How big a political football will the Second Amendment be in the election? Update: More Obama gun nuance

posted at 11:19 am on February 22, 2008 by Allahpundit

Pretty big if the Messiah’s ascension continues:

In his answers to the 1998 Illinois State Legislative National Political Awareness Test, Obama said he favored a ban on “the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.”

By definition, this would include all pistols ever made, from .22 target pistols used in the Olympics to rarely-fired pistols kept in nightstands and sock drawers for the defense of families, and every pistol in between. Obama’s strident stand would also ban all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, whatever their previously legal purpose…

At no point [on his campaign site] does Obama recognize an individual right to own handguns, or explicitly recognize a right for Americans to use a firearm to defend themselves or others. The site explicitly states that Barack Obama recognizes civilian gun ownership for two just purposes, “hunting and target shooting.”

Once his prohibitive views of firearms ownership become known to America’s millions of gun owners, they may well decide that a gun-grabbing Barack Obama promises the kind of “change” that they can’t believe in.

Yeah, this is one of those issues that New Yorkers are conditioned to ignore but, thankfully, swing voters in Pennsylvania and Ohio aren’t. The problem in gaming it out is that the whole apple cart’s going to be upset in four months when the Supreme Court decides the D.C. guns rights case. Like I said when they granted cert, it’s going to be a thunderbolt, and whichever side loses will have an irresistible fearmongering talking point for the rest of the campaign — about a Mad Max militarized society if it’s the left or a fascist police state if it’s the right. Unless, that is, Justice Kennedy can come up with some sort of squishy compromise solution that pleases no one. Which he probably will, and then the whole issue will be folded into the importance of judicial appointments to overturn such a crappy decision. Fine by me; it’s easy content!

Update: If a burglar breaks into your home, steals your gun because it wasn’t “securely stored,” and then shoots someone with it, are you a guilty of a misdemeanor? No — in the realm of hope and change, you’d be guilty of a felony.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Guns haven’t been an issue in a while (since Democrats have figured out its a loser). This could be a fun election!

frankj on February 22, 2008 at 11:22 AM

I hope he does a John Kerry, dresses up like Elmer Fud in Ohio and Penn and does some photo ops shooting skeet…

jp on February 22, 2008 at 11:23 AM

jp on February 22, 2008 at 11:23 AM

“Can I git me a hunting license here?”

Brat on February 22, 2008 at 11:26 AM

I hope he does a John Kerry, dresses up like Elmer Fud in Ohio and Penn and does some photo ops shooting skeet…

jp on February 22, 2008 at 11:23 AM

He won’t (unfortunately). For such a relatively inexperienced politician, Obama is surprisingly careful and canny.

His wife, on the other hand….

aero on February 22, 2008 at 11:27 AM

Since it seems that states are going more and more to gun rights, like concealed carry, Castle Doctrines, and at least in MO loosened the purchasing paperwork, it may be harder than ever to run on a gun-control platform.

Plus, wasn’t that one of the reasons that the Revolution in 94 happened?

JamesLee on February 22, 2008 at 11:27 AM

jp on February 22, 2008 at 11:23 AM

“Uh, can I get me a huntin license here?”

John Kerry pretending to be a redneck. Man, was that funny.

MarkoMancuso on February 22, 2008 at 11:28 AM

Fine by me; it’s easy content!

Come on, Allah, Bros before prose.

liquidflorian on February 22, 2008 at 11:29 AM

A revolver is semi automatic in action. May as well go for it all. I imagine an exception will be made for Weathermen/MS-13 types.

a capella on February 22, 2008 at 11:30 AM

Someone posted the 7 stages of how to kill a democracy (or something like that) recently…it makes sense that taking away the population’s ability to protect themselves from a totalitarian government is an important part of the takeover.

So let’s review: the dems divide the population by blaming “the rich” for all the evils of the poor, they keep the poor impoverished through substandard education and make them a permanent underclass through entitlements and dependency, tax the working people to death so they have to work so much we don’t have time to pay attention to all that they do, then try to take away free speech through the fairness doctrine, then take away our guns.

Democrats = socialist overlords.

