believe that any president, from either side, that is essentially fired by the people hurts America. I think that we can influence those that are out to hurt our rights, and if we cant, then we can invalidate their arguments.
4 years people. This can be done.
This is VERY good news. Look at the way the anti-gun talking heads are wording their responses. They are afraid of a repeat of the Clinton era reaction to the AWB, and they simply cannot afford that right now with everything on their plate. They cannot afford to lose control when most of what they're starting is going to take so long to come to fruition.
This gives us nearly 4 years to change the general public's opinion about gun control. This gives us nearly 4 years to make the term "assault weapon" meaningless, and educate them on the meaning of "semi automatic".
This is GOOD NEWS EVERBODY! It shows us that there is a core fear in approaching this situation. It shows us that the rhetoric that they so careless tossed around before is now being met with a huge brick wall of opposition.
Most of us are aggravated at how long it takes for an ordered gun to come in, and at how bare the shelves are of ammo, and even how hard reloading supplies are... THIS IS ALL GOOD NEWS, especially when combined with these statements. Watch the body language, watch their words, they are nervous about answering, and no where near acting. This means people who never owned a firearm previously is now joining our ranks. From the casual .22 father and son first timers to those like myself who have only recently entered the fold. The unavailability hints at an explosion of new gun owners. I point mostly to the recently high prices of .22 ammo and unavailability, as most new gun owners tend to start with the smaller,less scary calibers. Father and son stuff. It's aggravating personally, but very good news generally.
We have 4 years to change the tidal opinion, to open their eyes, to make it make sense to those who are completely removed from the concept.
And when I say them I do not mean Democrats, and when I say 4 years I do not mean ousting Obama. "Them" and "4 years" are our targets of education. I personally would like to see Obama have a second term, one that's influenced by the education he's received from conservatives and one that finds him with a new respect for the 2nd amendment. That's not said to stir controversy. I personally believe that any president, from either side, that is essentially fired by the people hurts America. I think that we can influence those that are out to hurt our rights, and if we cant, then we can invalidate their arguments.
4 years people. This can be done.
Acyually, we have more like 2 years. By April, 2001, the candidates for 2012 will be pretty much chosen. It's a forgone conclusion that Obama will get the Dem. nomination. There's no way that a radical socialist like Obama is going to suddenly embrace the 2nd amendment. It's more likely that He'll go in the other direction of new limits on gun and ammo sales and purchases. The Republican choice for their chosen candidate will play a huge role in whether or not an independent candidate has any traction.
I think that any push for new anti gun legislation will originate in the congress, and it won't happen until after the midterm elections, if it happens at all.
The last time the Dems pushed anti gun legislation the Republicans used it as a wedge issue to take control of the House and Senate. They maintained that control for 10 years until the Republican leadership squandered it by falling prey to the greed and avarice that they campaigned against in 1994.
In 1994 the Rep had Newt Gingrich leading the charge with ideas and an articulate vision. Niether party has that now and it has left a political vacuum. If the Reps can't stand FOR something soon, they will leave a huge opportunity for a 3rd party to fill that vacuum.
I think that any push for new anti gun legislation will originate in the congress, and it won't happen until after the midterm elections, if it happens at all.
The last time the Dems pushed anti gun legislation the Republicans used it as a wedge issue to take control of the House and Senate. They maintained that control for 10 years until the Republican leadership squandered it by falling prey to the greed and avarice that they campaigned against in 1994.
In 1994 the Rep had Newt Gingrich leading the charge with ideas and an articulate vision. Niether party has that now and it has left a political vacuum. If the Reps can't stand FOR something soon, they will leave a huge opportunity for a 3rd party to fill that vacuum.
ThorntonMelon
New member
Pelosi has also shot down re-instating the ban. I don't think there were will be any new gun legislation, other than the supposed "Gun Show Loophole", passed until Obama makes his second term. Right now, the only thing they care about is votes.
The woman went on ABC 4 days ago and announced "We want registration"...among other less than favorable firearms related restrictions. They're laying the groundwork right now...and they ain't gonna wait another 4 years to act on it.
Assault Weapon vs Assault Rifle
If found a recent documentary on the Battle of the Bulge interesting. It talked about a new rifle the Germans were issued. It was the M44, called by Hitler Sturngewehr. The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally meaning "storm rifle"), "storm" used as a verb being synonymous with assault, as in "to storm the compound".The Maschinenpistole 44, subsequently re-christened Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally is considered the first true assault rifle that served to popularize the concept.
Assault weapon is an American term generally used to describe weapons that look like military rifles with selectors that allow it to shoot fully automatic.
