Why does Obama think the Second Amendment has something to do with hunting?
“The President believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms,” the White House says, “and he respects our nation’s rich hunting and sport shooting traditions.” The 22-page document mentions hunting and sport shooting five more times, but there are only two mentions of self-defense, both of them in this sentence (which appears twice): “Most gun owners buy their guns legally and use them safely, whether for self-defense, hunting or sport shooting.” That ratio is a pretty accurate reflection of Obama’s rhetorical record on this issue, which features more assurances to hunters and sport shooters than references to self-defense.
Does it matter? I think it does, because someone who thinks the Second Amendment is mainly about shooting deer and targets will have a much broader concept of constitutional gun restrictions than someone who recognizes that it is mainly about defense against various kinds of aggressors. …
It does not help Obama’s credibility that he defended the constitutionality of both the Washington, D.C., and Chicago gun bans before they were overturned by the Supreme Court. If he were smart, he would talk more about the right to self-defense and less about hunting and target shooting, the better to smooth the way for the restrictions he wants. Every time he pays lip service to “our nation’s rich hunting and sport shooting traditions,” its sets off alarm bells among Americans who value the Second Amendment for other reasons.
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
obozo knows exactly what the 2nd Amendment is about. That’s why he’s against it.
Flange on January 16, 2013 at 11:42 PM
Because the GOP and commentators keep telling him to leave hunters alone.
sharrukin on January 16, 2013 at 11:43 PM
This. And he lies. It’s his native language.
The Rogue Tomato on January 16, 2013 at 11:46 PM
Same reason Senator Lurch thinks you hunt for deer crawling on your belly?
viking01 on January 16, 2013 at 11:49 PM
Because that’s the left’s semi-random reason for rejecting it?
RoadRunner on January 16, 2013 at 11:51 PM
Because the left is always trying to reassure the less-informed voters in Pennsyl-Tucky who occasionally hunt that they have nothing to fear, as 0bama shitz all over the Constitution.
UltimateBob on January 16, 2013 at 11:56 PM
Because some fool told him so and he is a fool from college…recall, this is a supposed constitutional ‘scholar’.
Schadenfreude on January 17, 2013 at 12:18 AM
Obama hates black children and is a hypocrite.
512 dead in Chicago did nothing for him to wake up.
Schadenfreude on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 AM
Obama fears what the 2nd really stands for. It prevents their tyrannical Utopian pipe dreams from being implemented.
Schadenfreude on January 17, 2013 at 12:20 AM
Why do 99% of the liberal peons and half the republican leaders and peons think the same?
Because they are ignorant fools.
LegendHasIt on January 17, 2013 at 12:48 AM
To try to split hunters away from other 2nd amendment supporters hoping they’ll stand by and do nothing while everybody else is disarmed. Divide and conquer.
Together we stand, divided we fall.
FloatingRock on January 17, 2013 at 12:56 AM
0 has never really considered the second amendment fully. That is to say deeply.
Bmore on January 17, 2013 at 12:57 AM
Ding ding ding! It only took about 10 tries, but we have a winner.
Fenris on January 17, 2013 at 1:58 AM
I think you’re right but don’t go far enough. I think it’s also to reassure regular folks who don’t hunt or own guns and never will that the 2nd is all about hunting, and so therefor as long as they don’t ban hunting rifles they should be allowed to ban everything else. It is a passive method for them to perpetuate the lie that the 2nd is all about hunting, which isn’t the case at all of course, it’s the final check in our system of checks and balances that help ensure the freedom and liberty of the American people.
FloatingRock on January 17, 2013 at 2:59 AM
“Why does Obama think the Second Amendment has something to do with hunting?”
Because, according to the MSM, Obama was a constitutional law super duper specializer. However, being that his college transcripts are sealed we can only assume by his actions that he has never actually read the constitution of the United States.
Perhaps the constitution of Kenya has a right to hunt?
kregg on January 17, 2013 at 5:30 AM
It’s his way of changing the argument so that he can ban everything but shotguns and bolt action rifles.
It’d be like us trying to turn their “women’s health” argument for abortion into a parachute for life-threatening illnesses during pregnancy. “No one is trying to take away your abortion if you need chemo.” Yeah, we’ll they think the point is to be able to get one at any time for any reason from a primary means of birth control to gender selection.
The Count on January 17, 2013 at 6:24 AM
Yes, and it’s very planned and deliberate. They’ve been biding their time waiting for another chance to execute this plan. Using the Fudds against the other gun owners worked well for the British commies and it’s worked here too to a lesser extent so far. They will never give up trying to ban guns.
juliesa on January 17, 2013 at 6:27 AM
Because I am not sure he has read the constitution..
CW on January 17, 2013 at 7:20 AM
I’ll take “Dyed-in-the-wool liberal fluke” for $400, Alex.
Odysseus on January 17, 2013 at 7:23 AM
Somewhere after the civil war the guns are for hunting idea came as a way to keep free blacks from getting guns. They don’t hunt they never have hunted for food, they do not need guns. Thus the NRA came in to help.
tjexcite on January 17, 2013 at 7:36 AM
You mean “well-regulated militia” isn’t 18th century English for “hunting party”..?
affenhauer on January 17, 2013 at 7:40 AM
OK, if the Second Amendment is even in part about hunting, how is a fee charged for a hunting license any more constitutional than a poll tax?
PersonFromPorlock on January 17, 2013 at 8:26 AM
The Second Amendment is all about bear hunting.
steebo77 on January 17, 2013 at 8:33 AM
When you think about it, though, it’s no odder the President finding the word ‘hunt’ in the Second Amendment than the Supreme Court finding the word ‘home’. Government professionals simply have more penetrating eyesight than we do.
PersonFromPorlock on January 17, 2013 at 8:50 AM
“weapons designed for the theater of war have no place in our society”. Might want to consider what the authors of our Bill of Rights might think about that, Mr. President! Those were the EXACT weapons they were trying to protect!
michaelo on January 17, 2013 at 8:54 AM
I see what you did there!
GWB on January 17, 2013 at 10:06 AM