Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after people's guns?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity >> RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after people's guns? Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 4:48:21 PM   
rfd1


Posts: 53
Joined: 2/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou
Criminals don't go through legal channels to get firearms.  They buy them on the street, or they steal them. 


That is what they do in London, England and in Brazil.

Same guy you buy dope from can get you any gun you want.
The number of weapons, of all sorts, stolen or "lost" from military bases in this country is staggering.

I had posted a thread a few minutes ago from San Francisco Chronicle which concerns civil liberties and NRA types being considered terrorists, it is now GONE. WHOA!

< Message edited by rfd1 -- 2/27/2009 4:55:07 PM >

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 241
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:12:15 PM   
Coldwarrior57


Posts: 297
Joined: 12/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sir Daddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

On the campaign trail, what did Obama say? What did his minions say?



Okay. So he should've said; "I'm not going to take away your hunting and sporting rifles.  I'm not gonna' take away your guns...unless your gun happens to be specifically designed for assault/warfare." 

There are THREE words in "Assault Weapons Ban".  Each one of them are important.

Ok , why is it that those three words are so important , and these four are not " shall not be infringed" ??


_____________________________

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
-- George Orwell

(in reply to Sir Daddy)
Profile   Post #: 242
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:23:45 PM   
SpinnerofTales


Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:


ORIGINAL: Sanity

On the campaign trail, what did Obama say? What did his minions say?


What he said was, "I see a couple of sportsmen back there. I’m not going to take away your guns"

Now, I can understand why you may disagree with his decisions. But WHY is it necessary to throw your own lies out there in order to make your point. It has been shown time and time again in this very thread that he has been consistent on this point. That, right or wrong, he believes that certain firearms should be allowed and certain firearms prohibited. He has made very clear that he considers shotguns and other sport related firearms to be different than assault weapons (not, as it has been pointed out to me, assault rifles). In short, he has made himself clear on the position and stuck to that position in his actions.

So....again I ask, WHY is it necessary to attack the man's character instead of his position?

(in reply to Coldwarrior57)
Profile   Post #: 243
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:27:50 PM   
Sir Daddy


Posts: 53
Joined: 2/7/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Coldwarrior57

Ok , why is it that those three words are so important , and these four are not " shall not be infringed" ??



I never discounted the importance of the words "shall not be infringed".  If you're going to try to put words in my mouth, pick better words, sparky.

We have a right to keep and bare arms...not a right to own any weapon of warfare we choose.  We can't buy a nuclear bomb either.  Why is that?  Duh...  And if you accept that there are certain perfectly logical and reasonable restrictions on what weapons any citizen should be able to purchase, your argument isn't one of infringement of the 2nd amendment.

Then what is the argument?  In a nutshell, it's a bunch of childish whining.  "wah wah wah...they wanna' take away my military grade killing tools"

(in reply to Coldwarrior57)
Profile   Post #: 244
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:27:56 PM   
BoiJen


Posts: 2608
Joined: 3/7/2007
Status: offline 		Because your fingers are stuck in the same pattern of typing I'm gonna help you out...

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/infringed
in·fringe play_w2("I0136400") (n-frnj)v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es v.tr.1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent; to violate or break (a law or agreement) 2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.

This can be interpreted TWO ways..

1) So long as I can own A (meaning one) firearm my right has not been infringed upon.
2) ANY limitation of my right to own ANY weapon would infringe upon my right to own a firearm.

MY guess is that the first interpretation is the one the supporters of an assault weapons ban are meaning. I also guess that you (Coldwarrior) are interpreting it by the second one.

You can only be 50% right here because other people are going to interpret it another way.




(in reply to Coldwarrior57)
Profile   Post #: 245
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:29:29 PM   
SpinnerofTales


Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:



Ok , why is it that those three words are so important , and these four are not " shall not be infringed" ??



Once again, Cold, you, and the rest of the second amendment guardians have failed to answer my question. Let me restate.

The second amendment speaks of the right to bear arms. Do you believe that that means that every type of armament from firearms, to rocket launchers to flame throwers to plastic explosives should be available to any person who wants them? Is there an unconstitutionality attached to laws that prohibit people from walking the streets of a major city strapped down like Rambo?

Since the core of your argument  has, in several postings, been that the amendment gives total and unfettered rights of selection and armament, I am really very curious as to hear your thoughts on this.

