President Obama is in a fix over firearms. He needs to win undecided voters in the swing states to be re-elected, but these areas are largely pro-gun. So after years of trying to dodge the issue, Mr. Obama let it slip in Tuesday’s presidential debate that he’d push a gun ban in a second term. It’s a revelation that could sway the election. In the town-hall event at Hofstra University, “undecided” voter Nina Gonzalez asked the president what he’d done to limit the availability of assault weapons. Mr. Obama feigned support for the Second Amendment before calling for regulation of inexpensive handguns, automatic weapons and resurrecting the so-called assault-weapons ban. “I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal,” Mitt Romney countered. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/17/obamas-big-gun-slip/ Well Well, looks like baraq slipped and let out he would support another assault weapons ban during the second debate that did nothing more than make the dems loose elections for 10 years. He also wants to stop cheap guns so I guess the poor blacks aren't going to be able to protect themselves as well.
I caught that as well, but I was not surprised. It is pretty much a given that Obama is a gun grabber. The entire point of Fast and Furious was gun grabbing...
When did Obama call for "regulation of cheap handguns"? Funny that Romney signed an assault rifle ban in Massachusetts but now opposes it. I think the POTUS put it best "I think Governor Romney was for an assault weapons ban before he was against it. And he said that the reason he changed his mind was, in part, because he was seeking the endorsement of the National Rifle Association. "
Funny that MA is a state and on a whole different level than the nation as a whole... Why does that escape the liberal mind? The law Romney signed had broad bi-partisan support, should he go against the will of the people he represented? From an article on the issue: "Never before has there been such bi-partisan cooperation in the passage of gun safety legislation of this magnitude in this nation," said John Rosenthal, co-founder and chair of Stop Handgun Violence. "I applaud the leadership of the Governor, Senate President, House Speaker and entire Legislature for passage of this assault weapons ban renewal. They have shown that Massachusetts can continue to lead the nation in protecting the public and law enforcement from military style assault weapons." http://www.iberkshires.com/story/14812/Romney-signs-off-on-permanent-assault-weapons-ban.html
Ah yes, the it's a state argument. That allows Romney to have two conflicting opinions at once! Guess what fact that doesn't change? Of the two candidates, Romney is the only one who had signed major gun control regulation. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense, They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.” -romney
This comes to mind, though it is not a direct threat... http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=32A5CB39-C11C-68A5-C4831867713C087F
Really? You're going to drag this one up? After 4 years of not supporting any gun legislation you really think this is going to do for you? Wow you righties really are desperate!
LOL!! how do you figure that? Remember now, 'fast and furious' was a bush the failure program......so explain away.
[video=youtube;-PNhYk9NuNc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PNhYk9NuNc[/video] [video=youtube;D9sBBm43Ee0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9sBBm43Ee0[/video]
Barack Obama has absolutely called for and supported taking registered handguns from citizens in their own homes. We have two clear examples in the Washington D.C. and Chicago, IL handgun bans they attempted which Barack Obama 100% supported. Fortunately, we have a U.S. Supreme Court that knocked Barack Obama and the gun grabbing Liberals on their collective asses. Barack Obama stated to the Chicago Tribune when running for president that he, "believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional". The Supreme Court thankfully protected the whole nation and reversed the gun ban allowing citizens to possess revolvers in their own homes. The ban was ALL handguns. Barack Obama was also 100% for the Chicago handgun ban making it illegal for law abiding citizens to keep their own firearms. Thankfully the Supreme Court crushed the gun grabbing of Barack Obama and the Liberals there too! This Liberal lie that suddenly Barack Obama is not against citizens having guns to protect themselves will not be tolerated. We will expose their lies on this subject at every turn.
Why wouldn't he, he has nothing to lose if he win re-election and he said he would work to bring back the AWB on live TV.
Well unlike Obama, who forced through Obamacare with legislative tricks, Romney actually obeyed the will of the people when he signed legislation. Isn't that what our representatives should be doing? Following the will of the people? Those things still matter to some of us...
I notice that neither the OP nor the article he cites actually quotes Obama. They tell us what Obama said and means. The absence of an actual quote sure set off my BS meter. Considering that for the last 4 years the far, far right have been saying that Obama is going to take away all of our guns(and the gun industry reaped the awards of that alarmism) and in those 4 years he hasn't done a thing to pry the guns away from any of us. Why not give us his exact quote, where he gives us his plan for taking away our guns? Is it that the quote just doesn't exist?