JustTruth101 on February 22, 2008 at 11:32 AM

What was funnier was the photo of Kerry trying to eat a cheese steak in Philly, looking like he was trying to eat a turd sandwich without getting any turd in his mouth.

Akzed on February 22, 2008 at 11:32 AM

Let’s see: the right to own guns was specifically put in the Constitution to give The People protection from Government. Obama wants change. He cannot get the change he wants if The People are able to defend themselves. Kinda reminds me of the early 1770′s.

William Teach on February 22, 2008 at 11:33 AM

I think Obama has a problem of consistency here. If he’s correct in stating that we’re sending our boys off to battle without weapons, we may need to return to the good old days when citizen soldiers were required to carry their own rifles to the muster point.

scatbug on February 22, 2008 at 11:34 AM

He’s partially retreated from the extreme anti-gun stance he had in Chicago, though he’s not exactly a 2nd Amendment activist, either. I’ve little doubt that he’d sign any anti-gun measure that crossed his desk though.

He’ll mostly get a pass, because he’s the Obamamessiah. I’ve already seen him state that gun ownership is an individual right, yet he supports the type of “common sense” restrictions that amount to registration (a necessary prelude to confiscation) and bans. Typical lefist doublespeak.

News flash, Obama: The 2nd Amendment isn’t about Bambi; if anything, the 2nd Amendment applies more to so-called “assault weapons” than it does to hunting arms. And unless you think that state and local jurisdictions have the right to pass laws violating the other 9 amendments of the Bill of Rights, they don’t have the right to violate the 2nd Amendment, either.

Hollowpoint on February 22, 2008 at 11:36 AM

It’ll go like this (if he gets in)..

1. Registration, license, training, certification, disassembly, ammunition ‘rations’.

2. Community based arms rooms. Permit to remove and transport to approved firing range. No personal ammo. Firing range issues and audits use.

3. Andy Taylor and Barney Fife kick in your door and hold Auntie Bee hostage until you surrender.

I hope Andy and Barney have insurance. Auntie Bee too.

Limerick on February 22, 2008 at 11:36 AM

Democrats = socialist overlords Liberal Fascist.

JustTruth101 on February 22, 2008 at 11:32 AM

fixed

jp on February 22, 2008 at 11:37 AM

i can at least understand wanting to put heavy restrictions on fully-automatic, minigun-type weapons, but a full ban on semi-automatics? that’s lunacy.

what do you want us to fight with, SPITBALLS!? /zell

locke on February 22, 2008 at 11:38 AM

He’ll mostly get a pass, because he’s the Obamamessiah. I’ve already seen him state that gun ownership is an individual right, yet he supports the type of “common sense” restrictions that amount to registration (a necessary prelude to confiscation) and bans. Typical lefist doublespeak

Yeah, I saw that too. Weak.

Just like in last night’s debate when he said he would meet any dictator, without preconditions…but of course only if the dictator met the right preconditions.

pseudonominus on February 22, 2008 at 11:42 AM

Not entirely surprising. My vote doesn’t count for much, but I’m going to cast it anyway.

Sure they can enact a gun ban. That doesn’t mean they’ll be getting my gun or the thousands of ammunition rounds.

Ultimately, there are too many Blue Dog Dems out there to let this happen. My opinion of course.

natesnake on February 22, 2008 at 11:43 AM

Mad Max militarized society

{sigh} all that leather….

Kini on February 22, 2008 at 11:43 AM

I still don’t get how allowing the people to be armed leads logically to “totalitarian police state.” But then, the American Left is not known for its cognitive ability.

q2600 on February 22, 2008 at 11:45 AM

Obama doesn’t need to hunt. He simply waves his hand and pheasant fall from the sky… happily… and with hope in their hearts.

Sugar Land on February 22, 2008 at 11:45 AM

Guess this means that B.O. can kiss that N.R.A. endorsement goodbye, huh?

pilamaye on February 22, 2008 at 11:45 AM

BTW, support your local NRA chapter. Most have annual banquets that are a lot of fun. Good food, good company, and the possibility of winning a fire arm in the raffle.

