DNC director: Obama still wants the assault-weapons ban reinstated; Update: AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, says Obama

posted at 9:17 pm on July 25, 2012 by Allahpundit

Via the Weekly Standard, I can’t decide if this is newsworthy or not. It’s like when O says he wants to close Gitmo. On the one hand: Hmmm! On the other hand: Meh. It’s not happening, so who cares? The only reasons it’s interesting are (a) at this point, given how jittery Dems are about alienating rural voters in purple-blue states like Pennsylvania, it’s surprising to hear them make even a rhetorical concession to gun control and (b) this isn’t what Jay Carney said a few days ago when reporters pressed him during the gaggle.

[CARNEY:] I don’t have any — the Department of Justice can provide more details in terms of some of the steps that we’ve taken involving making higher quantity and quality of information available in background checks, and other measures they’ve taken which I know they can provide to you, working with law enforcement agencies. But the President’s view is that we can take steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them under existing law. And that’s his focus right now.

QUESTION: In terms of like assault weapons or something like that, there’s no renewed push for a renewed assault weapons ban?

MR. CARNEY: Well, as you know, there has been opposition to that since it expired within Congress, and I think — I wouldn’t argue with your assessment about that. So the President is focused on doing the things that we can do that protect Second Amendment rights, which he thinks is important, but also to make it harder for individuals who should not, under existing law, have weapons to obtain them.

Does that contradict what Gaspard says here? They’re both realistic about the chances of a new AWB making it through Congress, i.e. zippo, so Carney’s giving the pragmatic take to reassure gun owners and Gaspard’s giving the in-a-liberal-utopia take to placate their base (a little). In fact, the more I think about it, the more I like the Gitmo analogy I used up top. Like Gitmo, this was an issue about which O talked tough during his campaign and in the early days after he was elected. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress; if the political will was there on their side, they could have rammed it through. But Obama realized quickly that it wasn’t, so his spokesflacks started backing away from it even as gun-control diehards like Eric Holder continued to say as recently as February that the administration supports reinstating the assault-weapons ban. (The new ban wouldn’t apply to the ATF’s shipments of assault weapons to Mexican drug cartels, I assume.) This is the compromise they’ve settled on, I guess — occasional lip service to the AWB as required while staying scrupulously far away from it in practice so as not to make life more difficult for their caucus. As I say, newsworthy or not?

Update: Via Mediaite, here he is tonight at the National Urban League more or less supporting Gaspard’s point but being far smarter rhetorically about it. Most voters don’t know what an “assault weapon” is; it’s a gassy term that plays into fears that any new gun regs will be used to target a broad class of weapons. By singling out AK-47s, he reduces that risk.

Belated exit question: Who said this? “There are differences between myself and the NRA.” Hint: Not Obama, although that statement certainly applies to him too. And in case you’re wondering why any candidate would say that right now, read this.


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

rayra on July 25, 2012 at 9:43 PM

…oh oh!…meth head!

KOOLAID2 on July 25, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Don’t they publish exactive minimum lengths for barrels ?

listens2glenn on July 25, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Yes, the barrel length cannot be less than 18 inches or the gun’s overall length less than 26 inches, 26 U.S.C. § 5845, without being registered and a tax paid first, 26 U.S.C. §§ 5801- 5872.

The maximum sentence for each violation is 10 years.

Resist We Much on July 25, 2012 at 10:02 PM

The only business that is booming world wide right now is the sale and distribution of AK-47. The same AK-47 that fired in Libya are now firing in Syria. They skipped Egypt because they have US made M-15 and training to take out anyone with a Chinese made Russian knock off of a AK-47 made in 1973.

tjexcite on July 25, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Romney vetoed raising the minimum wage that the legislators wanted..$8/hr.
Stating that an increase of that much would cause the unemployment to increase.
Romney wanted to see an increase of around 25cents/hr.
The legislators overturned his veto.

It’s Romney’s fault…
He was Governor.
That’s what sticks.

Electrongod on July 25, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Its all the fault of those evil Democrats.

That excuse is getting old.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:03 PM

“If this country is about anything, it’s about passing on greater opportunity to the next generation.”—President Obama to @NatUrbanLeague

https://twitter.com/NatUrbanLeague

canopfor on July 25, 2012 at 9:48 PM

I don’t know about you…

… but gas was cheaper under President Bush compared to this pantload.

*clink*

:)

Seven Percent Solution on July 25, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Its all the fault of those evil Democrats.

That excuse is getting old.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:03 PM

But it is the truth…in this case.

