Owning a gun a disqualification in Obama administration

posted at 9:18 am on November 21, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

If a job application included a question about religion, especially for a government position, First Amendment advocates would rightly go ballistic.  The ire of Second Amendment activists is easily understood, then, arising from the questionnaire prospective Obama administration employees must complete.  The 59th question demands to know whether the applicant or anyone in his/her family owns a firearm, a sign of the hostility we expected to see towards gun owners from Barack Obama:

But even some Democrats and transition experts are baffled by the inclusion of the question.

Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.” …

It’s just one question on a lengthy personnel form — No. 59 on a 63-question list — but the furor over the query is a vivid reminder of the intensity of support for Second Amendment rights and signals the scrutiny Obama is likely to receive from the ever-vigilant gun lobby.

Obama’s transition team declined to go into detail on why they included the question, suggesting only that it was done to ensure potential appointees were in line with gun laws.

Oh, I get it.  Rather than just ask the traditional question about prior convictions, Team Obama wants to proactively ensure that their applicants don’t break laws.  Will we see questions like this?

  • Do you have children?  Please list proof that you haven’t beat or molested them.
  • Do you have pets?  Please list proof that you have them spayed or neutered.
  • Do you have alcoholic beverages in your house?  Please list proof that you’re not an alcoholic.
  • Do you have satellite television service?  Please list proof that you don’t buy pay-per-view porno or professional wrestling.

No, of course not, nor should we … well, perhaps except for the professional wrestling question, but we’ll work on that later.  Team Obama isn’t interested in enforcing gun laws through job applications.  They don’t want gun owners working in the administration, and they’re screening for that right up front.

Gun ownership is a constitutional right.  Employment discrimination on that basis should be illegal.  It certainly should be exposed so that we can get a sense of how the man who will swear to protect and defend the Constitution plans on doing either for the entire Constitution.

Will a religious test come next in the Obama vetting process?


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

johnnyU on November 21, 2008 at 10:19 AM

Oy

Squid Shark on November 21, 2008 at 10:30 AM

Please explain to me how Obama’s alarming fear of guns and gun ownership is any different than the paranoid fear of most “conservative” Republicans regarding “illicit” drugs. NEWSFLASH: There is no difference.

sayabule1 on November 21, 2008 at 9:35 AM

When the time comes. And people get so fed up with ones with your mentality. Where will you go? How will you protect yourself? Being stoned out of your mind? You will live being hopeless, defenseless. Not a way to live.

sheebe on November 21, 2008 at 10:34 AM

The Feds already are compiling a data base on ownership….

Before deploying overseas my son is allowed to store his personal possessions at Uncle Sugars expense. All boxed up nice and neat and waiting for him to come home.

Firearms are included in that offer by Uncle Sugar….BUT each and every firearm must be photographed and registered into a Federal data base. That was why he opted to put them in my gun safe instead of Uncle Sugar’s loving care.

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Do you have any evidence this is in fact the case? Or are you just surmising it from the fact the question is being asked? That’s quite a leap in logic.

I think it’s a dumb question too, but I doubt anyone who states they have .22 in the closet their Dad passed down to them is going to be disqualified.

JaHerer22 on November 21, 2008 at 9:31 AM

Fascinating. You take Ed to task for taking a “leap in logic” when he asks if it is a disqualifier to own a firearm. Then you turn around and without any evidence to back it up you surmise that Obama wouldn’t disqualify on that basis. If Ed’s leaping here you are right beside him.

highhopes on November 21, 2008 at 10:41 AM

#75 Have you ever used tobacco, cigars in any way, cigarettes, chewing tobacco or bongs?
Do you have a pack on you now and could I bum one as I have quit smoking.

dragondrop on November 21, 2008 at 10:43 AM

What is the purpose of registration?

An honest question to the gun control folks out there. What is the registration list for? Why is the Federal government so interested in who owns firearms and where those firearms are likely to be stored?

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 10:45 AM

“…and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage…”

That’s why you have to keep the dang things locked up. They can jump up and cause personal injuries if you don’t watch them every minute.

Just like that alcohol in the cabinet jumps out and gives me a headache sometimes.

Mini14 on November 21, 2008 at 10:45 AM

what else could this question be used to conclude about someone?

palefaced on November 21, 2008 at 10:49 AM

Seriously, though, I have NEVER understood the reason for requiring a permit to own a gun. We don’t require permits for speech or to exercise any other right. Why so for a firearm?