Ours is next week and attracts 500 people annually.

natesnake on February 22, 2008 at 11:46 AM

Sure they can enact a gun ban. That doesn’t mean they’ll be getting my gun or the thousands of ammunition rounds.

natesnake on February 22, 2008 at 11:43 AM

They can try. It will be an inevitability that people will begin “voting from the rooftops” if it does occur. A lot of people know what happened in New Orleans, and their veneer about not fighting troops in such a situation is wearing thinner and thinner.

MadisonConservative on February 22, 2008 at 11:47 AM

I suppose Hillary the Duck Killer would be better?

She’s nursing some major grudges against the military, so I suspect she’ll try to disarm them as well.

When guns are illegal, only Hillary’s bodyguards will have guns.

Hope. Change. Catastrophe.

MrScribbler on February 22, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Attrition is the first goal. No manufacturing. Parts break or wearout. Ammo ages. Re-loading equipment possession will be a felony.

The 2d Amendment issue is huge. It might not happen overnight, but let Obama pick the next 3-4 supremes and you might as well start learning how to throw rocks effectively.

Limerick on February 22, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Also, let me point out that there are a few loons in the NRA. Loons as they may be, the NRA carries the biggest stick of all the pro-gun lobbies.

You don’t bring a beagle to a dog fight.

natesnake on February 22, 2008 at 11:49 AM

One of the reasons I kept saying Romney had to get his sh*t together on Second Amendment issue when he was still running. It’ll be a big issue because a lot of pro-2nd people are nervous that the Dems are gonna win and impose a bunch of abusive bans and regulations on owners.

And yes, gun rights issues will absolutely hurt Obama in PA, the state is solidly pro-Second (except for the Portal to Hell, AKA Philly), there are a lot of hunters and shooters here, including a number of working class Dems.

doubleplusundead on February 22, 2008 at 11:52 AM

What numb-nuts like Obama neglect to accept, is that even in countries with a 100% gun ban, there are still armed robberies and murder.

“Gun Bans” work about as well as “Gun Free Zones.”

natesnake on February 22, 2008 at 11:54 AM

And yes, gun rights issues will absolutely hurt Obama in PA, the state is solidly pro-Second (except for the Portal to Hell, AKA Philly), there are a lot of hunters and shooters here, including a number of working class Dems.

doubleplusundead on February 22, 2008 at 11:52 AM

Wisconsin has just as many hunters, if not more. Plenty of working class Dems as well. Meanwhile, you can’t open carry in Madison or Milwaukee without a hassle from the cops, and we’re one of the two states left without concealed carry.

Here’s hoping your state can pick up the slack.

MadisonConservative on February 22, 2008 at 11:54 AM

Everybody is scared of Obama.

Paper tiger. Mark my words.

Saltysam on February 22, 2008 at 11:56 AM

What was funnier was the photo of Kerry trying to eat a cheese steak in Philly, looking like he was trying to eat a turd sandwich without getting any turd in his mouth.

Akzed on February 22, 2008 at 11:32 AM

I think I heard that moron tried to order swiss on his cheesesteak! BWAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!

doubleplusundead on February 22, 2008 at 11:56 AM

Saltpeter/Potassium Nitrate right now about $4 a lb.
Sulfur right now about $3 a lb.
Charcoal.

75%/10%/15%, combine with brass and lead. Don’t forget to garnish with a primer cap. Crimp firmly, but gently, before serving. Store in a cool/dry place.

Limerick on February 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM

I wonder if the anti-gun Dems will figure out that when the guns get banned, your friendly neighborhood gang members still won’t have a problem getting assault rifles and hand guns.

Nah, I don’t think they’ll figure it out, either. Because facts and truth don’t matter.

wherestherum on February 22, 2008 at 11:59 AM

His wife, on the other hand….

aero on February 22, 2008 at 11:27 AM

I’d be interested in seeing Michelle O. in hunting gear. Hilarious.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on February 22, 2008 at 12:00 PM

Sure they can enact a gun ban. That doesn’t mean they’ll be getting my gun or the thousands of ammunition rounds.

Ultimately, there are too many Blue Dog Dems out there to let this happen. My opinion of course.

natesnake on February 22, 2008 at 11:43 AM

They ain’t getting mine, either.