Electrongod on July 25, 2012 at 10:05 PM

I don’t know about you…

… but gas was cheaper under President Bush compared to this pantload.

*clink*

:)

Seven Percent Solution on July 25, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Unemployment was considerable low under Bush as well.

SWalker on July 25, 2012 at 10:06 PM

M-15 M16 rifle.

tjexcite on July 25, 2012 at 10:07 PM

TAKE THAT MOTHERF*****S!
It’s constitutional bit*hes!
Yeah, he still has a job after that.
And, his boss wants to shut down the 2nd amendment.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on July 25, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Jeez you guys are getting me all excited with this rough talk. I’m fixing to get out my AK and AR-15 and ask Mrs. ziffel if she has a minute.

arnold ziffel on July 25, 2012 at 9:50 PM

I was just posting what this as$hat twittered after the obamatax decision, but get to it!

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on July 25, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Meh, I’ve had an entire country mad at me.

hawkdriver on July 25, 2012 at 9:43 PM

*chortle*

Good one, Hawk. Gotta write that down. You might add “a significant segment of a large world religion” as well.

The War Planner on July 25, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Unemployment was considerable low under Bush as well.

SWalker on July 25, 2012 at 10:06 PM

The list is long…

Seven Percent Solution on July 25, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Nice job, another million guns were sold after this dude got done talking.

Bishop on July 25, 2012 at 10:10 PM

I was just posting what this as$hat twittered after the obamatax decision, but get to it!

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on July 25, 2012 at 10:08 PM

OK, I understand now. She’s out plowing the back acreage anyway and don’t have time for my nonsense.

arnold ziffel on July 25, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Its all the fault of those evil Democrats.

That excuse is getting old.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:03 PM

But it is the truth…in this case.

Electrongod on July 25, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Those monsters also forced that health care bill on him as well. I bet Mitt just felt violated after that sordid episode. And the AWB, and the CO2 emissions limits on power plants.

That poor man! /

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:12 PM

“That’s an assault weapon!”

-No it’s not. See, I removed the bayonet lug.

“Oh. Ok, great, we’ll move along now and talk to the next gun owner.”

Bishop on July 25, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Obama wants to hand AK-47′s over to which soldiers? Last I knew, ours don’t use them, only our enemies.

Erich66 on July 25, 2012 at 10:14 PM

He has been the salesman of the month at every gun store since his election. Keep those sales strong, Barry.

Philly on July 25, 2012 at 10:14 PM

Those monsters also forced that health care bill on him as well. I bet Mitt just felt violated after that sordid episode. And the AWB, and the CO2 emissions limits on power plants.

That poor man! /

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:12 PM

I responded to your statement of low job growth when Romney left.

The above inserts you stated I do have issues with…

Electrongod on July 25, 2012 at 10:15 PM

That’s funny because AK-47s are not standard issue for our armed servicemen.

Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants use ‘em all the time, though. Is that what he meant?

KingGold on July 25, 2012 at 9:29 PM

At least we finally cleared up that the Islamic militants being fought are soldiers, not criminals.

Axe on July 25, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Go ahead Bammy, go ahead and say you will reinstate an assault weapon ban if you are reelected …….PLEASE ……… Gun control=political suicide ………PLEASE MAKE MY DAY……

angrymike on July 25, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Purely for purposes of this discussion, let us assume that if elected Gov. Romney won’t go within two light years of this issue, and further that if he did he’d be stomped by a hefty and (slightly) bipartisan majority in both houses. This is actually a very reasonable assumption, not only if you know Congress but if you just look around you these days.

Given this – I can only hope (except I don’t do that) and pray (not really my thing, either) that the idiot Dems continue to play rhetorical footsie with a very much electrified political third rail like this. That moronic kid Carney’s statement quoted above is a nice reminder of just how smart and reasonable – meaning completely hostile to “gun control” – the dominant political environment is. Even after Aurora, the WH wouldn’t go near “gun control” – nor would any Dems up for re-election.

Obama and his crew have always been fourth-rate, unintelligent non-entities, not just substantively but as political animals. The 2008 campaign was a farce on the Obama side – career-ending gaffes twice a day, bizarre cult-like vibes, embarrassing and pathetic pop culture riffs and TV appearances, etc. Now the DNC has stepped in it big-time, and the idiot “president” himself has made a typical gaffe of his own (those most justifiably suspicious of his intentions will also appreciate the equisite double-illiteracy of his AKs in soldiers’ not criminals’ hands comment – not a US firearm, and no guns belong in the hands of criminals).