AW1 Tim on November 21, 2008 at 10:30 AM

I agree with you, I have never understood that either.
However, I did state in the states that is needed, Obama didn’t want to produce a questionnaire for each state.
BTW, I think in every state that does not insist on a permit, and in every state where ownership is not infringed on…each of those states are at the bottom (the good bottom) with you in the stats.
And the areas that are the most restrictive have the highest…chicken or the egg, or no balance of power…

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 10:50 AM

what else could this question be used to conclude about someone?

palefaced on November 21, 2008 at 10:49 AM

You obviously have not read through the thread…plenty of reasons to have this question other then banning.

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 10:51 AM

Ask Condi Rice and her minister dad about gun ownership. She tells how they had to form their own neighborhood patrol at night to keep KKK types from molesting the residents. The police would not / could not protect them. For many Black Americans a firearm was their only protection in the time of real discrimination. This is why we were given a second amendment right (not privilege) to own guns–we had very wise framers of the Constitution.

John Bibb

rocketman on November 21, 2008 at 10:52 AM

Isn’t Hillary a hunter? Doesn’t she own guns? I seem to remember her pandering about that back in the primaries.

JonPrichard on November 21, 2008 at 10:58 AM

This is why we were given a second amendment right (not privilege) to own guns–we had very wise framers of the Constitution.

John Bibb

rocketman on November 21, 2008

This may seem like a quibble but we aren’t GIVEN a right to bear arms by the Constitution. We were born with that right. The Constitution was written to keep government from infringing on our God given rights.

JonPrichard on November 21, 2008 at 11:01 AM

Here’s a link for the questionnaire.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13apply_questionnaire.pdf

nwsseeker on November 21, 2008 at 11:02 AM

Owning a gun a disqualification in Obama administration.

Shouldn’t there be a question mark at the end of that? While I completely agree that it is improper to ask questions about gun ownership of job applicants and that it should be illegal, it seems premature to conclude that no one who owns a gun will be hired.

Buy Danish on November 21, 2008 at 11:05 AM

The only reason I can come up for this question is that Obama is planning a raft of new oppressive gun restrictions, and when he unveils them he doesn’t want to hear screams of hypocrisy when someone finds out that the father of a prominent cabinet member has a firearm museum in his basement.

Socratease on November 21, 2008 at 11:07 AM

If a job application included a question about religion, especially for a government position, First Amendment advocates would rightly go ballistic.

A job application at McDonald’s maybe. But it’d be perfectly normal to ask a question like this if you were hiring an in-home nanny or live-in housekeeper. You could even specify a religion if you wanted.

Is this what I want him to require for his staff? Hell no. Do I think he’ll do everything in his power to ban gun ownership? Unfortunately, yes. But I’m pretty sure he’s within his rights here.

Also? If he were a Republican, and he would only hire people who did own guns, this thread would have 623,451 comments, all of them cheering wildly. (Ok, one of them might be me.)

Tanya on November 21, 2008 at 11:14 AM

Owning a gun a disqualification in Obama administration.

Shouldn’t there be a question mark at the end of that? While I completely agree that it is improper to ask questions about gun ownership of job applicants and that it should be illegal, it seems premature to conclude that no one who owns a gun will be hired.
Buy Danish on November 21, 2008 at 11:05 AM

Agreed.

If the headline is a question, then it’s accurate. In other words, the truth. If it is presented as a statement of fact, then it is not accurate. In other words, a lie. Or misleading.

wise_man on November 21, 2008 at 11:17 AM

That’s O.K., I didn’t want a job in the Obama administration anyway. Besides, my state doesn’t have firearms registration.

TooTall on November 21, 2008 at 11:21 AM

Here’s a link for the questionnaire.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13apply_questionnaire.pdf

nwsseeker on November 21, 2008 at 11:02 AM

Interesting. What does it say next to #31? Is it “Clinton” or am I projecting?

Tanya on November 21, 2008 at 11:22 AM

Just like that alcohol in the cabinet jumps out and gives me a headache sometimes.

Mini14 on November 21, 2008 at 10:45 AM

I hate it when that happens.

DaveC on November 21, 2008 at 11:22 AM

Guess i better go buy some more to help my local dealer.

