TheFlyingTurkey
Fetus Worshiper
If I had said this I would've gotten the ban hammer for at least a month.
The Attack on the 2nd Amendment Continues
- Thread starter Hacker15e
- Start date
TheFlyingTurkey
Fetus Worshiper
It kind of makes sense in a way.
IF (a really big if) these politicians actually cared about the crap that comes out of their mouths, then they would actually work, and work hard at changing the things they say they care about.
So lets see them tell the truth. Lets see them say they want to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Lets see them take actual steps to do that. Nope. Nothing. They won't even admit to it.
Take climate change for instance. If these politicians actually cared or thought that the climate was warming because of man and to a point that it could be harmful, then why isn't there a Manhattan style project going on to find technology to replace the internal combustion engine? There's nothing. All you hear about is the politicians trying to figure out how to tax us or regulate us to death. (More government control and power). And scientists say there is a consensus that it is real and man made. OK, if the science is settled, then lets concentrate on a solution. But the only solution so far is taxes, regulation, and maybe a few wind farms. This tells me they care more about their careers than the actual perceived threat.
President Obama is really good at talking the talk without walking the walk. Take terrorism. According to the president, there is no war on terror (there is even if he wants to say there isn't), and we do not have any troops in combat (even though they are still being killed in places like Afghanistan) because he declared the war over. I guess the enemy didn't get the memo. He doesn't really care about it because he is more worried about his political career and what his stupid legacy will look like than he is about real threats.
The #1 thing in a politicians life is the politician. The issues are a tool for the politician to use to get elected. That's it.
And out of left field with that one......The guy was a nutbag who obtained his weapons LEGALLY. If it wasn't a shotgun it would have been something else. Not sure what that has to do with open-carry.....
He was indeed once an international airline captain.....
Acadia
Well-Known Member
Obama was very clear in his speech that we have the 2nd amendment and that it is fundamental. There is also roughly half of the country that are firmly against any restrictions. With that in mind our options are somewhat limited, so a politician can't take any earth shattering steps. The best things we can do, IMO, is work to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those who are mentally unstable, without restricting law abiding citizens. Improving the background check and improving enforcement of existing laws is a good start in my book. I find it a bit comical that folks have been screaming about the over reaching use of executive orders to attack the 2nd amendment. Once again Obama has not done that, and now some of the same folks are using the argument against him that he didn't go far enough? I am not saying that these latest steps are the final solution, but short of more draconian measures that most of us do not want, I think it is reasonable attempt given the constraints.
There have been efforts and gains towards cleaner energy, but we are not going to solve the issue in a decade or two. It will be slow incremental change. There actually was a lot more public funding of energy technology development that has been cut, and you can guess which party to primarily hold responsible for that. When you still have a good chunk of our leadership spouting misinformation about science to pander to their oil based campaign funding, it is hard to imagine us rallying behind a huge effort to put more resources towards alternate energy tech.
If we are really to work hard on this issue:
Step 1: Stop with the misinformation and agree on specific scientific bodies to review the literature.
Step 2: Reformulate our government science and environment committees with science minded people (there are plenty R's, D's & I's who fit the bill)
Step 3: Sell the need to the tax payer with science and empirical evidence, not politics
Right now we are still knee deep in an information war, and we need to be more unified behind the problem.
milleR
Well-Known Member
Not my finest moment. But hey, the ignore list is is my new best friend
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
While I don't like what Obama is doing, nobody can say that only the Democrats use executive orders to limit the 2A. Daddy Bush banned basically all import of firearms (other than shotguns) from China via executive order.
My biggest problem with the recent round of EO's is, well, they changed absolutely nothing. Literally no new policy or anything from them. Nothing changed, it's simply feel good action on the part of the left.
Acadia
Well-Known Member
It is hard to know that now. Obviously these wont be night and day impacts, but if we truly support the system to enforce the useful laws better, and if we improve our background checks, it may have a long term positive effect. Nothing is going to stop a random nut job, but I think we can make progress in preventing legal guns from becoming illegal guns. With all of the inventory out there it won't matter much at first, but in time it would have a benefit.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
There is no change in when background checks are required, which is why I'm confused as to why you think this will make a change.
Acadia
Well-Known Member
Well the claim is that lots of small dealers are slipping through the cracks, not getting an FFL, and not doing background checks. So the plan is more enforcement, which should equate to more background checks. I have no idea how common this is or isn't. The remainder of the components are designed to improve the background check system with better information sharing RE mental health and criminal records, also with the hopes of speeding up the process. I see no reason to complain about any of that, if anything it could be good news for gun buyers if the improvements work.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
So what you're saying is, that "small dealers" are all of the sudden going to be "caught"? If they were truly dealing guns previously without an FFL, they were operating just as illegally last week as they are today. And I'm not sure how you speed the NICS system up, I've never, ever, ever had a background check take more than a couple minutes.