This is one where Romney should hide and remain silent. Let these idiots further stoke the fires that burn to expel them from public life. More importantly, let them increase the odds of down-ticket carnage on the Dem side. Remember – there was no “Bradley effect” in polling way back when – it was a state-wide firearms-related proposition that brought out rural and gun-owning Californians that tipped the balance against Bradley in a way polling did not forecast.

And after the hoped-for GOP and Tea Party tsunami, the real work will begin. And likely fail. But what else can be done?

IceCold on July 25, 2012 at 10:17 PM

MadisonConservative on July 25, 2012 at 9:38 PM

I hear you, and it’s been a big issue for me too. Romney is real comfy with making us buy stuff and telling us what firearms we can own.

My vision for getting through the next four years starts with a more-conservative Congress — even one that still has a strong whiff of left and RINO in it — refraining from sending Romney a lot of bad bills. I’d like to see more movement conservatives in Congress, but that doesn’t mean I want a nice, fat GOP majority that will collaborate with Romney to do a lot of big-government stuff. I’d like to see a relatively divided Congress with a narrow GOP majority in the Senate: one that can’t get much done. Repeal Obamacare. Refrain from having any new “good ideas” about “gun control.”

I tend to agree with CherryBeaver, however, that the stink it is on an officeholder to vote for gun bans will keep Congress in check. The Democrats won’t forget 1994 any time soon.

J.E. Dyer on July 25, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Some of Y’all already told the technical truth about AK-47 and how 0bama made what I assume is a freudian slip about the kind of armies he supports and wishes to arm, so all I can add that is new is this:

The Baraka would also like to ban insult weapons.
Unfortunately for him, the First Amendment makes them legal, 8!tc#es

LegendHasIt on July 25, 2012 at 10:18 PM

That excuse is getting old.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:03 PM

…you finally getting tired of JugEars blaming Bush for his golf game all the time too?

KOOLAID2 on July 25, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Axe
Ya religious soldiers, his religion ….his soldiers ……not mine

angrymike on July 25, 2012 at 10:20 PM

That’s how f**king stupid these people are.

MadisonConservative on July 25, 2012 at 9:31 PM

MadisonConservative:Yup,Semi,vrs Full-Auto!:)

canopfor on July 25, 2012 at 10:20 PM

Seventy-four percent of the current and former NRA members and 87 percent of the other gun owners supported criminal background checks of anyone purchasing a gun, according to the poll.

Seventy-nine percent of current and former NRA members and 80 percent of the other gun owners supported requiring gun retailers to perform background checks on all employees to ensure they are not felons, the poll found.

Poll respondents also favored eligibility requirements for obtaining concealed weapon permits.

More than two-thirds of respondents from both groups said that permits to carry concealed weapons should not be allowed for people who had committed violent misdemeanors, such as assault, or those who have been arrested for domestic violence.

In addition, 71 percent of current or former NRA members and 80 percent of the other gun owners supported banning people on a terrorist watch list from purchasing guns.

Which is essentially the firearms laws of all “shall issue” CCW states (i.e. not Wyoming, Alaska, Arizona or Vermont), which is not the law for the gun-free paradises of Chicago, Anaheim, New York, etc, where crime is on the upswing.

Alternative title for this poll: Most NRA members and gun owners feel that New York’s gun laws are full of crap” :)

ExUrbanKevin on July 25, 2012 at 10:21 PM

canopfor on July 25, 2012 at 9:48 PM

I don’t know about you…

… but gas was cheaper under President Bush compared to this pantload.

*clink*

:)

Seven Percent Solution on July 25, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Seven Percent Solution:Yup,US of A,was better off under Bush!
*clink* X2:)

canopfor on July 25, 2012 at 10:23 PM

In the meanwhile, the One, who’s been president for 3+ years, just found another way to dump your taxes into the toilets, for votes.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is creating a new office to bolster education of African-American students.

The White House says the office will coordinate the work of communities and federal agencies to ensure that African-American youngsters are better prepared for high school, college and career.

Obama is announcing his election-year initiative Wednesday night in a speech to the civil rights group the National Urban League as he seeks to rally black voters. Aides say his executive order, to be signed Thursday, will set a goal of producing “a more effective continuum” of programs for African-American students.

Schadenfreude on July 25, 2012 at 10:24 PM

If Obama is so opposed to AK’s, maybe he should kindly ask Jay-Z to tone down his lyrics next time he hosts him at the White House.

Lawdawg86 on July 25, 2012 at 10:27 PM

Couldn’t you find anyone better than Jesse “The Insane” Ventura?