HOOKEM1 on November 21, 2008 at 11:25 AM

Hmm. Thinking about how I would answer.
“Well, yes. My father owns some guns. One of them, a Lugar, he brought home from Europe when he was over saving the world from people who would insist on asking questions like this.”

kurtzz3 on November 21, 2008 at 11:27 AM

The entire ‘questionnaire’ is a set up. A total set up.
Months from now when B Hussein has some very shady and radical people on his staff throughout the White House, he will remind everyone…
” They were fully vetted, remember you all made such a big deal out of our questions?”…
and the money quote here:
“Like I always said, everyone has been fully vetted”
.
Obambi and the Bitter Half can then sneak just about anyone onto the payroll.

shooter on November 21, 2008 at 11:28 AM

Here’s a link for the questionnaire.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13apply_questionnaire.pdf

Are ALL of the questions typical? The gun question is bad enough, but some of the others are equally disturbing!

They seem to want to “vet” people much more than his highness himself. Who came up with this? Do you realize somebody has to verify all 63 answers!

tru2tx on November 21, 2008 at 11:30 AM

Q : Provide proof that you have a brain. (I know it is hard to do, if you are a democrat but try).

Fuquay Steve on November 21, 2008 at 11:38 AM

Obambi and the Bitter Half can then sneak just about anyone onto the payroll.

shooter on November 21, 2008 at 11:28 AM

No doubt…CYA (CYBA)

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 11:50 AM

The country elected him and you get “what you pay for”. This doesn’t help the almost 50% who didn’t want him. This “vetting” paperwork is just the tip of a very bad iceberg.

duff65 on November 21, 2008 at 11:51 AM

Was Baracked elected the mommy in “The Christmas Story”.

“You’ll put your eye out!”

Bush was the daddy in the Christmas Story, now it’s time for mommy obambi to take charge.

Instead of Mao suits we’ll all be wearing pink bunny suits.

NoDonkey on November 21, 2008 at 11:52 AM

Isn’t this technically an application for a job with the Federal government?

This questionnaire asks so many inappropriate questions that, in any other situation, it’d be a lawsuit waiting to happen.

JadeNYU on November 21, 2008 at 11:53 AM

What’s Hussein going to do w/ Biden?

Doesn’t he own a shotgun?

rightwingmom on November 21, 2008 at 11:53 AM

One other question may be (referring to the new posts on voting).
Do you know any Lizard People?

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 11:54 AM

What’s Hussein going to do w/ Biden?

Doesn’t he own a shotgun?

rightwingmom on November 21, 2008 at 11:53 AM

Not go hunting with him, that’s for sure…

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 11:55 AM

“Isn’t this technically an application for a job with the Federal government?”

If so, wouldn’t there be a question related to whether people who advocate the violent overthrow of the United States government, are among your associates?

So how did Barack get hired?

NoDonkey on November 21, 2008 at 11:56 AM

Just because one doesn’t own guns doesn’t automatically mean one is anti Second Amendment. In NYC very few could own guns but there are still a substantial number who are pro Second Amendment.

eaglewingz08 on November 21, 2008 at 12:00 PM

Just got off the phone with my AR dealer. Current waiting period is 9-16 weeks FOR PARTS. DPMS, btw, has a 26 week warning message to on-line customers. Model I Sales, 12 weeks. Rock River and SOG the same (right now).

It is a good time to be a chrome-moly supplier.

Damn, there just went another $350 redistributed to a needy business owner. I figure those ‘parts’ will be worth $750 by March.

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 12:01 PM

Q: What’s the difference between Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney?

A: When Sarah Palin shoots something, it don’t get back up.

Wyznowski on November 21, 2008 at 12:06 PM

Question: Do you eat turkey at Thanksgiving?
/sarc

Seriously, though, I agree with the folks who think these questions (re gun ownership) are probing on gun registration and usage. I would assume there are also questions about driving, DUI’s, etc.

Y-not on November 21, 2008 at 12:09 PM

Wow…

Two points…

1. I wish we could get Obama to fill this out… its asking the questions the media should have been during the election cycle.

2. This is NOT going to be used to disbar most Dems from getting hired, this is going to be used to get the dirt on them, to control them. The questions are SO invasive that if you answer honestly, and are not a 12 year old Boy Scout singing in the church choir, you will be giving whoever holds these dirt on yourself.

Romeo13 on November 21, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Damn. . . There goes my dream job in the BO administration.

