Obama’s Gun Ban List Is Out

[KommanderK]

strangely the opposite in manchester. young'uns go round shooting up the neighbourhoods with their illegal 9mm's/shotguns/uzi's and nobody other than other crims can shoot back because they have nothing to shoot back with.

i'm all for legalising guns. crime rate will decrease (in theory), because criminals are less likely to shoot at someone if they know they can get shot back at.

Funny thing is that can also happen when no one has guns.

I'd rather be ACTUALLY safe, then have a false sense of safety because someone ELSE has a false sense of safety

[the_irate_pirate]

Note that Obama’s pick for this office, Eric Holder, wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.” In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose — is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

#cry

You say that taking away your UZIs and AK47s is the first step to an authoritarian government. I say that's BS. What, if the BIG BAD WOLF that is the government (and only when run by Democrats, because Republicans are infallible) wants to do something against you, you're going to defend yourself with a few weapons? Gonna hold the Alamo?

The only reasonable argument is that sometimes you may need to defend yourself from criminals. That's a reasonable concern that can be addressed by attempting to improve the society, overall. In any case, I feel safer knowing that only criminals and the police have guns, as opposed to everyone in-between.

If the NRA could have their way, anyone could get a gun in the U.S. Oh wait.. that's already the case. Did you see CBS 60 Minutes last week? They showed one of those gun shows in Virginia where you can buy a gun without needing to show identification. Think about that for a second.

The simple fact of the matter is that too many Americans don't know how to use guns as they are intended. Too many homicides happen for too many stupid reasons. We live in the Wild West.

Finally, your worry is premature. The democrats are not going to touch this issue. It's too much of a hassle right now. They have the economy to worry about.

[Seraph169]

I'm not so against a person owning a gun, so long as it isn't automatic and was obviously for recreational use, i.e. hunting or target shooting, as I quite enjoy the latter.

There's no sense to owning an automatic weapon, so removal of said weapons is very reasonable in my opinion.

In the US, don't they screen gun purchasers for several weeks before allowing them to obtain it? That step is very important, but apparently isn't as good as it should be and perhaps that is what should be revised than a ban on a great deal of weapons.

[BillyDa59]

That list is a bit ridiculous... then again, so is blaming Democrats for the ban. Hey you know what? Obama is also black. So maybe it's the blacks' fault that all those guns are being banned!

Edit*

Man if some of our Liberals are seen as conservative in other countries I THANK GOD I live in the US... I wouls sooned buy one of those banned guns and shoot myself in the head then have to deal with people even more liberal then the people I work with.

As for talking and Disagreeing about thngs people dont know about.

Hello pot my name is kettle... Your black...

How is that people in other coutries know so much about what americans know and dont know, and how or government works and doesnt work. I may not know it all but Know this. This country dispite your obvious distain for it and its people is still one of the greatest if not the greatest country in the world. Every day people come here to make a better life for themselves. Why would that be? Why in gods name would people come here is it is so god aweful here? Why would you come and visit? I will leave it at that because I do not want to get too abrasive...

Nicely said.

[Mr-Jigsaw]

There's no sense to owning an automatic weapon, so removal of said weapons is very reasonable in my opinion.

This is a non-issue. As it has been said before, automatics are already illegal, this list targets semi-automatic weapons.

The democrats are not going to touch this issue. It's too much of a hassle right now. They have the economy to worry about.

If you've heard, they have decided that the majority of seized weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels came from inside the United States. So there has been talk of reinstating the assault weapons ban country-wide. So yes, in fact they could touch this issue, and the economy would act as a veil. However, it should be noted that Obama has personally said that he will not pursue reinstatement as of this time, but said that it would be easy to accomplish if he so wanted.

[dissonance]

There's no sense to owning an automatic weapon, so removal of said weapons is very reasonable in my opinion.

This is a non-issue. As it has been said before, automatics are already illegal, this list targets semi-automatic weapons.

Illegal for civilians.
Apparently, the only people who need the power to kill large amounts of people quickly are law enforcement.

[the_irate_pirate]

If you've heard, they have decided that the majority of seized weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels came from inside the United States. So there has been talk of reinstating the assault weapons ban country-wide. So yes, in fact they could touch this issue, and the economy would act as a veil. However, it should be noted that Obama has personally said that he will not pursue reinstatement as of this time, but said that it would be easy to accomplish if he so wanted.

No doubt it would be easy, but politicians are politicians, and Obama is no exception. I don't think he's likely to touch this issue just yet. Doing anything to restrict guns is political suicide, for him or for congressmen or senators. I think Obama is much more likely to try to reinstate the ban in his second term.