NotCoach on July 25, 2012 at 9:53 PM

lol–sorry; it came with the chicks in bikinis shooting guns. I takes whats I cans gets.

ex_machina on July 25, 2012 at 10:29 PM

That excuse is getting old.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:03 PM

…you finally getting tired of JugEars blaming Bush for his golf game all the time too?

KOOLAID2 on July 25, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Yes I am. Thats an interesting parallel, and I find it just as disingenuous coming from Obama.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Ya religious soldiers, his religion ….his soldiers ……not mine

angrymike on July 25, 2012 at 10:20 PM

*handled by the military and military courts, not the police and civilian criminal courts. In case I baked that and the point wasn’t clear. :)

Axe on July 25, 2012 at 10:30 PM

President Barack Obama is creating a new office to bolster education of African-American students…
 
Schadenfreude on July 25, 2012 at 10:24 PM

 
A government program is a great idea. I don’t know why they didn’t try it sooner.

rogerb on July 25, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Axe
I got what you said, but wasn’t it Bammy’s administration that wanted to move the gitmo trials to civilian courts????…..;-)

angrymike on July 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM

I’m sick of gun control talk from these fascist liberals.

Nobody is getting my guns.

Ever.

And just so you don’t tax the healthcare system, I don’t suggest you try.

Wolfmoon on July 25, 2012 at 10:42 PM

I got what you said, but wasn’t it Bammy’s administration that wanted to move the gitmo trials to civilian courts????…..;-)

angrymike on July 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM

LOL — Exactly!

I take this as a reversal, and now we can just get on with it all. :)

Axe on July 25, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Wolfmoon on July 25, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Well said. And they need to know we mean it.

A fairly long time ago this came up and quite a few of us were saying we would risk all to preserve our rights to own and bear our arms. I’ve been Googling for the thread since this one opened but can’t find the one I’m talking about. But the trolls were indignant and said that kind of talk should scare most people.

A conservative regular said in so many words, you’re damn right it should.

hawkdriver on July 25, 2012 at 10:48 PM

President Barack Obama is creating a new office to bolster education of African-American students…

Schadenfreude on July 25, 2012 at 10:24 PM

A government program is a great idea. I don’t know why they didn’t try it sooner.

rogerb on July 25, 2012 at 10:33 PM

But, don’t you think that the programme is going to need a Federal Department, a few committees to run it and a “Super Committee” to make the decisions when the Federal Department and the committees are unable to come to agreement?

How can we have any programmes if we don’t eat our meat, er, have lots of bureaucracy, committees and a Super Committee?

Does SCoaMF have to fail all of the time?

Resist We Much on July 25, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Schadenfreude, thanks for posting that. Speechless (but that’s a lazy cop-out – hell I’ve been pretty much speechless for years, in some ways even before 2008).

Executive orders and government programs are what’s going to turn around black K-12 academic outcomes.

(speechless)

IceCold on July 25, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Wolfmoon
………;-D

angrymike on July 25, 2012 at 10:49 PM

How can we have any programmes if we don’t eat our meat, er, have lots of bureaucracy, committees and a Super Committee?

Does SCoaMF have to fail all of the time?

Resist We Much on July 25, 2012 at 10:48 PM

If you don’t link in Floyd now, you are a pozer. :)

Axe on July 25, 2012 at 10:55 PM

I have an AK-47 semi-auto and know people who legally have full auto firearms. Obama and other hoplophobes can stick it.

aikidoka on July 25, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Because it’s constitutional, mother-fuc*er! Take that, b1tch…

Jaibones on July 25, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Oh, and hawkdriver, somewhere up above you mentioned .556 and .308 as remedies to certain constitutional challenges. I think you have to nod to the cheap guys in the crowd, too – Soviet surplus 7.62X54R is still just $0.17/round, and the rifle to fire it can be had for $100. (And that cartridge looks like a rifle round …..)

OK, OK, the Greek surplus to feed my recently acquired HRA M1 is not quite as cheap, but I’ll start reloading it once I’ve shot enough of it.

Far more than actual gun-grabbing in some outlandish scenarios, existing harrassment of gun owners (no better way to describe it) in states like CA, NY, NJ, and IL is the problem. Stacks of laws and restrictions that, besides being unconstitutional, are unrelated to any public safety purpose and often idiotic. I believe Heller and McDonald will work their way down through the courts, but as you probably know absurd distortions and shredding of the constitution takes only one decision, reversing such things takes years and years …..