DuctTapeMyBrain on November 21, 2008 at 12:14 PM

The question shouldn’t have been there. Period.

Ryan Gandy on November 21, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Please explain to me how Obama’s alarming fear of guns and gun ownership is any different than the paranoid fear of most “conservative” Republicans regarding “illicit” drugs.

Drugs are illegal.

angelat0763 on November 21, 2008 at 12:20 PM

They don’t want gun owners working in the administration, and they’re screening for that right up front.

…well, at least they’re honest and thorough totalitarians…the sloppy ones are so outre’….

…were there questions about NASCAR, beer, pickup trucks or bib overalls? “Are you now or have you ever been a person who owns a gun rack?”

…that’s OK…the Brooks-approved Ivy Leaguers who’re queuing up to be little Sturmbahnfuehrers in the Obama Reich seldom own guns…they have armed guards….

Puritan1648 on November 21, 2008 at 12:25 PM

Is this questionnaire available online for the public to view? I’d really like to see what other questions are on there.

gxpgxp on November 21, 2008 at 12:26 PM

Obama won’t work with anyone who owns a gun but will happily work with someone who plants bombs in a war against America. Savor the irony.

Tantor on November 21, 2008 at 12:26 PM

Damn. . . There goes my dream job in the BO administration.

DuctTapeMyBrain on November 21, 2008 at 12:14 PM

…mine, too….

I was angling for a job in State…ambassador to the rest of the United States….

…I speak fluent Redneck….

Puritan1648 on November 21, 2008 at 12:27 PM

Instead of Mao suits we’ll all be wearing pink bunny suits.

NoDonkey on November 21, 2008 at 11:52 AM

Damn. I really had my eye on a Mao suit for Christmas this year!

Badger40 on November 21, 2008 at 12:28 PM

Obama’s transition team declined to go into detail on why they included the question, suggesting only that it was done to ensure potential appointees were in line with gun laws.

Your headline: “Owning a gun a disqualification in Obama administration”

Pathetic.

Grow Fins on November 21, 2008 at 12:28 PM

The only reason I can come up for this question is that Obama is planning a raft of new oppressive gun restrictions,

Perhaps this is just to ensure that he isn’t taken out by his own appointees. After all, Vince Foster and Ron Brown thought that they were safe until they conveniently went room temp.

highhopes on November 21, 2008 at 12:29 PM

Grow Fins on November 21, 2008 at 12:28 PM

What part is pathetic, the headline? Why so? Why is it critical to find out whether potential appointees are in line with gun laws? What’s pathetic is the way the Obama people are trashing the Constitution months before the bastard even takes office. Obama may have won the election but a military-hating, terrorist sypathizing, racist, socialist will never be my President.

highhopes on November 21, 2008 at 12:32 PM

Before some of you (including Ed) do a hysterical “Andrew Sullivan” thing over the gun question, realize that Obama is asking applicants 61 other questions. Applicants must include any e-mail that might embarrass the president-elect, along with any blog posts and links to their Facebook pages. They must also list all aliases or ‘handles’ they have used to communicate on the Internet, so that probably disqualifies (because of potential embarassment) all of us that post here.

See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/us/politics/13apply.html.

jim m on November 21, 2008 at 12:32 PM

Conspicuously absent from the questionnaire is anything about building bombs that have been the cause of personal injury or property damage.

So, you know, Bill Ayers is covered.

JohnTant on November 21, 2008 at 12:32 PM

Here is a questionnaire:

Multiple Choice:

kayo on November 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM

Is this questionnaire available online for the public to view? I’d really like to see what other questions are on there.

gxpgxp on November 21, 2008 at 12:26 PM

Here’s a link to the full questionnaire.

Although I think the gun questions are not all that insidious, I do think it’s really ironic that Obama has not come close to being vetted to the level that his appointees will be.

Y-not on November 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM

Gun Owner

Victim

Sorry about the break….

kayo on November 21, 2008 at 12:34 PM

Actually, the Ayers thing is caught by questions 46, 61 and 63 of the questionnaire.

jim m on November 21, 2008 at 12:37 PM

Why so?

Because the headline claims something that isn’t true (ironic really, considering I see lots of talk about how the ‘right deals in facts, the left in emotion’ round these parts). Ed doesn’t know that “owning a gun [is] a disqualification in Obama administration,” yet his headline asserts that as a fact.

