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.