If found a recent documentary on the Battle of the Bulge interesting. It talked about a new rifle the Germans were issued. It was the M44, called by Hitler Sturngewehr. The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally meaning "storm rifle"), "storm" used as a verb being synonymous with assault, as in "to storm the compound".The Maschinenpistole 44, subsequently re-christened Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally is considered the first true assault rifle that served to popularize the concept.
Assault weapon is an American term generally used to describe weapons that look like military rifles with selectors that allow it to shoot fully automatic.
JustDreadful
New member
I also think this is good news. And remember Obama insisting during his campaign that he won't go after anyone's guns?
This is no reason for us to relax, let down our guard, stop paying meticulous attention. But the bad guys think they have to convince people they're not anti-gun. They're lying, of course, and they might claim that they're supporting some anti-gun legislation down the road regretfully, ruefully, sorrowfully, they never wanted it to come to this, but what choice did they have? It's for the children...
But the fact that they have to make the right noises shows where the issue stands.
This is no reason for us to relax, let down our guard, stop paying meticulous attention. But the bad guys think they have to convince people they're not anti-gun. They're lying, of course, and they might claim that they're supporting some anti-gun legislation down the road regretfully, ruefully, sorrowfully, they never wanted it to come to this, but what choice did they have? It's for the children...
But the fact that they have to make the right noises shows where the issue stands.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
They're laying the groundwork right now...and they ain't gonna wait another 4 years to act on it.
I don't know about that. Right now they don't have the votes unless the House and Senate leadership make it a priority and start twisting arms. If they do that, they are almost guaranteed to lose seats in the midterm elections and it still isn't all that clear they would get the votes they need - especially since the current Senate leadership needs NRA support in Nevada.
From a practical standpoint, it looks like the Dems can't do anything until after the midterm elections (and that assumes the midterms go their way). If that is the case, then the earliest they can even get started on legislation is February 2011. At that point, we're basically already in to the 2012 campaign.
Here is another little factoid to consider - Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania remain the key states to winning the national election. Pennsylvania has the highest per-capita NRA membership of any state in the Union. Ohio and Florida both have significant gun owner contingents as well. Obama picked up 37% of the gunowner vote in 2008 according to what I've read. Past unsuccessful Democratic candidates have done more like 31-33%.
I can't read the minds of the Democratic Party; but based on what I've seen, I am skeptical they will want to make gun control an issue that close to the 2012 elections and that will be the earliest practical opportunity they have to do it.
Of course, all of this assumes that gun owners stay active and vigilant and continue to write their Representatives and Senators and let them know their feelings. If we get apathetic or lazy, that situation can change pretty fast; but we have the power we need to stop any new gun control. Gun owners in Nevada or those who have Democratic Representatives who signed the Anti-AWB letter are especially helpful. Every one of your letters has about ten times the effect a letter to my Congresscritters would.
skydiver3346
New member
Bud Helms is right!
They are just putting it on the back burner for now. It will rear its ugly head again before long as this particular subject will always be a pet project for the antis.
p.s. The good part is: Will ammo maybe be a little easier to obtain from
now on?
They are just putting it on the back burner for now. It will rear its ugly head again before long as this particular subject will always be a pet project for the antis.
p.s. The good part is: Will ammo maybe be a little easier to obtain from
now on?
Kreyzhorse
New member
I'm not sure that this is either good news or bad news. I think all it really means is that the battlelines are still drawn and both sides are still dug in. Perhaps this maybe a truce, for now, but both sides will still be watchful.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
One hope is that with a period of inactivity - the battle lines pull back into fringe groups. The general public or the middle will accept the status quo and not want to engage in a culture war over something that seems to make no difference.
Not to start a war about the topic itself but I heard a right wing commentator having a major hissy about the states' that recently legalized gay marriage. He was terribly annoyed that there wasn't major uproar.
The host said that folks have looked at the issue and don't care anymore, there are other things to do. Maybe they don't like it personally but don't see it as an issue worth debate.
A period of inaction on the AWB may be the same phenomenon. Oh, here comes a fringe group ranting. The major players in the political organization don't want to open that can of worms and a once hot button issue fades except for the encapsulated fringe group on their own encapsulated media.
That's a hope, at least.
Not to start a war about the topic itself but I heard a right wing commentator having a major hissy about the states' that recently legalized gay marriage. He was terribly annoyed that there wasn't major uproar.
The host said that folks have looked at the issue and don't care anymore, there are other things to do. Maybe they don't like it personally but don't see it as an issue worth debate.
A period of inaction on the AWB may be the same phenomenon. Oh, here comes a fringe group ranting. The major players in the political organization don't want to open that can of worms and a once hot button issue fades except for the encapsulated fringe group on their own encapsulated media.
That's a hope, at least.