Comments on: Obama Planning More Gun Bans

By: frank blagdan

frank blagdan — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 03:30:19 +0000

If not for one thing weather Obama tries to get congress to pass gun bans and heavy restrictions on gun dealers and resposable gun owners.The fear factor has,already, in reality either driven up the price or made the ar rifles sacrce and driven up the cost of ammo.Most rifles and hand guns are semi auto.Gee we are in the 21st century.Does Obama think any one will revert to the muzzel
loader for hunting.
This attempt by the incomming administration should be moot since the Supreme Court just upheld the second admendment.Lets hope that this issue will not overshadow the history we are apart of in our lives.Lets hope that this administration has more important issues to tackle.Like saving jobs,economy, the wars aand real change.
Yes there are some sick people out there that snap and get hold of a weapon and hurt ,kill or maime.99.999999% of gun owners are responsable and know the consequences of our actions.

The media and any one that wants the 15 min of fame come out of the wood work to espouse their adgenda when a real tradegy with a weapon occurs.They prey on peoples fears that it can happen anywhere.That is possiable.However dont punish all of the men and women that have and use guns for hunting or target practice.

Keep in mind an un armed populace is a step closer to socialism

By: Progressive Conservative

Progressive Conservative — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:44:41 +0000

I’m fine with closing the gun show loophole.

For the rest though, if Obama is serious about going after an AK-47, or more likely an ‘assault weapon’ ban…he’s going to have to base that on rate of fire which means all semi-autos will be potential targets.

By: Dyre42

Dyre42 — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 05:11:03 +0000

“When Obama talks about going after ‘assault weapons’ it is a code phrase to make large bans across the board by playing on the ignorance of guns that exists among many Americans today.”

What are you basing that assumption on?

Obama announced yesterday in a town hall meeting he isn’t going to take anyone’s guns away.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/05/obama-im-not-going-to-take-your-guns-away/

The Dem’s learned a few elections ago that gun bans are a poisonous pill. Given how close this election seems I doubt they are willing to open Pandora’s pill box.

However I am pretty sure that the gun show loophole is going to bite the dust. Even McCain is for nipping that escape clause in the bud.

By: Progressive Conservative

Progressive Conservative — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:01:04 +0000

The point is that it’s a stealth ban. That also means no more purchases at places like your local sporting goods store. And the next thing would have been ammo.

As for semi-auto rifles, there is absolutely no reason to ban them. And for a wingshooter like myself, doing away with semi-autos would mean a lot of hunters giving up their guns.

The existing laws we have that define legal guns are more than sufficent. The problem is gun trafficking and responsible gun owners should support legislation to deal with that.

By: John

John — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:34:22 +0000

Well no, it wouldn’t have banned them completely. If there was ever a “destination” store, a gun shop is it. You could put it in the woods, surrounded by landfills on all all sides, and unless other shops were allowed to have better locations for some reason, it would do business.

And no, I’m not making some veiled “gun owners are sleazy” reference, I’m simply saying people are willing to go to gun shops. They aren’t (or at least, they shouldn’t be) impulse purchases.

And if semi-autos were gone, could you really not kill stuff in the woods?

Progressive Traditionalist – sorry, I was being euphemistic by saying “artillery.” I simply meant larger guns.

~ John

By: Progressive Conservative

Progressive Conservative — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 02:08:55 +0000

John, machine guns manufacturing and importation is already banned. Obama wants to go after semi-autos, which means a lot of hunting rifles. He has also shown an interestin handgun bans. lastly, he tried to pass a law in Illinois that wouldn’t allow a guns shop within, I think, half a mile of a school. That pretty much would have banned them completely.

By: Progressive Traditionalist

Progressive Traditionalist — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:24:44 +0000

There already are.
I know it’s a federal crime to fire a 50 cal in a place other than an approved area.
There are various other laws, but as I remember it, most of them are either restrictions on weapons or munitions or restrictions as to their storage.

By: John

John — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:32:55 +0000

But which guns?

Let me start by saying that I think the “slippery slope” argument is poppycock, and anybody who uses it is calling me stupid. Yes, I mean that.

So, what’s wrong with gun bans on the serious artillery?

~ John

By: Progressive Conservative

Progressive Conservative — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 15:32:26 +0000

He supported a lot of gun bans in Illinois. Clinton got legislation passed (thank god it expired). I think if Clinton, a white Southerner, was willing to go after guns… what would stop Obama?

By: John

John — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 15:17:53 +0000

You know… I suspect we’d have an interesting conversation about guns some day. But for now, let me ask you this – do you really think Obama would try for any meaningful change in gun control? You don’t think he doesn’t already know, or have a senior trusted advisor who would explain it to him, that the genie is out of the bottle on guns?

You’ve made it clear that you get it when Conservatives “play to their base.” You don’t think this is just the same thing on the Lib side?

~ John