Obama Spurns Gun Control Why the anti-gun lobby is disappointed with Obama

[TMMT]

Obama Spurns Gun Control

Why the anti-gun lobby is disappointed with Obama's first year

Obama Spurns Gun Control - Reason Magazine

Among the many groups that opposed Barack Obama's presidential race, few were more certain or vehement than gun rights organizations. "Barack Obama would be the most anti-gun president in American history," the National Rifle Association announced. "Obama is a committed anti-gunner," warned Gun Owners of America.

So it's no stunner that after a year in office, the president is getting hammered by people who have no use for his policy on firearms. The surprise is that the people attacking him are those who favor gun control, not those who oppose it.

Obama's record on this issue has been largely overlooked—except by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which recently issued a report card flunking him on all seven issues it deems important. Said President Paul Helmke, "If I had been told, in the days before Barack Obama's inauguration, that his record on gun violence prevention would be this poor, I would not have believed it."

Had he listened to the candidate in 2008, he would have believed. At a September campaign rally in rural Virginia, Obama declared unequivocally, "I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people's lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won't take your handgun away. … There are some common-sense gun safety laws that I believe in. But I am not going to take your guns away."

The Brady Center must have hoped he was being less than honest. And he was: He had no intention of pushing those "common-sense" laws he had previously favored. On the list of issues for which Obama is willing to put himself on the line, gun control ranks somewhere below free trade with Uzbekistan.

So he has proposed nothing in the way of new federal restrictions on firearms. Even the "assault weapons" ban signed by President Clinton—and allowed to expire in 2004—has no visible place on his agenda.

Not only that, he's approved changes that should gladden the hearts of gun-rights supporters, a group that includes me. He signed a law permitting guns to be taken into national parks. He signed another allowing guns as checked baggage on Amtrak. He acted to preserve an existing law limiting the use of government information on firearms it has traced.

Still, the NRA is not rushing to recant. A spokesman admits the president has signed some provisions it favors, but notes that they were attached to legislation he wanted, making them hard to veto. Says Andrew Arulanandam, "He has disappointed us with his appointments," particularly Atty. Gen. Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, neither a darling of the shooting set.

But those are petty matters given Obama's overall refusal to do anything to advance gun control. On this issue, he took such a strong, clear position during the campaign that he has no room to maneuver. That was not accidental. It was deliberate—the equivalent of burning his ships to eliminate the option of retreat.

In terms of actual policy, rather than his previous record, Obama is a long way from being anti-gun. This is not because he has fond memories of sitting in a deer stand as a lad in Hawaii or of talking shotguns with Dick Cheney. It's because his mother didn't raise a fool.

Like some other Democrats, he may recall that in 1994, after banning "assault weapons," they lost the House for the first time in 40 years. Obama knows that anyone who staunchly favors banning guns won't vote Republican no matter what. But some independents who are protective of their weapons may vote Democratic if that issue is off the table.

Off the table is exactly where he intends to keep it. Last year, 65 House Democrats wrote Holder vowing to "actively oppose" any effort to restore the assault weapons ban. The president has enough trouble getting legislation that enjoys overwhelming support in his party. He is not about to pick a fight with centrist Democrats over gun control.

Opponents of gun control should not rely on Obama's innermost sentiments on the subject. He obviously doesn't cherish the right to keep and bear arms. But for those who favor Second Amendment rights, here's the nice thing about having such a canny politician in the White House: He doesn't have to.

[Guest Drewsett]

Any day now I expect him to realize his mistake and start passing Executive Orders banning various gun rights...but then again, I'm a pessimist.

[Guest Ae-35]

Just wait till he gets reelected for the second term, when he has nothing to lose! Bet he even tries to ban "toy pistols" , BB-guns, you name it. When a state senator in IL., where he knew he had no problem getting elected, he voted for all the gun control bills that came up, on a lot of bills some he even co-sponsored, when he saw they had the votes to pass, he just voted " present", not yes or no. You just wait, he's slick like ol' Willie!!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Keep an eye on his left and you lose sight of what his right hand is

doing. His record is firmly anti gun. He is picking his battles and the time is not right.

[leroy]

Keep an eye on his left and you lose sight of what his right hand is

doing. His record is firmly anti gun. He is picking his battles and the time is not right.