[blackdeath]

lol

i hate to break it to you but um... your gun is going to do jack shit against all of the following:

a) a military-trained team of, say, 12
b) a nuclear weapon
c) an f-22
d) an aircraft carrier
e) laser guided bomb
f) a satellite
g) and while you're barricaded in your log cabin, probably nothing more than a mere flashbang



I'm all for gun rights and all but, um, turning this into some power grab by the Feds is insane. I don't know if you noticed but they've had the upperhand for, what, 160 years? And now you really think your AK is going to matter? lol

[Australian Bushman]

Watched a documentary on gun trading called 'Devil's Bargain'. http://player.sbs.com.au/programs#/prog ... n-Full-Ep/ (might only work if your in Australia)

Very interesting documentary. Might give a different perspective.

[Mr-Jigsaw]

Would you mind summing it up the video for us, seeing as it's no longer available?

i hate to break it to you but um... your gun is going to do jack shit against all of the following:

a) a military-trained team of, say, 12
b) a nuclear weapon
c) an f-22
d) an aircraft carrier
e) laser guided bomb
f) a satellite
g) and while you're barricaded in your log cabin, probably nothing more than a mere flashbang

Exactly, a government would nuke its own people. /roll eyes

[blackdeath]

Exactly, a government would nuke its own people. /roll eyes

way to miss the point

[the_irate_pirate]

Would you mind summing it up the video for us, seeing as it's no longer available?

i hate to break it to you but um... your gun is going to do jack shit against all of the following:

a) a military-trained team of, say, 12
b) a nuclear weapon
c) an f-22
d) an aircraft carrier
e) laser guided bomb
f) a satellite
g) and while you're barricaded in your log cabin, probably nothing more than a mere flashbang

Exactly, a government would nuke its own people. /roll eyes

The government nuking its people is no more ridiculous than the notion that taking away your AK47 will take away your ability to defend yourself from the government.

[ghost12332]

I've personally seen someone convert a semi-automatic legal AK-47 to fully automatic with a kit he got off of Ebay for $30.

Since then, I've fully supported banning all Assault Rifles and Automatic Weapons.

All pistols, shotguns, and regular rifles are fine by me.

[Mr-Jigsaw]

No, I did not miss the point. The very fact that you listed it there would be to say that the government has arms superiority, but arms superiority means nothing unless they're willing to employ them.

Actually, I forgot the one important thing.

i hate to break it to you but um... your gun is going to do jack shit against all of the following:

a) a military-trained team of, say, 12
b) a nuclear weapon
c) an f-22
d) an aircraft carrier
e) laser guided bomb
f) a satellite
g) and while you're barricaded in your log cabin, probably nothing more than a mere flashbang

Hmmm, strange. The Vietnam War and the Iraqi Insurgency seem to refute your claim. Despite the Vietcong and insurgents having access to resources roughly equivalent to what an American citizen does, they somehow managed to fend off the best equipped and best trained military in the world. Thus, the defense still stands.

[Dionysos]

No, I did not miss the point. The very fact that you listed it there would be to say that the government has arms superiority, but arms superiority means nothing unless they're willing to employ them.

Actually, I forgot the one important thing.

i hate to break it to you but um... your gun is going to do jack shit against all of the following:

a) a military-trained team of, say, 12
b) a nuclear weapon
c) an f-22
d) an aircraft carrier
e) laser guided bomb
f) a satellite
g) and while you're barricaded in your log cabin, probably nothing more than a mere flashbang

Hmmm, strange. The Vietnam War and the Iraqi Insurgency seem to refute your claim. Despite the Vietcong and insurgents having access to resources roughly equivalent to what an American citizen does, they somehow managed to fend off the best equipped and best trained military in the world. Thus, the defense still stands.

They were in their home country, and the US soldiers found themselves in, to them, quite hostile environments such as jungle. The terrain etc also made the geruilla tactics work much better for them. How does this apply to the US? You really cant compare that, the insurgencies have advantages the us militias wouldnt have, really. Also, they never tried to beat the US army, or to paraphrase that kill every GI and thus "defeat" you, they just wanted to piss you off enough to make you leave. The US military wouldnt leave the US, they would demonstrate their power to the extend that would demoralize any insurgency by any means necessary (if they really were that interested in power) because they wouldnt have anywhere to fall back to.

They were fighting an invader; something you can alienise, something foreign - you would be fighting your own government, other americans. That might lead to less resistance than was shown in vietnam and the iraq. And finally: which country do you think it would be easier to smuggle the weaponry need for an insurgency into: the iraq/vietnam or the us? Because the weapons you already have in the hands of citizens, and last but not least the ammo and heavier ordnance required, wouldnt be enough I think.