IceCold on July 25, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Don’t they publish exactive minimum lengths for barrels ?

listens2glenn on July 25, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Yes, the barrel length cannot be less than 18 inches or the gun’s overall length less than 26 inches, 26 U.S.C. § 5845, without being registered and a tax paid first, 26 U.S.C. §§ 5801- 5872.
The maximum sentence for each violation is 10 years.

Resist We Much on July 25, 2012 at 10:02 PM

They can be shorter than that without the registration/tax so long as they don’t have a forward pistol grip or a butt stock. Technically then, the moronic law doesn’t consider it a rifle, but a “pistol.” Even though, especially in the case of the AR-15, it’s the same frickin thing.

WhatSlushfund on July 25, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Oops, sorry about the italics. What is this, Ace’s place? (!)

IceCold on July 25, 2012 at 11:00 PM

In the meanwhile, the One, who’s been president for 3+ years, just found another way to dump your taxes into the toilets, for votes.

Schadenfreude on July 25, 2012 at 10:24 PM

You would think black folks would be outraged at this, as it’s just another example of democrats saying: “your not capable of being smart, so we are going to create another program to try and help boost your intelligence.”

It really amazes me that people don’t see this in the actions of the democrats on things like this. It’s insulting.

BruthaMan on July 25, 2012 at 11:05 PM

Is he referring to some of those “heavy weapons” BOR mentioned last night? Or, is he evolving again..?

d1carter on July 25, 2012 at 11:07 PM

IceCold on July 25, 2012 at 10:59 PM

That was MadCon mentioning calibers and getting in trouble. But I have all of those in my safe and .308 to boot. Soon, a .308 AR. And I’d only let a leftist bastard who’d like to take any of them see them from one end.

hawkdriver on July 25, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Refrain from having any new “good ideas” about “gun control.”

J.E. Dyer on July 25, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Here’s hoping.

Obama is an idiot on this,(water wet ) but Romney is bugging me. Not only was he for assault weapons ban, but in the 2002 gov debate he stated (rather enthusiastically) he was for a federal ballistic fingerprinting database. The fact that Romney was for it is just so much fail.

Mitt Romney Wants Federal Ballistic Fingerprinting

LazyHips on July 25, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Europe, How Can You Have Any Pudding If You Don’t Eat Yer Meat?

M2RB: Pink Floyd

Resist We Much on July 25, 2012 at 10:57 PM

:) Do I need to say it?

Axe on July 25, 2012 at 11:18 PM

Is he referring to some of those “heavy weapons” BOR mentioned last night? Or, is he evolving again..?

d1carter on July 25, 2012 at 11:07 PM

BOR didn’t budge an inch tonight either, but then you probably knew he wouldn’t.

slickwillie2001 on July 25, 2012 at 11:23 PM

AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, says Obama

Yeah in the hands of Communist Soviet Soldiers. M4′s belong in the hands of real American Soldiers.

Shock the Monkey on July 25, 2012 at 11:31 PM

I own 2 AK-47 semi-automatic rifles. I’m a law abiding citizen. A citizen soldier in a manner a speaking, able to defend myself, my property, my neighbors, my country. I am not the enemy, a threat or a target.

Molon Labe.

Yakko77 on July 25, 2012 at 11:47 PM

This is no-lose proposition for O. He can blather what his base wants to hear without the danger of any actual gun legislation coming across his desk; and he can blame obstructionist Republicans for failing to act. Also, did anyone else who clicked through to that poll notice that all those things gun owners are in favor of, which supposedly show that gun control has broad support, are ALREADY THE LAW? That’s smart, and sleazy…

unclejack on July 25, 2012 at 11:53 PM

So BOR was his usual Blow Hard self again this evening? We stopped watching Fox some time ago when they turned left and left again. Mr. Harvard is a bully and one hopes that soon he will fall from grace in the ratings. A lightweight who is very short on facts !

Sandybourne on July 25, 2012 at 11:57 PM

That was MadCon mentioning calibers and getting in trouble. But I have all of those in my safe and .308 to boot. Soon, a .308 AR. And I’d only let a leftist bastard who’d like to take any of them see them from one end.

hawkdriver on July 25, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Back in 1993, one of my uber-liberal brothers was talking about how Clinton was going to seize all the guns and it would make the country infinitely safer. He specifically stated there was no possible legal use anyone could make of an AK-47.

My consideered response was, IIRC, “Are you THAT fucking stupid?”

Which brought his rant to a screeching halt. I asked him,

“Who is going to seize these guns?”

‘The military!’

“Really?” “Do you now or have you ever had a friend who has been or is in the military?”

‘No.’

“You are aware the military is currently an all volunteer force?”