They know they can’t get away with passing a broad, strict ban in one swoop- their stategy has been an incremental one to be done over a long period of time. Keep in mind that the anti-gun types have been active for decades and will be for decades to come- if it takes 25 years to get their way, they’ll do it.

1. Ban import and manufacture of “assault rifles” for civilian use. To help get it passed, have allies in media shine a spotlight on every crime committed in the country in which such a weapon is used. Most people don’t own one, so they’ll let it slide- after all, it doesn’t affect them.

2. Implement some kind of backdoor “common sense” registration scheme on new guns sold. Can be sold as merely a measure to track guns used in crime or conduct background checks. Most people won’t object too passionately- they have nothing to hide, right?

3. Expand #1 to include pistols, extend “assault weapon” ban to prohibit ownership. Gain passage by grandfathering in weapons currently owned, subject to registration. They’re not actually confiscating existing guns, so no harm, no foul.

4. Use registration lists to start collecting guns from owners. Wait until a high profile shooting occurs to garner support, and compensate owners financially.

5. Apply #4 to handguns.

6. Require registration of “riot shotguns” (Mossberg 500 duck gun) and “sniper rifles” (Remington Model 70 deer rifle).

7. Enjoy socialist utopia!

Hollowpoint on February 22, 2008 at 12:02 PM

MadisonConservative on February 22, 2008 at 11:54 AM

I think our state has a D+ from the Brady Bunch, so we’re pretty good when it comes to gun rights, but that’s a test I’d really like to see us fail. I really need to either go to an NRA class or have my grandfather teach me to shoot properly.

doubleplusundead on February 22, 2008 at 12:04 PM

I still don’t get how allowing the people to be armed leads logically to “totalitarian police state.” But then, the American Left is not known for its cognitive ability.

q2600 on February 22, 2008 at 11:45 AM

Especially since one of the first things Hitler, Lenin, etc. did was ban gun ownership.

Kowboy on February 22, 2008 at 12:05 PM

So if I go to jail for bearing arms does that make me a political prisoner? You know, one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist? Can I apply to the ACLU or HRW for help?

Limerick on February 22, 2008 at 12:06 PM

Whadda ya want? Hell In Chik-a-go, only the crooks are allowed to have weapons.

And yes, that includes the cops.

mojo on February 22, 2008 at 12:18 PM

Note to self and/or the rest of America: 1)Get gun before election. 2)Hide it.

CP on February 22, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Bans can be instituted quickly and effectively. Australia did it with draconian penalties for noncompliance. They may have also had registration data, but compliance was accomplished by giving citizens an unpalatable choice. It doesn’t require a masterlist of ownership. Just major penalties if you are caught with a gun. I also doubt people will start shooting from rooftops in disapproval. Real life choices are different than imaginary ones.

a capella on February 22, 2008 at 12:21 PM

Note to self and/or the rest of America: 1)Get gun before election. 2)Hide it.

CP on February 22, 2008 at 12:19 PM

No point trying to hide it from the Obamessiah. He is omniscient, after all.

phronesis on February 22, 2008 at 12:21 PM

I still don’t get how allowing the people to be armed leads logically to “totalitarian police state.” But then, the American Left is not known for its cognitive ability.

Erm, that’s what you get when you don’t allow the people to be armed. That’s the talking point the Republicans can use if the Supreme Court decides against the Second Amendment.

Mark Jaquith on February 22, 2008 at 12:22 PM

Note to self and/or the rest of America: 1)Get gun before election. 2)Hide it.

CP on February 22, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Note to self and/or the rest of America: FFL gun dealers are required to fill out a form when you buy a weapon, listing basic identification information, most of what is on your driver’s license. What happens to these forms? Well, the FFLD keeps them on hand, until he dies or his business is closed down. Where do they go at that point? They are seized by the ATF.

So, in essence, there already is a registration system in place. All it takes is authority to legalize the cataloguing of those records.

In other words…

1) Get gun before election, but only from a gun show or face-to-face personal purchase.

2) Hide it.

3) Get cheap gun from dealer.

