2008 Election Firearms Discussion

[Kamikaze_Badger]

Ammo taxation is on their hitlist. Last I heard it was a 500% excise tax.

 

And regarding the 870, you're exactly right, Camaro. I've got an 28" 870 I use for skeet shooting, and for just $150 I can buy a kit to replace the stock with a collapsible one... and voila, it's an assault weapon. I call BS. Just another excuse politicians use to control our lives for no reason.

+1 From an anti-gun violence website (Brady Campaign), this all qualifies a shotgun as an assault weapon:

 

* Folding/telescoping stock

* Protruding pistol grip

* Detachable magazine capacity

* Fixed magazine capacity greater than 5 rounds

 

Man, a PISTOL GRIP!? That totally makes it much more dangerous!

[Andrewr05]

I was looking for this, I finally found it, I wasn't going to bring anything else up until I found the article...

 

Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson Issues Open Letter to Nation's Sportsmen Regarding

Obama's History in the Illinois Senate

 

 

The following is the text of an open letter to the nation's hunters and sportsmen issued today by Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson:

 

Fellow Sportsman,

 

Hello, my name is Rich Pearson and I have been active in the firearm rights movement for over 40 years. For the past 15 years, I have served in the Illinois state capitol as the chief lobbyist for the Illinois State Rifle Association.

 

I lobbied Barack Obama extensively while he was an Illinois State Senator. As a result of that experience, I know Obama's attitudes toward guns and gun owners better than anyone. The truth be told, in all my years in the Capitol I have never met a legislator who harbors more contempt for the law-abiding firearm owner than does Barack Obama.

 

Although Obama claims to be an advocate for the 2nd Amendment, his voting record in the Illinois Senate paints a very different picture. While a state senator, Obama voted for a bill that would ban nearly every hunting rifle, shotgun and target rifle owned by Illinois citizens. That same bill would authorize the state police to raid homes of gun owners to forcibly confiscate banned guns. Obama supported a bill that would shut down law-abiding firearm manufacturers including Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms and Les Baer. Obama also voted for a bill that would prohibit law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month.

 

Without a doubt, Barack Obama has proven himself to be an enemy of the law abiding firearm owner. At the same time, Obama has proven himself to be a friend to the hardened criminal. While a state senator, Obama voted 4 times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of home and family.

 

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding gun owner?

 

And speaking of friends, you can always tell a person by the company they keep. Obama counts among his friends the Rev. Michael Pfleger - a renegade Chicago priest who has openly called for the murder of gun shop owners and pro-gun legislators. Then there is his buddy Richard Daley, the mayor of Chicago who has declared that if it were up to him, nobody would be allowed to own a gun. And let's not forget Obama's pal George Soros - the guy who has pumped millions of dollars into the UN's international effort to disarm law-abiding citizens.

 

Obama has shown that he is more than willing to use other people's money to fund his campaign to take your guns away from you. While a board member of the leftist Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama wrote checks for tens of millions of dollars to extremist gun control organizations such as the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the Violence Policy Center.

 

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding gun owner?

 

By now, I'm sure that many of you have received mailings from an organization called "American Hunters and Shooters Association(AHSA)" talking about what a swell fellow Obama is and how he honors the 2nd Amendment and how you will never have to worry about Obama coming to take your guns. Let me make it perfectly clear - everything the AHSA says about Obama is pure hogwash. The AHSA is headed by a group of left-wing elitists who subscribe to the British view of hunting and shooting. That is, a state of affairs where hunting and shooting are reserved for the wealthy upper-crust who can afford guided hunts on exclusive private reserves. The AHSA is not your friend, never will be.

 

In closing, I'd like to remind you that I'm a guy who has actually gone nose to nose with Obama on gun rights issues. The Obama I know cannot even begin to identify with this nation's outdoor traditions. The Obama I know sees you, the law abiding gun owner, as nothing but a low-class lummox who is easily swayed by the flash of a smile and a ration of rosy rhetoric. The Obama I know is a stony-faced liar who has honed his skill at getting what he wants - so long as people are willing to give it to him.

 

That's the Barack Obama I know.

 

The ISRA is the state's leading advocate of safe, lawful and responsible firearms ownership. Founded in 1903, the ISRA has represented the interests of millions of law-abiding Illinois firearm owners.

 

WEB SITE: http://www.isra.org

Edited November 13, 2008 by Andrewr05

[Verran]

Here we go again.