In terms of actual policy, rather than his previous record, Obama is a long way from being anti-gun. This is not because he has fond memories of sitting in a deer stand as a lad in Hawaii or of talking shotguns with Dick Cheney. It's because his mother didn't raise a fool.

Like some other Democrats, he may recall that in 1994, after banning "assault weapons," they lost the House for the first time in 40 years. Obama knows that anyone who staunchly favors banning guns won't vote Republican no matter what. But some independents who are protective of their weapons may vote Democratic if that issue is off the table.

Off the table is exactly where he intends to keep it. Last year, 65 House Democrats wrote Holder vowing to "actively oppose" any effort to restore the assault weapons ban. The president has enough trouble getting legislation that enjoys overwhelming support in his party. He is not about to pick a fight with centrist Democrats over gun control.

The great thing for us gun owners in regards to Noboma is that he is a polititian first and and idealogue second. When you are a polititian, everything is for sale. Even your leftist buddies. The gun control lobby is a minority no matter where you look; even in the Demorat party.

There are those in the Demorat party that still remember the gun control act of 1968 and the aftermath for Dems. The state of Tennessee voted out a 30 year New Deal (Centerist dotay) Demorat after 30 years in the senate; his name: Albert Gore SENIOR. ... The Democrates know gun control issues are dangerous to polititians.

That being said; I still dont trust 'em. As President Reagan so famously said: "...Trust but verify. ..."

Food for thought.

Leroy

[ftncityfatboy]

be careful, its the calm before the storm. he's like a snake ready to strike, a sheep in wolves clothing. Oh be careful little children, don't get sucked into his dasturdly web, the hammer will fall. A storms coming.......

[leroy]

ftncityfatboy quote:

be careful, its the calm before the storm. he's like a snake ready to strike, a sheep in wolves clothing. Oh be careful little children, don't get sucked into his dasturdly web, the hammer will fall. A storms coming.......

Amen brother!! Dont disagree at all. It APPEARS TO BE (operative word .. appears..) for now.

Keep up the good work!

Kind regards,

Leroy

[Guest Caveman]

This doesn't mean anything to us. Just like 6.8 AR said, he is just picking his battles right now. He isn't stupid, he has bigger fish to fry at the moment. He will get around to us though, don't doubt that for a minute.

[strickj]

15 months ago everyone was saying it would be his first action in office.

Now everyone is saying it will be his first action in office after re-election.

In 6 years,if elected again, everyone will say it will be the last thing he does before leaving office...

[Guest Caveman]

15 months ago everyone was saying it would be his first action in office.

Now everyone is saying it will be his first action in office after re-election.

In 6 years,if elected again, everyone will say it will be the last thing he does before leaving office...

I take it you don't agree he will be going after gun laws at some point in time?

[strickj]

Caveman, at this point in time in his presidency, we are 1-0.

I don't think anyone will do anything drastically against guns, or gun owners.

In his second term, he may have nothing to loose, but congress members as well as his successor will...

Edited February 16, 2010 by strickj

[Guest Caveman]

Caveman, at this point in time in his presidency, we are 1-0.

I don't think anyone will do anything drastically against guns, or gun owners.

In his second term, he may have nothing to loose, but congress members as well as his successor will...

Well I sincerely hope you are right my friend.

[Guest Catdaddy]

It may not be necessary to the plan to bring us all to our knees under a OWG for there to be any gun confiscation- other restrictions will place active resistance in the area of futilism- like no ammo for those who did not prepare early.

I think the largest area of conflict will be civil, not governmental, against Patriots. The have-not, welfare dependent class is growing by leaps and bounds, as intended, and if you don't eat, or freeze, you die. Many will knuckle under to the NWO in order to see their families fed, keep a job, or survive in whatever world is left to them. Rewards for ratting out dissidents will make Patriots targets as well.

If you don't "take the mark", you will not be able to buy or sell, and all that is left is to go underground (so to speak) until the last option is reached- starve/freeze or go out in a blaze of glory.

Of course, many will never reach that decision, having been ratted out and incarcerated for whatever BS charge is levied against them, and will be spending their remaining years in those nice shiny FEMA prisons.