4) Give cheap, recorded gun up when they come for it.

MadisonConservative on February 22, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Or when they come looking for your gun, tell them you sold it face to face to someone, but you didn’t keep records.

Snake307 on February 22, 2008 at 12:45 PM

This just in from the NRA:

http://www.nraila.org/pdfs/KempthorneRTC.pdf

And a “score” for the great Commonwealth of Virginia:

Virginia House of Delegates Passes Critical Right-to-Carry

Reform Legislation!

Please Contact Your Delegate and Thank Him or Her for Supporting SB436 and SB476!

Earlier today the House of Delegates passed two critically important self-defense measures by overwhelmingly bipartisan majorities. Senate Bill 436, sponsored by Senator Jill Vogel (R-27), and Senate Bill 476 sponsored by Senator Emmett Hanger (R-24), are now heading to Governor Tim Kaine (D) for consideration. SB436, which passed in the House of Delegates 69 to 29, will allow law-abiding, non-concealed carry permit holders to store a handgun in a locked compartment or container in their personal vehicles or boats. SB476, which passed 62 to 36, will allow restaurant owners to decide if they will allow concealed carry permit holders to carry in their restaurants.

Both of these bills represent significant advances in an ongoing effort to protect and enhance Virginia’s self-defense statutes. Please call and thank your Delegate if he or she voted for these important self-defense bills, and also please contact Governor Kaine and strongly encourage him to sign both of these measures into law! To contact your State Delegate click here, and to contact Governor Kaine please click here.

bernzright777 on February 22, 2008 at 12:49 PM

Guns haven’t been an issue in a while (since Democrats have figured out its a loser). This could be a fun election!

frankj on February 22, 2008 at 11:22 AM

Yep. Wanna fight over gun control? Bring it on!

petefrt on February 22, 2008 at 12:52 PM

There will be a fight.

Second Amendment an individual right

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide D.C. v. Heller, the first case in more than 60 years in which the court will confront the meaning of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Although Heller is about the constitutionality of the D.C. handgun ban, the court’s decision will have an impact far beyond the District (“Promises breached,” Op-Ed, Thursday).

The court must decide in Heller whether the Second Amendment secures a right for individuals to keep and bear arms or merely grants states the power to arm their militias, the National Guard. This latter view is called the “collective rights” theory.

A collective rights decision by the court would violate the contract by which Montana entered into statehood, called the Compact With the United States and archived at Article I of the Montana Constitution. When Montana and the United States entered into this bilateral contract in 1889, the U.S. approved the right to bear arms in the Montana Constitution, guaranteeing the right of “any person” to bear arms, clearly an individual right.

There was no assertion in 1889 that the Second Amendment was susceptible to a collective rights interpretation, and the parties to the contract understood the Second Amendment to be consistent with the declared Montana constitutional right of “any person” to bear arms.

As a bedrock principle of law, a contract must be honored so as to give effect to the intent of the contracting parties. A collective rights decision by the court in Heller would invoke an era of unilaterally revisable contracts by violating the statehood contract between the United States and Montana, and many other states.

Numerous Montana lawmakers have concurred in a resolution raising this contract-violation issue. It’s posted at progunleaders.org. The United States would do well to keep its contractual promise to the states that the Second Amendment secures an individual right now as it did upon execution of the statehood contract.

BRAD JOHNSON
Montana Secretary of State

Oops.

old trooper on February 22, 2008 at 1:02 PM

The first try at gun control:

This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future.”

-Adolph Hitler 1935

Another quote I like is “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I don’t remember who said that, though.

dentalque on February 22, 2008 at 1:10 PM

When … when … when … the State makes the possession of a firearm illegal – when … when … when the State requires all possessors of firearms to turn them in, or be subject to imprisonment – the State will finally comprehend the TRUE meaning and purpose of the Second Amendment.

My greatest fear, however, is that each successive generation of Americans – starting in elementary school – will be taught that the possession of any firearm is indicative of an anti-social personality and, therefore, that said person is abnormal, e.g. the little boys who have already been suspended from school for DRAWING a firearm.