In actuality, “Obama’s transition team declined to go into detail on why they included the question, suggesting only that it was done to ensure potential appointees were in line with gun laws.”

And highhopes. Sorry, the Constitution suggests that actually, yes he is your President. Funny thing, democracy.

Like I said, pathetic.

Your headline: “

Pathetic.

Grow Fins on November 21, 2008 at 12:37 PM

This rivoting testimony is five years old, but still one of the best I’ve seen watching a lady explain to a senate panel what the 2nd amendment means to the people. It’s around 8 minutes long, but well worth the watch.

Rovin on November 21, 2008 at 10:14 AM

Great link. I had not seen that before.

Although I am a big second amendment guy, and have carried for years, I have tried to remain objective in reference to what Obama will try and do. I think the only thing that is for sure is the assault weapons and high cap magazine ban. I think you can take that to the bank. He might try some type of tax surcharge on weapons and ammo, but I don’t think that will fly. There is no way he will attempt to confiscate weapons, not unless he truly wants to turn millions of Americans into instant criminals, or an actual revolt.

kam582 on November 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM

And highhopes. Sorry, the Constitution suggests that actually, yes he is your President. Funny thing, democracy.

Like I said, pathetic.

Nope. I recognize the bitter bastard’s position in the government but the man will never have my support because there isn’t one thing the man stands for that represents my views. I will fight the bastard tooth-and-nail and work tirelessly to minimize the damage he and his supporters can do over the next four years.

I predict that ultimately the bastard will be drummed out of office in disgrace or impeached because of outrage when he does things like attempt to get rid of the second Amendment. Obama doesn’t even come close to representing the core values of most Americans. What is pathetic is useless tools like you propping up an unfit public official.

highhopes on November 21, 2008 at 12:44 PM

Ed doesn’t know that “owning a gun [is] a disqualification in Obama administration,” yet his headline asserts that as a fact.
Grow Fins on November 21, 2008 at 12:37 PM

I agree with you about the interpretation of the gun questions, but dwelling on Ed’s headline, which I took to be intended to generate comments on this thread, seems like a waste of time. Ed’s headline is no worse than CNN’s headline on the Bush “snub” piece.

Headlines are for generating traffic.

Y-not on November 21, 2008 at 12:45 PM

Haven’t read all of the posts on this thread yet, but, you people with concealed carry permits will be the first ones they come to for their guns. Know who you are, where you live, and what kind of a gun you have.

cjs1943 on November 21, 2008 at 12:47 PM

“Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.” …

Bwahahahahaha!!!!

Does the questionnaire cover saline solutions, nail bombs, and car bombs?

Good God….these people are absolutely evil to the core of their black hearts.

csdeven on November 21, 2008 at 12:47 PM

“What is pathetic is useless tools like you propping up an unfit public official.

-Glad to know that you think 53% of the US is pathetic.

——————————————-
Y-Not, the problem I have with our good host is that he was sloppy. It would have taken Ed one Google search to actually turn up the questionnaire and see that the gun question was just one question on it. And the apparently intent of most of those questions is to try to figure out if applicants have any embarrassing skeltons in their closet that could be used against them. Ed used to be careful and well balanced, and I at least enjoy reading Ed for the carefully considered weighing and fact research he goes through when coming to an opinion. He seems to have lost that in this article. JMHO.

jim m on November 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM

kam582 on November 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM

What is an assault weapon?

Prior to the NFA full auto weapons required a FFL. After NFA they still required a FFL. So what did the NFA do to classify a weapon as an assault weapon?

1. Bayonet lug
2. Flash suppressors
3. Folding or collapsable stock
4. Magazine capacity

Now the vogue is to call semi-auto “automactic weapons“. Lever actions and pumps can’t be far behind.

As for that ‘tax’ on guns and ammo, how does a 500% ammo tax sound. It only drives a $300/1000 round can price to $1800. You are right about confiscation, they won’t try it.
They are going to try to rust your guns into oblivion.

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM

“I’m with the government, and I’m here to help…………………. by the way, do you own a gun?”

Seven Percent Solution on November 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

gxpgxp on November 21, 2008 at 12:26 PM

Here’s a link to the full questionnaire.

Although I think the gun questions are not all that insidious, I do think it’s really ironic that Obama has not come close to being vetted to the level that his appointees will be.