Please, illuminate us.


(in reply to Coldwarrior57)
Profile   Post #: 246
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:30:41 PM   
slaveboyforyou


Posts: 3607
Joined: 1/6/2005
From: Arkansas, U.S.A.
Status: offline
quote:

I'm not gonna' take away your guns...unless your gun happens to be specifically designed for assault/warfare." 

There are THREE words in "Assault Weapons Ban".  Each one of them are important


Weapons designed for warfare, huh?  Well that would include the 1903 Springfield, the M-1 Garand, the '98 Mauser Gewehr, the Lee-Enfield, the SKS, all lever action rifles (based on the Henry Rifle, which was designed for warfare.), any rifle that is chambered for intermediate sized rounds, almost all handguns, etc.

Now, please define the term "assault weapon" for me?  I've asked this question several times in this thread.  Tell me what rifles, handguns, shotguns you define as a assault weapons and want to see banned.

(in reply to Sir Daddy)
Profile   Post #: 247
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:35:05 PM   
SpinnerofTales


Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Tell me what rifles, handguns, shotguns you define as a assault weapons and want to see banned.
ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou


Personally, and you can check this, I never said that I wanted any firearms banned. I did say that Obama did not lie in this matter and believe that to be correct. I also have asked the question, and will keep asking the question: Does the second amendment give the general public the right to keep and bear any kind of armament that they desire to possess?

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 248
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:44:57 PM   
Coldwarrior57


Posts: 297
Joined: 12/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sir Daddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Coldwarrior57

Ok , why is it that those three words are so important , and these four are not " shall not be infringed" ??



I never discounted the importance of the words "shall not be infringed".  If you're going to try to put words in my mouth, pick better words, sparky.

We have a right to keep and bare arms...not a right to own any weapon of warfare we choose.  Show me in the constitution where it says that please?
 
We can't buy a nuclear bomb either.  Why is that?  Duh...  And if you accept that there are certain perfectly logical and reasonable restrictions on what weapons any citizen should be able to purchase, your argument isn't one of infringement of the 2nd amendment.

You seem to think that our rights come from the Gov .


Then what is the argument?  In a nutshell, it's a bunch of childish whining.  "wah wah wah...they wanna' take away my military grade killing tools"

sounds childish to you, but there are people that believe other wise.

Our safety , our libery depends upon preserving the Constitiution of the United states  as our fathers made it inviolate.
The people of the United States are the righful Masters of Both Congress and the courts. Not to overthrow the Constitution , but to overthrow the men who pervert the constitution.
 
 
Abe Lincoln.
 
And we have the power to do so only  by being as well armed as the government, there junior.
 
 

_____________________________

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
-- George Orwell

(in reply to Sir Daddy)
Profile   Post #: 249
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:47:40 PM   
slaveboyforyou


Posts: 3607
Joined: 1/6/2005
From: Arkansas, U.S.A.
Status: offline
quote:

Personally, and you can check this, I never said that I wanted any firearms banned. I did say that Obama did not lie in this matter and believe that to be correct. I also have asked the question, and will keep asking the question: Does the second amendment give the general public the right to keep and bear any kind of armament that they desire to possess?


Spinner, we have Supreme Court decisions that have made it clear that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to all arms.  I and most sane people do not advocate allowing people to own mortars or defend their property with landmines.  The old Assault Weapons Ban is a different matter.  It was ridiculous.  It banned things like bayonet lugs, flash suppressors, pistol grips on rifles, magazines with more than a 10 round capacity (not a big deal, it doesn't take long to change magazines).  It was a bullshit law, and it didn't lower violent crime at all. 

Do you know why crime decreased in the 90's?  We got mandatory sentencing laws passed in the 80's, and people were getting sent away for 20 years.  You go ask any cop, they deal with the same people over and over again.  I don't have a problem with us enhancing sentences for folks that use firearms in the commission of a crime.  Hell, we do that in most states.  But I am firmly against punishing law abiding citizens with moronic laws.  Our new Attorney General is lying his ass off when he says that Mexican gang wars are the result of us allowing the Assault Weapons Ban to lapse. 