‘Yea, SO?’

“They take an oath to uphold the Constitution, which includes the 2nd Amendment, and to protect this country from all enemies foreign and domestic. They would have to violate their oath to seize the guns.”

‘They are required to FOLLOW orders.’

“No, they can actually be court martialed for following an unlawful order. Let’s change tracks. WHO do you think is volunteering for military service? Liberals?”

‘I don’t know.”

“Exactly … but I do. I have friends in the military. They are generally people from more center to right wing backgrounds than anything else. Most of them grew up around guns. They BELIEVE in the Constitution and the Second Amendment.”

‘Well, the police can seize the guns then.’

“Do you now or have you ever had a friend who has been or is in law enforcement?”

You get the picture. It took over an hour but I convinced him the idea of “seizing the guns” was the biggest fantasy ever sold by a political party.

Most convincing, I think, was my point that a smaller group of unarmed citizens insisting a much larger group of well armed citizens surrender property guaranteed to them by the Consitution would make for a very short and very lop-sided civil war with he and all of his liberal “seize the guns’ friends on the losing side.

Seriously, none of them had ever “thought the idea through” to that inevitable conclusion.

Liberals – dumber than a sack full of hammers … to this very day.

PolAgnostic on July 26, 2012 at 12:02 AM

Really?

What about the Libyan rebels? Did 0bama forget how they needed AKs and other weapons? I thought 0bama was all for the rebellion.

ProfShadow on July 26, 2012 at 12:31 AM

He will attempt to push the UN ATT. If he cannot get it ratified, he will issue an EO to “Declare it in force.”

Fast and furious. ATT. Under the radar – and by EO if he can get away with it.

Molon Labe.

georgej on July 26, 2012 at 12:50 AM

This, from the pResident who took rifles from the hands of our Border Patrolmen and replaced them with bean-bag guns?

sartana on July 26, 2012 at 1:33 AM

They can be shorter than that without the registration/tax so long as they don’t have a forward pistol grip or a butt stock. Technically then, the moronic law doesn’t consider it a rifle, but a “pistol.” Even though, especially in the case of the AR-15, it’s the same frickin thing.

WhatSlushfund on July 25, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Heh, whats even more hilarious is, while the laws won’t let you have a typical hand/forward grip on a pistol the ATF does allow you to installed an “angled foregrip” on an AR/AK pistol.

oryguncon on July 26, 2012 at 4:43 AM

We have slept while these totalitarian scum insinuated themselves throughout our institutions, media and governmental bureaucracies. Their knives are at our throats.

rayra on July 26, 2012 at 4:57 AM

Assault weapon is as a clearly defined as HEAVY WEAPONS.

PEople dont have any idea what they are speaking about. Ignorance.

TX-96 on July 26, 2012 at 5:44 AM

Really did not know that American soldiers carried AK-47′s, outside of SpecOps types and certain “advisors” overseas.

To which “soldiers” was Obama addressing his admonition?

Certainly not ours.

Or is Obama referring to his civilian defense forces, again?

coldwarrior on July 26, 2012 at 6:10 AM

It’s not happening, so who cares?

Just about everybody but you and others like you that have been inured to the constant assault on individual rights.

What matters in intent. Intent can almost never be determined after a person succeeds in accomplishing some type of nefarious deed. But when they tell you they believe in something which dilutes your rights, irrespective of their ability to accomplish it, you..demur?

Honestly, where have you been the last few years? Liberals have for years opined about their utopian views which are at odds with individual freedom in our democratic republic. The minute they gained enough power to do so, they took us headlong into the world of their destructive statist agenda.

If the last few years have shown anything it is that we should be vigilant or at least suspicious when it comes to goals of the liberal agenda.

For years liberals operated stealthily mincing words and confusing the dialogue as to hide their intent. Now we see the rotten fruit of that effort and we should just dismiss it? Shall we wait until all that is sacred and principled under our constitution is gone in our republic to fight back? Never.

Marcus Traianus on July 26, 2012 at 6:31 AM

They’re both realistic about the chances of a new AWB making it through Congress, i.e. zippo, so Carney’s giving the pragmatic take to reassure gun owners

And exactly what makes you think that not getting a law through Congress would slow Der Fuhrer down, given the number of things he’s already rammed through by EO and regulation?

SDN on July 26, 2012 at 6:51 AM

SDN on July 26, 2012 at 6:51 AM

Yep.

Projectiles are allegedly harmful to the environment…soil, water…animals. All the EPA needs to do is place a $5 per round tax/fee on small caliber ammunition and a $10 per round on larger caliber ammunition…and by their thinking, any American can own a firearm…but that ammunition thing…cost prohibitive for most gun owners.

