T Nation

Obama Seeks 'Assault' Weapons Ban


#1

... and there you have it.

Wasn't there a bunch of people in these forums who swore that this wasn't a concern of Obamas? That 'the gun nuts' were just over reacting? That people were crazy for even thinking that Obama cared about guns? That he wouldn't try to further infringe our 2nd Amendment rights?

Has it even been 100 days yet?

Funny how when you're really close to an issue you can just see these things coming from miles away.................

From ABC News (just so some wouldn't cry that this is FOX or NRA material)

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.

"As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.

Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S.

Full Story:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1


#2

Assault Weapons for Dummies:

http://www.mggraphics.net/pics/AssaultDummy.jpg


#3

I don’t agree with this. Although I doubt it, I hope there’s enough Republicans to block this.

I just cannot understand why Democrats are so anti-gun.


#4

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

I just cannot understand why Democrats are so anti-gun.[/quote]

Insurgents.


#5

Write/email/call your reps. I did this morning, even though I know all 3 of them will vote for a ban anyway.

A new ban, like the last one, isn’t gonna do shit to curb violence. If anything it’ll increase.


#6

[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
A new ban, like the last one, isn’t gonna do shit to curb violence. If anything it’ll increase.[/quote]

I love the administrations ‘logic’ for pursuing a ban.

“In order to curb violence from Mexican Drug Traffikers, we must restrict the rights of law abiding Americans”

Genius.


#7

Shouldn’t suprise anyone…except of course gun owners who voted for Obama.


#8

[quote]hedo wrote:
Shouldn’t suprise anyone…except of course gun owners who voted for Obama.[/quote]

Oh they know. That’s why the price on ARs, AKs, and parts and ammo have gone through the roof since November.


#9

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Doug Adams wrote:
A new ban, like the last one, isn’t gonna do shit to curb violence. If anything it’ll increase.

I love the administrations ‘logic’ for pursuing a ban.

“In order to curb violence from Mexican Drug Traffikers, we must restrict the rights of law abiding Americans”

Genius.[/quote]

It is completely logic-less. These motherfuckers come across the border and get at regular citizens with automatic weapons… no reason that you shouldn’t be allowed to respond in kind.

Amazing how the only motherfuckers allowed to have guns are the ones who getem illegally. I just don’t understand.


#10

And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?


#11

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?[/quote]

They are?


#12

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?[/quote]

Neither side of the aisle really wants to stay out of people’s business. They just pick and choose which liberties to attack.


#13

[quote]Sloth wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?

They are?[/quote]

I know you’re trying to be a smartass, but there is no arguing that the Democrats are far more “live and let live” then the GOP is.

The GOP would only approve certain positions in sex if you let them, the weird motherfuckers.


#14

Who is shocked by this?


#15

[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?

Neither side of the aisle really wants to stay out of people’s business. They just pick and choose which liberties to attack. [/quote]

Unfortunately, you are right. But the dems do it more.


#16

[quote]pat wrote:
Doug Adams wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?

Neither side of the aisle really wants to stay out of people’s business. They just pick and choose which liberties to attack.

Unfortunately, you are right. But the dems do it more.[/quote]

Bull-shit. Only on guns.


#17

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?

They are?

I know you’re trying to be a smartass, but there is no arguing that the Democrats are far more “live and let live” then the GOP is.

The GOP would only approve certain positions in sex if you let them, the weird motherfuckers.[/quote]

Well, what about freedom of association in regards to private entities hiring and firing? Don’t Democrats tend to use Government to dictate standards (their morality) onto people in this area? Or, how about the amount of time one spends working for the government (depending on the size of one’s tax burden) to fund redistribution programs based on moral principles (providing a safety net for the poor)? Heck, you have Democrats that want to dictate health-care for the entire nation! And liberals certainly do what they can to get their social views heard in local schools, to a captive audience. Democrats easily are as nosy and intrusive as any Republican.


#18

Democrats as social libertarians is a myth.


#19

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
pat wrote:
Doug Adams wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And besides that, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to keep the government out of private affairs, what with civil rights, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-legislating morality. How’s this fit in?

Neither side of the aisle really wants to stay out of people’s business. They just pick and choose which liberties to attack.

Unfortunately, you are right. But the dems do it more.

Bull-shit. Only on guns.[/quote]

Some of us consider sucking unborn babies into a garbage disposal to be rather anti-libertarian. For the murdered baby, that is.

You should be applauding this. Dear Leader is your man.


#20

It’s interesting to watch the progression of Eric Holder’s statements. Last week, he was criticizing whites for their racism. This week, he’s set about disarming them. Sure, he’ll disarm blacks and hispanics as well, but it’ll mostly be whites.