The whole thing that Obama is pushing of "people buying guns online with no background check" is such BS, it isn't even laughable. But hey, whatever he needs to do to make those tears flow you know...
Acadia
Well-Known Member
Sure it hasn't changed yet, but if you make catching that a priority and allocate funds for it, it would hopefully shut that activity down. Regarding the speed of background checks, never had an issue either, but I have seen arguments here recently against background checks because of delays and backlogs.
I know people that have purchased guns online, which like any private sale in my state, allows you to avoid a background check. The folks I know do it for a deal or to find what they are looking for, but if they can do it readily, then it stands to reason that criminals would do the same. I have no idea what kind of numbers we are talking about. Regarding the president showing emotion over Newtown, does it really seem so far fetched that him might get choked up thinking about 20 children being killed, and is that really what you want to criticize him over? I am glad my world isn't so cynical.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
They physically paid for the gun online and had it shipped to them? Or they found someone to meet, at which point they completed a face to face transaction? Big difference between the two, one if an online purchase, one is a private face to face sale.
And yes, when you are going to use 20 kids as political pawns, I'm going to criticize him over it.
Acadia
Well-Known Member
I am told that the deals were made online, Paypal and shipped. I have no firsthand evidence if this is true or not, but I have no reason to doubt it.
The topic is controlling gun violence, Newtown is one of several obvious examples that I would expect a president to use. Frankly, I think it would have been odd for him not to include that event.
Lawman
Well-Known Member
Yeah but it goes to the whole using the blood of children and tears invoked at the thought of them for motivation but ignoring the real problem, or better yet ignoring the same political side causing/ignoring/allowing gun violence.
Like I said earlier, where is Brian Terry's family in that group of people on stage who's dead relatives are being used as the call against ease of gun ownership. When politicians up to the president himself have argued that criminals getting guns happens because of the ease of Law Abiding citizens getting them, they owe that family and others like it answers. Because at the same time they blame the NRA for senseless gun deaths or making them more likely they ignore changing the laws when they had the political ability and the guns that the presidents own justice department put out on the streets and into the system willingly.
Why are republicans and gun owners and the big bad NRA boogeyman suddenly being asked to answer for the emotional charge of "why are these parents grief and loss ok," when it wasn't like these deaths and tragic incidents started the day the democrats lost their super majority in congress. This sudden demand that something be done is ignoring that when he and others had the chance they didn't act in what they think is our best interest and now want to use that same action as a reason to score political points.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Acadia
Well-Known Member
I will have to watch the speech again, but I don't recall blame being placed on republicans, gun owners or the NRA. Obviously it is a long standing issue that bridges generations at this point.
Lawman
Well-Known Member
It's not just this speech. The whole CNN townhall, and all the immediate post shooting speeches the president himself where he talks about why we haven't done anything, and now most importantly of all the criticism by all the pundits on Republican reaction or inaction after this speech. Any time this issue comes up with why can't we do something it's always republicans and the NRA, as if they condoned the actions of killers.
Like I said where does a party get off when it blames the other for "allowing these tragic deaths to go unanswered" or "letting special interests get in the way of common sense" when they didn't hold it against themselves when they were completely in charge at the beginning of this administration. All these proposed gun bans and legislations could have simply and easily walked through congress then. And if the deaths of family members is enough to get you on that stage and be an example then where are Brian Terrys parents because nobody in this administration has answered for the guns they (holder and the ATF) willingly put into the hands of criminals that were later used to kill Mexicans and a US border patrol agent.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Acadia
Well-Known Member
I will have to find the whole town hall to listen to. The bits I am finding do have comments from Obama about the NRA not showing up to the town hall even, which I think is a fair jab.
As an aside, I think the NRA is a crappy organization, and I truly wish a better focused entity would take their place that does not fear monger to raise money.
As an aside, I think the NRA is a crappy organization, and I truly wish a better focused entity would take their place that does not fear monger to raise money.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
Why? Would you show up to a meeting where you know the entire premise is set up against you and no matter what you say or do, they're going to pull a smear job?
And for the life of me, I still cannot figure out why the left is constantly going for some sort of "assault" weapons ban, when handguns are used in crimes and murders at a 20x higher rate.
scooter2525
Very well Member
My google fo isn't the strongest but I haven't seen Obama show up at the NRA HQ either.