Y-not on November 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM

Thanks much!

gxpgxp on November 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM

I’m not sure who came up with this questionairre, but I can say that it is considerably more involved than a SF-86. And if I were applying for a job for the President-Elect and had to fill out a questionairre that is considerably more invasive than the one used to determine someones’ worthiness for a government clearance, I would damn sure want to know why.

Spc Steve on November 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Y-Not, the problem I have with our good host is that he was sloppy. It would have taken Ed one Google search to actually turn up the questionnaire
jim m on November 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM

OK, jim, I (reluctantly) agree with you. I found a bit of sloppiness lately in several posts, including the global warming study “headline” post yesterday.

I guess that after the election traffic is down because some of us are pretty depressed about the outcome, so I’m inclined to give Ed and Allah a bit of leeway for the time being.

Y-not on November 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

-Glad to know that you think 53% of the US is pathetic.

Well since you’re playing games with words and punctuation, shouldn’t that be 53% of the popular vote, not 53% of all Americans? 53% of the US is a far larger number than the total of stupid idiots who voted a terrorist-loving, military-hating, Constitution loathing, bastard like Barak Hussein Obama into office. Therefore, I have contempt for a portion of Americans far smaller than 53% of the total population.

53% of the US didn’t vote for Obama you worthless troll.

highhopes on November 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

53% of the US didn’t vote for Obama

Maybe not, but 100% of zombies did!
/sarc

Y-not on November 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM

You are absolutely right, the assault weapons ban was just a feel good thing that Clinton got through. The average Joe has no idea what an assault weapon actually is, and some anti-gun fools will try and say that my 10-22 is an assault weapon.

Maybe I wasn’t clear, I am totally against a bill such as that, and have already taken care of what I think is coming as far as my personal inventory. However, it is coming, and I don’t think we will be able to stop it.

I’m not so sure about the tax you wrote of, as I also think, well maybe hope, that the incoming crowd will want to be reelected in 4 years, and if they overreach they will soundly be defeated.

Not sure what’s wrong with me today, I am usually not this hopeful as far as politics are concerned.

kam582 on November 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

kam582 on November 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

No problem here, kam. I took from your post that you didn’t support the NFA. I guess I have a itchy trigger finger when it comes to the lets-give-em-a-chance crowd. Like I’ve said many times, sidewinder, diamondback, timber. Same pig, different lipstick.

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Before some of you (including Ed) do a hysterical “Andrew Sullivan” thing over the gun question, realize that Obama is asking applicants 61 other questions.

jim m on November 21, 2008 at 12:32 PM

…ah…the self-appointed voice of calm….

…isn’t it nice that one became available, lest we all rush off, hyperventillating, expressing ourselves willy-nilly….

…the point is, Mr. M, that having that 1 of 61 questions on among the 61 questions is indicative of a mindset….

…and, seeing the lefties, and the neo-lefties like Brooks, all gushing about how smart and sharp and open-minded Mr. O’s new team is (and remembering that the same paeans were sung back in ’93, when Mr. Clintons crew showed up in DC the first time)…well…being a bit gun-shy is justified….

…but, you go talking down to us, Mr. M…what did you answer for quesiton 59?

Puritan1648 on November 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 1:06 PM

You’re right about that, they are all the same. Off my game today, I usually expect the worst, that way I am seldom taken by surprise.

kam582 on November 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

So Obama’s grand plan is to have all employee’s
de-armed!

Interesting,what about if your a sport shooter,
or a hunter,or a gun collector,or want to exercise
your constitutional right to bear arms!

This is UN-AMERICAN!
——————————————————

So,the only people Hopey wants around him,is defenceless
co-workers,

and ARMED,

“NATIONAL CIVILIAN SECRUITY FORCES”,

that probably have to swear Loyality to Barack Obama!!!!

canopfor on November 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

What is an assault weapon?

Prior to the NFA full auto weapons required a FFL. After NFA they still required a FFL. So what did the NFA do to classify a weapon as an assault weapon?

1. Bayonet lug
2. Flash suppressors
3. Folding or collapsable stock
4. Magazine capacity

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM

You left out one…forgetting an anniversary or your wife’s birthday.

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

forgetting an anniversary or your wife’s birthday.

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

LOL…I’m in big trouble then because my anniversary IS my wife’s birthday!

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 1:11 PM

You left out one…forgetting an anniversary or your wife’s birthday.