My fear – is that the Second Amendment will die – without even a whimper.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 22, 2008 at 1:11 PM

dentalque on February 22, 2008 at 1:10 PM

Here are a couple of others:

Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?

If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.

Joseph Stalin.

Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA – ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.

Heinrich Himmler.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 22, 2008 at 1:15 PM

I wonder how the farmers and shopkeepers in Lexington and Concord would have done pulling their permits and licenses out of their wallets and petitioning King George to give them the key to the ‘people’s armsroom’?

Limerick on February 22, 2008 at 1:20 PM

The daily, “It’s Racist To Run Against Obama”….

Pensito Review

Peggy Noonan Uses Ebonics to Describe Michelle Obama

The offending quote:

I wonder if she knows that some people look at her and think “Man, she got it all.” Intelligent, strong, tall, beautiful…

http://www.pensitoreview.com/

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 1:28 PM

1) The Supremes are faced with either confirming the individual interpretation (AKA the “Standard Model” according to many if not most scholars), or being publicly caught in a lie.

I have said for years that the left has to give up the revisionist fantasy – if you want to get rid of the 2nd, you HAVE to amend the Constitution, or the Constitition literally becomes meaningless.

2) Anti-self-defense = pro-criminal. There isn’t a way around it, if you restrain the victim it directly helps the perpetrator.

3) dentalque – that’s a bogus quote. I really, REALLY wish people would stick to the absolutely enormous body of fact on this subject and not keep repeating urban legends. It just muddies the entire damned argument. This quote has been known as bogus since just about the day it first surfaced.

http://www.ccrkba.org/pub/rkba/general/BogusAntiGunQuotes.htm

Merovign on February 22, 2008 at 1:30 PM

Or when they come looking for your gun, tell them you sold it face to face to someone, but you didn’t keep records.

Snake307 on February 22, 2008 at 12:45 PM

By that time they would have implemented a registration system that makes it illegal to sell to a private party without updating registration records.

Hollowpoint on February 22, 2008 at 1:31 PM

Why is it that politicians like Obama don’t know the difference between a “power” and a “Right”? We the People have Rights hence the Bill of Rights applies to THE PEOPLE which Senator Obama doesn’t seem to grasp or care about. The govt has powers and it already has the power to arm itself (create an army) as granted elsewhere in the Constitution (Art 1, Sec 8 I believe).

Yakko77 on February 22, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Unless, that is, Justice Kennedy can come up with some sort of squishy compromise solution that pleases no one. Which he probably will, and then the whole issue will be folded into the importance of judicial appointments to overturn such a crappy decision.

Good analysis. We don’t know what the court will do. There could be no majority opinion. Or if there is a majority opinion, it might skirt the issue. But thanks for publicizing what an anti-gunner Obama is.

SECOND LOOK AT NOT STAYING HOME IN NOVEMBER

bigbeas on February 22, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Ooops

Just click on the text for the link

dentalque on February 22, 2008 at 2:14 PM

From.My.Cold.Dead.Hands.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on February 22, 2008 at 2:26 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0B_UZNtEk4

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on February 22, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Someone posted the 7 stages of how to kill a democracy (or something like that) recently ….

I don’t have “seven stages”, but to create a police state, the state needs:

1. Citizens who obey state decree without question
2. Citizens who are dumbed down and can not think critically
3. Citizens who look to the state for solutions to their problems
4. Citizens that prioritize their loyalty to the state, not family, community or self
5. Citizens that look the other way or deny abuses by the state on the people
6. Citizens who inform on others for committing acts unapproved by the state
7. Over whelming bureacracy of the state in its executive, judicial and legislative branches
8. Crisis, whether real or percieved, to obtain additional control
9. Disarmament

This country is well on its way.

The anti-gun crowd seems to think that Americans will go the way of law abiding Australians or Brits, and turn in their firearms. ome will. I really doubt the majority will.

Where the “Civil War” in our country was not fought over the control for the government (i.e., the South suceded, the North attacked), I think gun-control is an issue where we might possibly see a real civil war arise. How big or small I don’t know, but I enjoy my liberty and I will die free, not a slave.