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)
Profile   Post #: 250
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 5:49:03 PM   
Sir Daddy


Posts: 53
Joined: 2/7/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou

Weapons designed for warfare, huh?  Well that would include the 1903 Springfield, the M-1 Garand, the '98 Mauser Gewehr, the Lee-Enfield, the SKS, all lever action rifles (based on the Henry Rifle, which was designed for warfare.), any rifle that is chambered for intermediate sized rounds, almost all handguns, etc.

Now, please define the term "assault weapon" for me?  I've asked this question several times in this thread.  Tell me what rifles, handguns, shotguns you define as a assault weapons and want to see banned.


I cannott answer that question.  I do not support a ban on assault weapons.  I can understand the thinking behind it.  I can accept it.  And I take particular delight in poking fun at morons that seem to be under the misguided notion that the 2nd amendment gives them some sort of constitutional right to own any weapon they choose.  BUT...I, personally, do not "want" to see any particular personal, projectile weapons banned...regardless of design or functionality. 

Hell, I'd like to own an AR-15 myself.  Nice weapon...

There's a huge difference between "I'd like to have one of those" and "I have a right to own one of those" or even scarier still "I need one of those".  Anyone who claims to need an AR-15 is a friggin' nutjob.

And yes, an AR-15 is clearly an assault weapon.  As are the AK-47, TEC 9's, uzis, and several of my other Counter Strike favorites.  =)

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 251
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 6:20:04 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		Yep. He changed his website when he was elected to include his idea to reinstatement of the ban, on I believe Nov 4th. It was moved to the gov site when he took office. Assault weapons, as defined in the previous ban, constituted 2% to 4% of all gun crimes, yet they want to waste time, resources and money on this.

No amount of laws will stop a criminal from using a firearm, so why bother with it?

As far as all of these posts, it is the same as any topic that deals with the right to bear arms, degenerates into "neener, neener, neener.".

Now the question in my mind, is that The President has put forth he is a different politician, but does some of the same basic things wrong. In this case, it basic deceit, kind of like all of the Presidents before him. I am sure someone will excuse him of this, since it is not as bad as GWB, but at what point do the people stop accepting deceit?


_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 252
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 6:24:17 PM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Now the question in my mind, is that The President has put forth he is a different politician, but does some of the same basic things wrong.


(my italics)

.......seems to me that politics, like most everything, is analogue not digital. Which is to say, that tings aren't black and white, but a million shades of grey. As you point out, Obama is doing some things differently. This clearly constitutes change. Just because he does some things the same doesn't necessarily imply deceit. i'm sure GWB breathed in and out on a regular basis. i'm equally sure that Obama does the same. This does not mean he is a deceitful man.

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 253
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 6:24:35 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		You are taking something to the extreme, and it is making you look ridiculous. I am a big supporter of the right to bear arms, but it did not include some of the things that you stated. To put things in perspective, during the time of our rebellion, it took an entire armies to do what a WMD can do today.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Coldwarrior57
and I count myself in good company
The founding fathers.
Lincoln and others.



_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to Coldwarrior57)
Profile   Post #: 254
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 6:27:08 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		I agree he is doing some things differently, and many of them I like. He did state he was not going to go after firearms, and removed the support of the ban on assault rifles from his website, during the campaign. Then added it on election day. It appears as deceit to me, does it not to you? No matter how big or small, deceit none the less.


quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Now the question in my mind, is that The President has put forth he is a different politician, but does some of the same basic things wrong.


(my italics)

.......seems to me that politics, like most everything, is analogue not digital. Which is to say, that tings aren't black and white, but a million shades of grey. As you point out, Obama is doing some things differently. This clearly constitutes change. Just because he does some things the same doesn't necessarily imply deceit. i'm sure GWB breathed in and out on a regular basis. i'm equally sure that Obama does the same. This does not mean he is a deceitful man.


_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 255
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 6:39:06 PM   
Sir Daddy


Posts: 53
Joined: 2/7/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Coldwarrior57

Show me in the constitution where it says that please?

You seem to think that our rights come from the Gov .

sounds childish to you, but there are people that believe other wise.

Our safety , our libery depends upon preserving the Constitiution of the United states  as our fathers made it inviolate.
The people of the United States are the righful Masters of Both Congress and the courts. Not to overthrow the Constitution , but to overthrow the men who pervert the constitution.
 
 
Abe Lincoln.
 
And we have the power to do so only  by being as well armed as the government, there junior.