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Did that once, and only once mind you. No fire coming out, but a lot of ice.

kam582 on November 21, 2008 at 1:11 PM

What scares me most about Barak Hussein Obama is the truly cult-like defenders he has amassed. They don’t give a damn about the Constitution or the Office of the Presidency, they are supportive of an individual who has a history of supporting terrorists, racists, felons.

This skewed loyalty is not good for America.

highhopes on November 21, 2008 at 1:12 PM

I HAVE GUNS! I HAVE NO PERMITS OR REGISTRATIONS! I DON’T HUNT! I LIVE IN TEXAS! like our 1835 battle flag says: COME AND TAKE IT!

Javiel20 on November 21, 2008 at 1:19 PM

187. Do you have a valid birth certificate? If so, please supply a certified copy of the long form. If you do not have a valid birth certificate, that’s ok too

entagor on November 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM

I don’t have a gun, and neither do my wife and kids. We have a burglar alarm instead. I did have a BB gun and a C02 powered BB pistol as a kid, though. (No, I didn’t shoot my eye out).

In any event, I’m sure I’d be disqualified as a potential source of embarassment because of the things I’ve written here…..

1 of 61 questions does not evidence a mindset, BTW. You need to read all the questions to figue out the mindset.

jim m on November 21, 2008 at 1:21 PM

Please explain to me how Obama’s alarming fear of guns and gun ownership is any different than the paranoid fear of most “conservative” Republicans regarding “illicit” drugs.

There’s nothing in the Constitution about having the right to bear bongs.

Jim Treacher on November 21, 2008 at 1:22 PM

What is an assault weapon?

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM

…in Special Forces light weapons training, they taught me that the standard definition of that term was a selective-fire military firearm…selective fire meant that it would fire both semi- and fully automatic, not semi-automatic only….

…the confound-the-rednecks lobby has since fallen back on other tactics and verbiage, such as:

* “military-style guns”
* “guns with high-capacity magazines”
* “military-style guns with high-capacity magazines”

…and the ever-popular:

* “guns which scare me, in the hands of people who don’t agree with me, which they don’t need because I said so….”

…they also seem to refer to hunting a lot, as if that is the one and only reason for ever owning a firearm…I wonder if these same people think that skiing is the only reason to justify there being hills in winter….

…this perverse calculation sort of justifies, in some folks addled mindes, the exclusion of firearms with bayonet lugs…personally, I’d've taken the bayonet lug off of military service firearms 40 years ago…and, if I want to bayonet a deer, that’s my business….

…heavens above…people hunt with atlatls….

…the problem ultimately is cultural….

…you see, there’re folks who can’t (read: “won’t”) understand why anyone would want to own a gun, except that they have incompletely evolved minds and/or black hearts, and might one day plan to use it to make them, the enlightened ones, sad….

…and on the other hand, there’re people who take the Constitution literally, and can’t see any reason why they would have to justify a right to anyone…it’s either a right or it isn’t. Either we’re citizens or we’re subjects…the government is a servant or a master…you can continue this comparison from here….

…so, it’s a cultural thing, wrapped in pretty political paper….

Puritan1648 on November 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM

I HAVE GUNS! I HAVE NO PERMITS OR REGISTRATIONS! I DON’T HUNT! I LIVE IN TEXAS! like our 1835 battle flag says: COME AND TAKE IT!

Javiel20 on November 21, 2008 at 1:19 PM

You still care about 1835? Really? Incidentally, Texas had a much lower margin for McCain than a lot of other Southern states. I am not saying they should have voted for Obama, but I really do feel that a lot of folks in the so-called Bible belt need to educate themselves a bit more (take courses in UT Austin, maybe) so that they are more versed with the issues of the day.

Cheers,
The Family Guy.

peter_griffin on November 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Owning a gun = bad
Making bombs to kill soldiers and civilians = no biggie

Maybe he won’t care as long as you’ve owned your gun since back when he was 8 years old.

Scrappy on November 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM

LOL…I’m in big trouble then because my anniversary IS my wife’s birthday!

Limerick on November 21, 2008 at 1:11 PM

You’re the gift that keep on giving…and giving…and giving…

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 1:30 PM

1 of 61 questions does not evidence a mindset, BTW. You need to read all the questions to figue out the mindset.

jim m on November 21, 2008 at 1:21 PM

…oh…that’s quite incorrect….