 

Gun owners better sleep with your steel tonight, Obama's comin' to take yer baby...

[94Camaro]

Here we go again.

 

Gun owners better sleep with your steel tonight, Obama's comin' to take yer baby...

Please give it a rest Verran. I don't think he'll really push for much gun legislation aside from a new AWB (do I need to explain how this doesn't help anyone again?), but he certainly isn't going to veto any anti-gun laws that roll across his desk. And that means he is not the "friend" of law-abiding gun owners. Yes, the letter Andrew posted contains a lot of rhetoric but it also contains verifiable facts about Obama's voting record on gun issues.

[Verran]

Please give it a rest Verran.

Give what a rest? I didn't bring it up. You guys are the ones who keep bringing it up. The man isn't even in office yet. He hasn't said one word about gun policies and already you're all up in arms!

 

No wonder the anti-gun movement assumes the worst from gun owners... it's all they see. You see blue on the ticket and out comes the rhetoric. How about you guys give it a rest. You want people to take you seriously? Stop getting all worked up when nothing's happened.

[kingdingeling]

Here we go again.

 

Gun owners better sleep with your steel tonight, Obama's comin' to take yer baby...

:lol:

[Phil]

He hasn't said one word about gun policies and already you're all up in arms!

Actually he has, I saw a clip where he said "as for those concerned with gun rights, you have nothing to worry about from me".

 

I do believe that philosophically Obama is probably anti gun, but that doesn't mean he's burning to eliminate gun ownership. We never get a President that we agree with across the board, do we?

 

Let's face it, partisanship aside, Obama has more huge issues to deal with than any President-elect in memory. An epic world financial crisis, health care, and the task of bringing 2 wars to conclusion should give him something to do. I doubt he's thinking much about pursuing optional issues at this point.

[94Camaro]

Give what a rest? I didn't bring it up. You guys are the ones who keep bringing it up. The man isn't even in office yet. He hasn't said one word about gun policies and already you're all up in arms!

 

No wonder the anti-gun movement assumes the worst from gun owners... it's all they see. You see blue on the ticket and out comes the rhetoric. How about you guys give it a rest. You want people to take you seriously? Stop getting all worked up when nothing's happened.

I'm just asking that you give the rolliing eyes sarcasm crap a rest. Andrew posted a letter, and instead of politely discussing it, you start throwing out the "here we go again" bs. And then instead of focusing on the applicable content of my post, you latch onto a single phrase. Would it kill you to discuss the topic of guns civilly? Even though it isn't important to you? It is important to some of us, and if you don't wish to discuss it, why bother posting?

 

And he has said things about gun policies. His very own http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy/ listed that he would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, wished to close the "gun show loophole" (another joke), make all guns "childproof" and reinstate an "assualt weapons ban." But that page has been scrubbed too... Unfortunately the google cache has expired on the old page. I know it's "biased", but here's some facts about his "plan." http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=4227

 

 

I agree Phil, he does have bigger things to worry about. And like I said before, I don't think Obama will really push for many gun law changes. But there are some very anti-gun people in high positions in congress (and we all know how much time congress can spend focusing on minor issues instead of the big ones) -- and Obama will rubber stamp anything they send him. His voting record attests to that.

[Verran]

I'm just asking that you give the rolliing eyes sarcasm crap a rest. Andrew posted a letter, and instead of politely discussing it, you start throwing out the "here we go again" bs.

Oh cry me a river. First of all, we did discuss firearms back in posts ~904-951. And it was just as baseless and ridiculous the first time as it is this time. Second, don't give me that "instead of politely discussing" nonsense. Like if I brought some left-biased, baseless, off-topic opinion letter and plopped it down right here you'd take the high road and "politely discuss" it. Yeah. <eye-roll smiley omitted by request>

 

To me you guys are just shooting yourselves in the foot here. (Pertinent gun analogies FTW) If you really wanted to make a case for responsible gun ownership, it would seem to me you wouldn't be freaking out at the drop of a dime like this. Yes, Obama is a Democrat. Yes, he probably doesn't support firearms to anywhere near the extent that you do. So what? He hasn't done ANYTHING nor has he given any indication that he will. So freaking out and worrying about someone coming to take your guns just makes you look like the stereotypical paranoid NRA nut that makes people anti-gun in the first place.

 

All you're doing is putting words in his mouth and assuming he'll do this or that to your gun rights before he's said anything. Sounds kinda "drive-by media-ish" to me. (Another pertinent analogy FTW!)