Problem pretty much solved.

coldwarrior on July 26, 2012 at 6:56 AM

Maybe he’s just saying we should buy American

Mahna Mahna on July 26, 2012 at 7:06 AM

Barack Obama – Pushing to be the #1 leading salesman for firearms for four years running! And ammo sales, too!

And since Congress wanted to get its fingers into those nasty foreign guns that could be legally sold in the US, it decided in all its wisdom to put in the 922r set of regulations on just how many critical foreign parts are legal for a rifle. You just have to love this sort of thing, where you are left trying to figure out why replacing a foreign sear on a semi-auto weapon with a US one is such a ‘help’ to the arms industry in the US. Or replacing a foreign flash hider/suppressor/grenade launcher with a US made one is such a ‘help’. Do you meet the 9 parts rule? Is that gas rod on the list or isn’t it? Are those parts stamped ‘MADE IN USA’? Did the person who decided to put the ‘compliance parts package’ you paid for, which was more than the cost of the original gun, actually bother to study the regs and get it right?

Yeah the AWB is a horrific assemblage of stupidity. So is the 922r regulation schema which makes trying to make sure you have a ‘legal’ firearm closer to filling out your tax returns. And the fun thing is that once you get to the magazine, and remove an original fixed magazine and replace it with detachable one, you are actually not only in compliance with the regs (and removing a critical 922r part) but adding capacity to the rifle plus giving flexibility for swapping in higher round count magazines and removing the need for clip feeding. Glory be the asinine regulations!

Congress – so concerned with high capacity magazines one year and then, just a few years later, basically saying you need them to be compliant with their wishes. Can we elect some Congresscritters that don’t see fit to meddle with firearms and leave the self-governing people of the Nation to figure it out on their own? Because, somehow, all the regulations meant to restrict nasty weapons going to criminals hasn’t done so and has, instead, put law abiding citizens into the spotlight as villains.

ajacksonian on July 26, 2012 at 7:22 AM

I still don’t understand what an assault rifle is. It’s not a machine gun as Bill OReilly said and I doubt it is a select fire weapon.

I get even more confused when people like Diana Feinstein talk about these assaulting rifles with 100 round ‘clips’. Wouldn’t a 100 round clip of any kind of ammo be several feet long?

CorporatePiggy on July 26, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Man, what was that Ice T was saying just a couple days ago?

Crusader on July 26, 2012 at 8:01 AM

PolAgnostic on July 26, 2012 at 12:02 AM

The UN ATT will halt international sales and transfers.
LOTS and LOTS of guns, ammo and ammo components are from Europe.

The Prez has already twice tried restricting sale and transfer of ‘once fired’ brass. This cheaply purchased, already made, brass is easily reloaded. No brass = no ammo.

The DOT has so many regs on ‘hazardous’ materials that buying powder is pretty expensive +$40-50 for Hazardous Shipping.

The ATF is known for raiding people simply to get their ‘collections’.

orbitalair on July 26, 2012 at 8:15 AM

I still don’t understand what an assault rifle is. It’s not a machine gun as Bill OReilly said and I doubt it is a select fire weapon.

I get even more confused when people like Diana Feinstein talk about these assaulting rifles with 100 round ‘clips’. Wouldn’t a 100 round clip of any kind of ammo be several feet long?

CorporatePiggy on July 26, 2012 at 7:58 AM

The original ‘assault’ rifle was invented by the Germans in WW2. It was a smaller RIFLE cartridge with an effective range of 200-300 yrds. This filled the gap between the submachine gun which uses a PISTOL cartridge (50-100yrds) and the full up battle FULL RIFLE cartridge,all 8mm mauser and 30-06 cartridge effective to 800-1000yrds.

Modern powders and rifles have blurred this quite a bit, since a smaller rifle cartridge like the .308, .270 perform as well as the larger 30-06 round of old.

The AR15/M16/M4 using a small .223 round. while deadly, is really on the lightest end of the spectrum that will kill you. In fact guys were complaining about the short M4 12-14″ barrel being ineffective in Close Quarters combat (room to room) – the muzzle velocity isn’t high enough to tumble the round when it hits flesh, and guys were having to hit enemies 3-4 times to put them down.

ammo type selection is important.

So weapons have different ranges of effectiveness in differing situations.

Modern assault rifles are still defined by the effectiveness range of 300yrds.

The US ‘legal’ terminology bears nothing to this.

orbitalair on July 26, 2012 at 8:26 AM

“AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers.”