The ONLY people that don't know Barack Obama is a gun grabber have not been paying attention to the issue. His positions in Washington D.C. and Chicago banning handguns from citizens in their own homes tells us everything. Now let me get back to clinging to my guns and religion.
So my belief is that A, we have to enforce the laws weve already got, make sure that were keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. Weve done a much better job in terms of background checks, but weve got more to do when it comes to enforcement. "But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters dont belong on our streets. And so what Im trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced, but part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence, because frankly, in my hometown of Chicago, theres an awful lot of violence, and theyre not using AK-47s, theyre using cheap handguns." Here you go. He said it and he will do it if re-elected.
Those things seem to matter to you, but only when "the will of the people" agree with you. Where were you 2 years ago when the battle of extending the Bush tax cuts was going on. 70-80% of the people thought the rich sould pay a little more in taxes while extending the cuts for people making $250,000 or less. Where was the Will of the people then. The righties said " Well, the people just don't know what is best for them" "Everybody knows you don't raise taxes on the JOB CREATORS during a resession " Well maybe they were right, but so much for the "Will of the people. You guys bring that up when ever it suits your agenda. As for the OP, No, this was not Obama's big gun slip. This is Obama's position. It has always been his position. Yes it probably will cost him some votes in swing states. BUT..... this issue is a lot like Mitts tax plan. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN....At least Obama is realalistic. Yes , he would sign a assault weapons ban if it would pass congress and get to his desk, But... That is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Obama will not waste his time pushing for such a bill. Now Mitt, talks like if he is elected he will cut taxes 20% across the board . Not going to happen. Not unless he picks up 60 seats in the senate. He knows this. SO... all he is doing is talking, saying what he thinks people want to hear, Mitt has been pro-life, then pro-choice. Pro-gun, then ban guns. He sometimes takes both side of an issue depending on which state he is in. Obamas statement on gus was not a gaff, it was his opinion. Romney made a gaff when he said automatic weapons are illegal in the US. They are not. You must get a special permit to own ythem, but they are not illegal to Own. nuff said
This is the relevant part from the article you pasted in your OP: before calling for regulation of inexpensive handguns, automatic weapons and resurrecting the so-called assault-weapons ban As I suspected- the actual quote doesn't resemble that much at all. Obama doesn't call for the regulation of inexpensive handguns. Obama doesn't call for the regulation of automatic weapons(which of course are already heavily regulated) So of the three claims in your article- only one of them holds up when we see the actual quote. And you are proud that you got 33% of what he said correct? LOL. My problem with an assault gun ban is not that I think banning AK-47's is horrible, but that I don't think its possible to write a really effective assault gun ban. Oh and by the way- the original assault gun ban? But heaven forbid that Obama wants to have a 'broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally'- because we certainly can't have that.
You asked for a quote and got a quote with what he said and you're still (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ing. If dems are stupid enough to try and reintroduce the AWB, then they may never win another major election. If you haven't noticed, the country is leaning towards unfettered weapons access as gun ownership has skyrocketed.
I asked for a quote because as I suspected- the actual quote bears little resemblence to the claim in your OP. Doesn't it even bother you that you posted a claim that was 2/3 wrong? This is the relevant part from the article you pasted in your OP: before calling for regulation of inexpensive handguns, automatic weapons and resurrecting the so-called assault-weapons ban As I suspected- the actual quote doesn't resemble that much at all. Obama doesn't call for the regulation of inexpensive handguns. Obama doesn't call for the regulation of automatic weapons(which of course are already heavily regulated) So of the three claims in your article- only one of them holds up when we see the actual quote. And you are proud that you got 33% of what he said correct? LOL. My problem with an assault gun ban is not that I think banning AK-47's is horrible, but that I don't think its possible to write a really effective assault gun ban. Oh and by the way- the original assault gun ban? But heaven forbid that Obama wants to have a 'broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally'- because we certainly can't have that.
When you have to lie to support your position you know you have nothing to stand on. This had nothing to do with the President at all. Stop lying....if you can.