 

I agree Phil, he does have bigger things to worry about. And like I said before, I don't think Obama will really push for many gun law changes. But there are some very anti-gun people in high positions in congress (and we all know how much time congress can spend focusing on minor issues instead of the big ones) -- and Obama will rubber stamp anything they send him. His voting record attests to that.

And what if he does? Would that be wrong? People elected him into office because the majority agrees with him. Should he veto a bill passed by congress against the will of the majority just to appease the NRA crowd and prove them wrong? Who would be to blame at that point? Would you blame the bill on Obama for not vetoing it or your elected officials for passing it? I don't understand. Would you have expected McCain to veto an invasion of public privacy bill passed by congress?

[Andrewr05]

So freaking out and worrying about someone coming to take your guns just makes you look like the stereotypical paranoid NRA nut that makes people anti-gun in the first place.

I was not aware that anyone here "freaked out"? (not honestly that I can say I know the exact definition/usage of such a term)

 

 

As far as the NRA goes...

I'll use a term my father uses, "I wouldn't give them the sweat off a dead horse's cun vagina"

 

The NRA as of right now is far from the roots of its true purpose as a club/association.

 

The NRA has allowed people with anti-gun philosophies to penetrate the pro-gun nature of such an association and "mis"-represent certain areas of the NRA.

 

The internet is before you, you may find such information as you will...

Edited November 13, 2008 by Andrewr05

[94Camaro]

Oh cry me a river. First of all, we did discuss firearms back in posts ~904-951. And it was just as baseless and ridiculous the first time as it is this time. Second, don't give me that "instead of politely discussing" nonsense. Like if I brought some left-biased, baseless, off-topic opinion letter and plopped it down right here you'd take the high road and "politely discuss" it. Yeah. <eye-roll smiley omitted by request>

 

To me you guys are just shooting yourselves in the foot here. (Pertinent gun analogies FTW) If you really wanted to make a case for responsible gun ownership, it would seem to me you wouldn't be freaking out at the drop of a dime like this. Yes, Obama is a Democrat. Yes, he probably doesn't support firearms to anywhere near the extent that you do. So what? He hasn't done ANYTHING nor has he given any indication that he will. So freaking out and worrying about someone coming to take your guns just makes you look like the stereotypical paranoid NRA nut that makes people anti-gun in the first place.

 

All you're doing is putting words in his mouth and assuming he'll do this or that to your gun rights before he's said anything. Sounds kinda "drive-by media-ish" to me. (Another pertinent analogy FTW!)

 

 

And what if he does? Would that be wrong? People elected him into office because the majority agrees with him. Should he veto a bill passed by congress against the will of the majority just to appease the NRA crowd and prove them wrong? Who would be to blame at that point? Would you blame the bill on Obama for not vetoing it or your elected officials for passing it? I don't understand. Would you have expected McCain to veto an invasion of public privacy bill passed by congress?

Who is "freaking out at the drop of a dime"? I don't believe anyone in this thread has said "oh noes, 'bama is comin' fer our gunz!" You're the only one saying anything about "sleeping with steel tonight." It has simply been stated that he is not going to stand up for gun owner's Constitutionally guaranteed rights. I'll say it a THIRD time. I don't think Obama is going to push for much in the way of new gun legislation. I can't make it much clearer for you.

You're the one bringing the drama into this one, sorry.

 

I think we're done here.

[Andrewr05]

1. And what if he does?
   
2. Would that be wrong?
   
3. Should he veto a bill passed by congress against the will of the majority just to appease the NRA crowd and prove them wrong?
   
4. Who would be to blame at that point?
   
5. Would you blame the bill on Obama for not vetoing it or your elected officials for passing it?
   
6. Would you have expected McCain to veto an invasion of public privacy bill passed by congress?
   

1. If he passes a law/bill etc. that goes against the Constitution then he would be considered unconstitutional (and be at grounds in my opinion for impeachment, jut as any other president is/was) as well as the congresians would.
   
2. YES, it would be wrong to just approve anything that Congress throws at him.
   
3. YES, he should go against the majority if it helps maintain our Constitution rights.
   
4. To blame for what?
   
5. Both
   
6. Expected in the sense of knowing whether or not he would have done it? (i.e. knowing where he stands on such a thing) NO Expected in the sense that a patriotic president should? YES