What a stupid statement. The only soldiers that pack AKs are generally the enemies of the US forces. Obama’s soldiers are packing slightly different brands and designations of firearms, but he is such a military genius, he hasn’t quite figured that out.

dockywocky on July 26, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Well, this should goose guns sales. Maybe they’re trying to help the economy. ;)

WannabeAnglican on July 26, 2012 at 8:36 AM

You put the bold on the wrong part of the quote: “But the President’s view is that we can take steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them under existing law. And that’s his focus right now.”

Wait until Jan 21st, if he wins, or executive action in the lame duck if he loses.

Spartacus on July 26, 2012 at 8:50 AM

Like pesky little things like “laws” and “lack of Congressional action” have ever stopped dEar Leader…

DOMA? Eh, we just won’t enforce it.

Illegal Immigrant? Eh, so long as you haven’t broken any laws (aside from, you know, that whole illegally crossing the boarder thing) you’re cool.

Congressional Investigation sneaking up on your F&F plot? Executive Privilage, yo!

We know how this game works…

Tremor on July 26, 2012 at 8:51 AM

Does Obama know that American soldiers don’t use AK-47s?

dczombie on July 26, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Does Obama know that American soldiers don’t use AK-47s?

dczombie on July 26, 2012 at 8:54 AM

The Corpsemen do.

tom daschle concerned on July 26, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Last I checked, the only available AK was the AKS (semi-auto). The select fire AK-47 is available cheaply in Mexico from south of their border.

trl on July 26, 2012 at 9:24 AM

“AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers.”

Why would American soldiers want Russian guns? Are they better than the guns issued by the Pentagon?

Steve Z on July 26, 2012 at 9:32 AM

orbitalair on July 26, 2012 at 8:26 AM

Absolutely nailed it. I have a book titled “Weapons of the world” and your post almost sounds like its a verbatim quote from that book. But yes, the MP 40 Schmeisser was the worlds first “assault weapon” because of its light weight and firing pistol ammo (9mm Lugar) and short barrel. The Schmeisser was instrumental in the blitzkrieg for the later the signature weapon of the Waffen SS.

Its cyclic rate was 500 Rnds Per Min. So it was a sprayer for sure.

44Magnum on July 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Wonder if Obama knows the difference between an AK-47 and an AR-15?

on the exit question, I posted this earlier:

Wonder where Luntz got his numbers. I cant imagine any of my non NRA gun rights acquaintances wanting gun training or age 18 before allowing gun ownership. Mandatory gun training becomes government oversight. 18 is an arbitrary age. The age 18 is simply a way to cut ownership. Between 18 and 17, is only the influence of the parent. Between 18 and 12 (when my siblings got their first 22 rifle) is what the parent taught the child. 18 is not a protector, or the theater would not have been attacked

As for domestic violence, that also is a moving standard, and at the point domestic violence is determined, in a court, threats including guns should be determined by the Court and not a politician. Same goes for ‘violent’ misdemeanors, which could include being hauled off by police for refusing to move a picket sign from a free speech zone. Another moving standard which can be rigged to disarm a political group

Driving is a privilege. A gun is a right, and the right is forfeit only if the right is abused. There is a limit on how much the State should be anticipating the next moves of the citizens

entagor on July 26, 2012 at 10:56 AM

entagor on July 26, 2012 at 11:15 AM

We all know that the Obama admin doesn’t want to let this “crisis go to waste” so of course they are exploiting Aurora for their own political reasons. Here in Texas we have concealed carry and here’s some background on why:

It was because of just such madness as Aurora, Co that Texas enacted concealed carry. It’s biggest champion was and is Dr. Suzanna Hupp. Does anyone remember the Luby’s massacre in Killeen, Tx in October of 1991?

Ms. Hupp has a book out about her experiences:
http://www.amazon.com/From-Lub

An interesting read.

Here’s a bio of Dr Hupp and her championing of gun laws in Texas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S

As to Oblama, we know where he stands and if he’s re-elected he WILL enact some kind of gun control law….he doesn’t let a little thing like the Constitution stop him

neyney on July 26, 2012 at 11:57 AM

ExUrbanKevin on July 25, 2012 at 10:21 PM

Just to note that the standard orders in any case involving spousal or child abuse always include a requirement that the offender relinquish any firearms and prohibiting the offender from acquiring firearms.

So no, none of these requirements are new or even controversial at this point. The thing that keeps coming up is “background check for mental illness”, which is impossible.

UnrepentantCurmudgeon on July 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Comment pages: 1 2