AZ_Redneck on February 22, 2008 at 2:40 PM

So does this dufus want us all to own flintlocks now?

sabbott on February 22, 2008 at 3:25 PM

The site explicitly states that Barack Obama recognizes civilian gun ownership for two just purposes, “hunting and target shooting.”

So if a criminal with a gun breaks in, you just keep dodging the bullets `til the police show up?

ThePrez on February 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM

Hollowpoint on February 22, 2008 at 1:31 PM

Yeah, if they decided to take a run at this, they will have anticipated all the pre-emptive moves. As I said above, they don’t need a list. A 20 year jail sentence plus a ruinous fine if a citizen is caught in possession or lying about ownership, will do the trick nicely. Just a simple yes-no question for you to answer should separate things out quite nicely. And, a shiny, new bureacracy to handle it all,..think Human Rights Commission in Canada.

a capella on February 22, 2008 at 3:38 PM

The site explicitly states that Barack Obama recognizes civilian gun ownership for two just purposes, “hunting and target shooting.”

Go figure. Just like the Nazi’s in the 1930′s.

AZ_Redneck on February 22, 2008 at 4:19 PM

bernzright777 on February 22, 2008 at 12:49 PM

Boo-yah. Dirk Kempthorne has always been a good guy when it comes to these types of issues. I lived in Boise while he was mayor, and in Idaho for most of his term as Governor before I relocated to PRK. Nobody’s perfect, but he’s a good one to have at the Federal level.

steadyrock on February 22, 2008 at 4:20 PM

“hunting and target shooting.”

How about “in order to form a well armed militia”? Can we please make it a requirement that the read the constitution if they are going to run for president?

ericire12 on February 22, 2008 at 4:35 PM

They can’t take over America if they can’t take our guns! They will not stop until they do….

build the wall on February 22, 2008 at 8:39 PM

So…your SW .45acp is inherently unsafe, but Bill Ayers is ok with a pipe bomb in the Pentagon…do I have that right?

Jaibones on February 22, 2008 at 9:53 PM

So, according to Obummer, a weapon used for self-defense doesn’t fit into his two-point program (hunting and target shooting)?

And what does he mean by “semi-automatic”?

(A revolver “automatically” moves the bullet chamber toward the hammer, which would “technically” mean there is a “semi-automatic” loading process going on, only “mechanically” different from a recoil-chambering, clip-loading pistol, so, by his “logic” only a two shot derringer or muzzle loader would be “legal“.)

This is one dangerous simpleton.

profitsbeard on February 23, 2008 at 1:22 AM

Update: If a burglar breaks into your home, steals your gun because it wasn’t “securely stored,” and then shoots someone with it, are you a guilty of a misdemeanor? No — in the realm of hope and change, you’d be guilty of a felony.

Welcome to Canada. Seriously.

emmaline1138 on February 24, 2008 at 2:09 AM

It’s too bad Canada has become SO socialist.

But there are some US Gun laws that will get you 10 years in pound you in the A55 prison, where in Canada, it’s fine such as barrel length on a rifle.

A 10 inch barrel on a rifle in the USA is “NFA” where it must be registered with the BATFE. Fingerprints, background check, forms signed by your Chief of Police, 60 day wait, and a $200.00 TAX on the registration. Some states make it illegal to possess even. However in Canada it’s fine.

Countries like ( Just guessing ) Sweeden, norway maybe, make Firearm suppressors (Silencers as hollyweird calls them) as common as a box of ammo on the shelf and completely unrestricted. It’s considered RUDE to not use a sound suppressor in some places. However in the USA, they are again ” NFA ” devices and must be registered, and are illegal in a few states in the USA.

The point is, people who advocate restrictions on firearms make no sense and usually attempt to justify it based on the reasons why firearms need to be AVAILABLE.

It’s like school safety. That’s a big deal in the USA of course, which is why there is a fire extinguisher in the hallways of schools. In the name of safety, there should ALSO be a cabinet in the hallways which contains a shotgun for any number of trained adults to have access to. Maybe the tag on it should read ” IN CASE OF MURDERING IDIOT ENTER CODE “.

tx2654 on February 27, 2008 at 7:29 PM