So, gun control may not be necessary to reach the intended goal- and if we are lulled into passivity by that one seemingly huge concession to liberty, we may miss the cage door closing on us and our now-useless weapons.

Edited February 16, 2010 by Catdaddy

[Guest mikedwood]

They are politically savey if nothing else. I don't think he his waiting on accident, I think he is just waiting for another Columbine to take advantage of. Because they know right now it won't fly.

.... but if certain things happen at the proper time Democrats and Republicans and well over half the nation will be clammoring for gun control to save everyone from the evil of the 2nd amendment.

[Tempest455]

He won't be re-elected!

[lowbud]

He won't be re-elected!

don't be so sure. stranger things have happened.

[Jax970]

Also, while campaigning, he promised he would not increase taxes on incomes less than $250k. Now he is talking about it. Remeber, a wolf in sheep's clothing only looks like a sheep!

[MCSCOTT]

Since his thinking on most things seems to be to screw the American people out of as much as he possibly can, I think he will wait a while before doing anything. All the assault weapons buying has slowed down some, but firearms and ammo buying has not. Once he feels that the American people have spent as much money as they can on it, he will then try to pass laws to force law abiding citizens to hand over all that they have spent their hard earned money on.

Never know though, but I really don't worry about it too much. Here lately it seems that everyone around me is becoming a criminal in some way or another, while I sit around and try to keep my record clean. The day they pass such laws against firearms will be the day that I simply head over to the non-law abiding citizen way of life.

[mikegideon]

Caveman, at this point in time in his presidency, we are 1-0.

I don't think anyone will do anything drastically against guns, or gun owners.

In his second term, he may have nothing to loose, but congress members as well as his successor will...

I agree. No matter how you feel about Obama, he knows that gun control is not smart politics. I bought a bunch of guns last year to help drive up the sales numbers. 14 million guns was a statement. The ammo shortage was a statement. I think he'll sty away from it, and stick with the stuff he has a chance of winning.

[eapking]

He wants to get re-elected. He'll wait for when he has nothing to lose.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

He stepped into the White House with nothing to lose.

He was raised to believe in Marxism and nothing else.

Just like Hitler, he will take away liberties one by one,

until he bathes, feeds and provides for you and until he

has no further use for you.

[Tim Nunan]

While Obama may not be speaking on gun control his nominees/appointments are certainly antigun, e.g., Secretary of State Clinton has endorsed the UN Treaty on Small Arms control.

[Chief07]

Keep an eye on his left and you lose sight of what his right hand is

doing. His record is firmly anti gun. He is picking his battles and the time is not right.

Right! Watch what he does NOT what he says. We already know he lies in every other sentence. Why did Hilliary sign on to the UN global ban on small arms? I'm sure she didn't do that without direction from O.

I smell a rat!

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

The great thing for us gun owners in regards to Noboma is that he is a polititian first and and idealogue second. When you are a polititian, everything is for sale. Even your leftist buddies. The gun control lobby is a minority no matter where you look; even in the Demorat party.

There are those in the Demorat party that still remember the gun control act of 1968 and the aftermath for Dems. The state of Tennessee voted out a 30 year New Deal (Centerist dotay) Demorat after 30 years in the senate; his name: Albert Gore SENIOR. ... The Democrates know gun control issues are dangerous to polititians.

That being said; I still dont trust 'em. As President Reagan so famously said: "...Trust but verify. ..."

Food for thought.

Leroy

Tastes good too it does Leroy:).....I agree with all the above. But since we can not verify anything about this person, Trust is a looong ways off.

To heck with what any of them SAY....watch them, watch them closely and dont take your eyes off them.

[leroy]

Tastes good too it does Leroy:).....I agree with all the above. But since we can not verify anything about this person, Trust is a looong ways off.

To heck with what any of them SAY....watch them, watch them closely and dont take your eyes off them.

Sgt:__________

"Trust" was probably a poor choice of words. That being said, i couldn't remember anything else that the great Ronald Reagan said that fit the occasion. I heartily join in your opinion about this bunch. They do need watching. ... Like you, i was born at nite; but not last nite!! I have no illusions about their good will.

Keep up the good work and the watching!!!

Kind regards,

Leroy