…you can tuck a turd in an encyclopedia volume, hoping to hide it, and you’ll even find that you’ll fool the mass of Obama voters…”What’s that smell?”…”Shut up and keep reading!”….

…but someone brought up an interesting point: there’s applying for a job on the transition team, and then there’s applying for access to federally-mandated sensitive material. Will this be two forms, or will this turd-in-an-encyclopedia be the only one?

It’s not as simple as all that…you see, many in government are granted access by virtue of their positions…never having to fill out all that pesky paperwork we mere peasants had do…I remember it taking a week to find all the addresses, phone numbers, etc. to fill out my first background check paperwork…and typed my fingers numb to fill out my periodic reinvestigation paperwork….

…makes one think….

Puritan1648 on November 21, 2008 at 1:30 PM

Please explain to me how Obama’s alarming fear of guns and gun ownership is any different than the paranoid fear of most “conservative” Republicans regarding “illicit” drugs. NEWSFLASH: There is no difference.

sayabule1 on November 21, 2008 at 9:35 AM

The drugs are illegal. They impair ones judgment and senses. The guns are legal. They do not impair ones judgment and senses.

It’s very simple.

Theophile on November 21, 2008 at 1:35 PM

jim m:

I don’t need to read 61 questions to understand The Con Man of the Year.

And I wish that the Republican Party (if not the voters)could discern how our beloved country is becoming a hybrid of Western Europe and the (Third) Emerging World.

Let us pray for Phillip Berg and a new Republican leader.

IlikedAUH2O on November 21, 2008 at 1:35 PM

You still care about 1835? Really?

…I really do feel that a lot of folks in the so-called Bible belt need to educate themselves a bit more…so that they are more versed with the issues of the day.

Cheers,
The Family Guy.

peter_griffin on November 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

…it’s amazing…they say that you can’t communicate nuance using plaintext, but this fellow managed…he was able to communicate smell, as well….

…proves my earlier point: cultural differences….

…on the one hand, you have the smarmy, self-fascinated folks who favor Obama, who think themselves smarter than the rest of the supposedly unwashed and evidently under-informed and barely-educated masses….

…and, on the other hand, you have citizens who take the Constitution literally, and think themselves free…and do remember and care about 1835…as well as 1776…1787…and loads of other dates which stress the attention spans of self-worshipping socialists….

“Molon labe!”, said Leonidas…sort of the point Mr. Javiel was making…and, no, I’m referring to the movie with Mr. Butler…good movie, that, but I’m reaching back a bit earlier….

Puritan1648 on November 21, 2008 at 1:37 PM

You left out one…forgetting an anniversary or your wife’s birthday.

right2bright on November 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

…the article under consideration was “assault weapon” or, I would assume, “assault style weapon”….

…you’re leading us into a discussion of “weapon of mass destruction”…that for another day….

Puritan1648 on November 21, 2008 at 1:41 PM

“I really had my eye on a Mao suit for Christmas this year!”

Sorry, the required wear for the Obama Nation is the pink bunny suit with big silly ears and furry feet.

Ralphie’s mommy is President now and momma Obama says “You’ll shoot your eye out”.

The nanny state is in full force. So no complaining you bitter clingers, or AG Holder will wash your mouth out with soap.

NoDonkey on November 21, 2008 at 1:44 PM

Please explain to me how Obama’s alarming fear of guns and gun ownership is any different than the paranoid fear of most “conservative” Republicans regarding “illicit” drugs. NEWSFLASH: There is no difference.

sayabule1 on November 21, 2008 at 9:35 AM

I would just like to see one way that, even if the latter part were accurate, they would be the same. Can you please explain that?

Mini14 on November 21, 2008 at 1:46 PM

Limerick:

If Puritan 1648 knew anything — he could tell you the real definition of an Assault Rifle.

He seems to be better at knocking gun owners like some liberal from Massachusetts who spent his time in Special Forces…mmmmmm..maybe like Kerry did in Vietnam..but I don’t know if he was even in or the greatest.

Anyway:

Assault rifles are short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachinegun and rifle cartridges.” — Plagarized from Wikipedia with thanks to them!

Rapid Fire and a cutdown (less powder behind the bullet) cartridge so you don’t loose control of it with its rapid fire and a hard recoil.

BTW I wonder if The One would hire me? I guarantee he doesn’t have one like me working there. Diversity.

IlikedAUH2O on November 21, 2008 at 1:48 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4