Here’s why: You see, Mr. Big S, I’ve lived in many countries wherein firearms ownership was not anywhere near legal for the “proletariat”. I will never forget the folks laughing at my wife when she translated my question about handgun ownership in Kyrgyzstan…. They knew which end was up.

Having been in the Marine Corps, I understand that a bunch of radicals in the streets of LA aren’t going to do much in the face of combined arms. That being said, it is a healthy subtext to our elected officials to not push too far lest the owners of 240 million weapons come calling.

Watching the “Tulip” revolution in Kyrgyzstan (I lived in Bishkek and they set my apartment building on fire while we were in it recording license plate numbers), Akayev only left power because he’d stolen enough. When the people resorted to protesting the nest year against the new ruler Bakiyev, Bakiyev told them to f### off and they had no recourse, no way to stand up for themselves. The second amendment sets us apart from other countries because of the subtext – because it instills the basic fear in the government of facing retribution from a righteously angered populace. Throwing off the yoke of a government is no simple matter, but the means exist, and our forefathers sought ot ensure that right to succesive generations.

WHEN THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO FEAR OF THE POPULACE AND HAS A MONOPOLY OF FORCE, THE GOVERNMENT IS WITHOUT EQUAL AND MAY DO AS IT WISHES. Remember that.

mad saint jack on August 24, 2008 at 2:50 AM

Actual. The name “assault weapon”, was highjacked by the anti gun crowd. The banned weapons were semi-automatic weapons that are similar to a hunting rifle, except much less powerful, that look like military weaopns

Johan Klaus on August 24, 2008 at 12:48 AM

Big S 365 days a year 24 hours a day.

Sigh…

One more time from the top:

An Assault Weapon is not,

These three terms should not be used interchangeably by any one who wants to pass themselves off as competent on the topic of small arms. (And the BATFE does not fall into that category)

Back in the day they where so proud of their YouTube Debate.

You’d think they’d want to relive their glory days.

I disagree. The assault weapon ban is a very popular law. If this becomes the “gun control” issue of 2008, it will hurt the Republican nominee.

Big S on August 23, 2008 at 4:09 PM

Actual assault weapons, which are military weapons that are fully automatic or have a selector switch to select a fully automatic mode have been banned unless you have got a class 3 license. The Dems were banning weapons that looked like assualt weapons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlK7zl6jfXg

There has been much analysis concerning Barack choosing Joe Biden as his Vice President. In all seriousness, he just wants to show us gun owners how much he loves us. ……

I’m the guy that originally wrote the assault weapon ban…

I guess Obama just wanted to lose a few more gun owners.

People are going to be unhappy across the political board. God knows – unfortunately there are enough Republicans not happy with John McCain. But you can’t always get what you want but you sometimes get what you need, i.e., John McCain being the best candidate for right now at this point in our GOP history.

maybe Obama’s the racist one.

Chakra Hammer on August 23, 2008 at 8:00 PM

Gee…I thought that was common knowledge.

Huh, he wrote the 1994 gun ban. I didn’t know that. He’s a perfect fit for Barry O.

At least now I can quit worrying about BO ever becoming president.

darwin-t on August 23, 2008 at 7:45 PM

don;t you know typical white people clinging to their guns, religion and antipathy to people who aren’t like them..

So.. looks like Obama is in conflict with guns and religion, and is skeptical about white people.. maybe Obama’s the racist one.

Obama said that the D.C. handgun bad was constitutional.. and endorsed Illinois handgun ban..

Obama/Biden against the 2nd Amendment gun grabbers.

Obama said that the D.C. handgun bad was constitutional.. and endorsed Illinois handgun ban..

Obama/Biden against the 2nd Amendment gun grabbers.

At least now I can quit worrying about BO ever becoming president.

Big S on August 23, 2008 at 4:24 PM

Fortunately , the reason no real gun control is now on the table is because the SC has defined our rights as never before. What I find laughable is when I see someone say that gun control is a winning proposition and then post some serious numbers in that assertion. Even under only a cursory viewing of these numbers and the questions asked it’s shown that they’re contrived, for the most part, to indicate and support that assertion that we’re in favor of GUN CONTROL. This defies logic and reason.

73% say that the 2nd amendment guarantees our right to own

78% support the ban on assault weapons WTF ????????????????
Anybody have a problem with this?

I just spent the last half hour reading these polls. It’s as though the above response came from a question asked in two parts.
If the GANG down the street was threatening you …..with a rifle….
Would you support a ban on assault weapons?

And besides …does anyone know anyone who was polled on this or anything…ever?

Maybe, but how many of those who don’t care vote? Pro-2nd voters may be a vocal minority, but they’re a very politically active vocal minority.

doubleplusundead on August 23, 2008 at 5:22 PM

Plenty.

This ones easy the first 795 0bama picks said hell no!

Its’ darn hard to win a National election without the N.R.A.

doubleplusundead on August 23, 2008 at 5:22 PM

Bullseye.
Very few of those supporting more gun control consider it a high priority. But for many of us opposed to gun control it is a top priority, or even a “single issue” matter.
Given McCain’s weakness with the base, the Biden pick will increase turnout. It may only be a fraction of a percent, but every little bit helps, no?

Big S on August 23, 2008 at 5:10 PM

Maybe, but how many of those who don’t care vote? Pro-2nd voters may be a vocal minority, but they’re a very politically active vocal minority.