Thanks pops.  =)

In order of appearance:  I can just as easily ask you to show me where the constitution guarantees us the right to own any weapon we choose.  It does not.  It only guarantees us the right to keep and bare arms.  It is not specific as to which arms we may or may not keep.  The most devastating weapon of the era was a canon.  As weapons technology advanced, it is no surprise that it became necessary to restrict access to some.  Citizens cannot own anti-tank rockets, bazookas, etc...  And it is a GOOD thing that those weapons are kept out of the hands of the ignorant masses.

You seem to think you should be able to go buy a 2megaton yield nuclear device at your corner store.
Hint: I'd rather engage in civil intellectual discourse than childish sniping.  Stop pretending to know how I think.  If you want to know, be adult enough to ask instead of making a bunch of retarded assumptions.  Like this:  So where do you think our rights come from?  See how easy that was?

There are hundreds of millions of people who believe the wafer they eat on Sunday is the flesh of Jesus Christ.  A lot of people believe a lot of stupid crap.  I'm not particularly concerned with belief.  I prefer to stick to facts.

How ironic that you would use a quote from Abraham Lincoln to defend your "letter of the constitution" stance, when he himself was a man more concerned with the spirit of the document.  He changed the consitution by abolishing slavery.

Have you been asleep over the last 40yrs or so?  If you honestly believe the only way to protect our government from perversion is through armed insurrection, you're missing several big pictures...not the least of which being that our government is already lost to industry.  And corporate America didn't use guns to overthrow our government.  They used paper, pen and money.  No amount of arms will get it back for us. 

Our government is a thinly veiled plutocratic oligarchy living under the delusion of being a democratic republic.

But that's another conversation entirely.  =)


(in reply to Coldwarrior57)
Profile   Post #: 256
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 6:49:19 PM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

I agree he is doing some things differently, and many of them I like. He did state he was not going to go after firearms, and removed the support of the ban on assault rifles from his website, during the campaign. Then added it on election day. It appears as deceit to me, does it not to you? No matter how big or small, deceit none the less.




....well, as i understand it his position on this ban has been less than clear. Some suggest he never backed away from it, some say he did.
Whichever, he is still a politician. Which sadly usually means a certain amount of deceit is inevitable. Given that, we're left with the question of degree, which is a relative term. Is he more or less deceitful than what came before him? If less, then it's a change for the better.
i know Sanity will once again try to suggest that Obama's predecessor was never deceitful, but i doubt thats a majority view.

< Message edited by philosophy -- 2/27/2009 6:50:32 PM >

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 257
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 7:01:46 PM   
ModeratorEleven


Posts: 2007
Joined: 8/14/2005
Status: offline 		Folks, this thread is about the reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban.  If you want to discuss what weapons are covered under the 2nd amendment or any other tangent, either use one of the already existing threads dedicated to that topic or start a new one if none exist.

Thank you.

XI


_____________________________

This mod goes to eleven.

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 258
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 7:11:43 PM   
SpinnerofTales


Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Folks, this thread is about the reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban. If you want to discuss what weapons are covered under the 2nd amendment or any other tangent, either use one of the already existing threads dedicated to that topic or start a new one if none exist.
quote:

ORIGINAL: ModeratorEleven


Point well taken, 11..but actually, this thread was not started about the assault weapons ban. It was started to question whether President Obama lied about his intent in relation to gun ownership.

Perhaps we should all take note and go back to the original proposition of whether or not there was a lie involved..and discuss weapons restrictions elsewhere.


(in reply to ModeratorEleven)
Profile   Post #: 259
RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after peo... - 2/27/2009 7:52:16 PM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		I joke around a lot....I really do feel sorry for those that cannot appreciate our new President.  Instead of breathing a sigh of relief to the end of a fairly horrible era,I think the majority of people on both sides of the aisle can agree on that statement, you look for the most miniscule of topics to tear at this guy. 

Trust me you are wasting your bullets....(Hey, are those "cop killers?")...There will be plenty of juicy topics that have a lot more teeth than the shit that you are currently spewing out.  Ya got eight more years to look for more damning material.

Don't shoot your load so early...You will be spent and not be able to fully enjoy the next eight years. Poor thing.


_____________________________



(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 260
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity >> RE: Remember when Obama said he wouldn't come after people's guns? Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109