don't worry guys, obama just wants to take AK's away from criminals

B

black

New member
....which in democrat speak means he will put in place an AWB.

Originally Posted by Barack Obama
The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than they are for those plagued by gang violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals.
Click to expand...

since when does the 2nd Amendment relate to hunting?
 
Naturally, if he intends to make it a felony for a felon to posess a firearm, this does not apply, but... I'm pretty sure that's already a law, so it would take an all out ban on these types of rifles, and...what does that mean? That's like taking away freedom of speech, it is one of our birthrights that our founders fought for and passed on to us.

I guess Obama missed Thomas Jefferson's quote...:
 
I took what he said to mean that he planned to step up enforcement of existing laws that already ban criminals from having guns. I hope that democrats won't try to pass a new weapons act. Unfortunately as long as people can legally own guns some greedy SOB will be willing to sell them to the bad guys under the table. I'm not saying that this is a good reason to take away gun rights. I fully support the 2nd amendment. The sooner politicians realize that most criminals go through criminal avenues in order to buy their illegal guns the better. Gun laws only really affect people who care about laws. Last I checked criminals don't, otherwise they wouldn't be criminals. There really isn't a good way to selectively disarm a population of criminals without also disarming everybody else. There are already so many guns in the United States that this would be next to impossible to do without calling up the military and that might cause a revolution or something.
 
Last edited:
dr.j, do you realize who Joe Biden is?

Do you realize who freakin' wrote the first AWB?

Have you looked at bHo's record on gun legislation?

possum
 
since when does the 2nd Amendment relate to hunting?
Click to expand...

Despite being told otherwise, Obama and his supporters usually refer to gun rights as it relates to hunting. They even did this after the recent Heller decision. Yet that decision had absolutely nothing to do with hunting. It's just their game plan to change peoples thinking that 2nd Adm. rights are directly related to hunting.


......it ain't working.:p
 
Yeah I realize who he is. I also realize that he would not be the king of america, and could not do whatever he wants, this is still a democracy. I never said that I didn't think that democrats would try to pass an AWB, I'm sure they will try. I said I hope that they won't. Last I checked, hoping that democrats listen to reason doesn't mean I don't realize who people are. I also understand that gun lovers get frustrated with pointless gun laws and I couldn't sympathize more. To me, gun laws are the least of my political concerns and since I live in the U.S. I'm entitled to feel that way. Unfortunately neither political party reflects the way I think, and I'm forced to make some compromises. If you bothered to read (or undertand) what I wrote you would see that I do not support AWBs because they don't work, they only hurt those of us who follow laws.

I will never own an AK-47, because an AK-47 has absolutely zero practical value to me. For hunting and self defense, Ak-47s are not that useful. While they are fun at the range, that's about all they are good for if you are a civilian.
 
i can't afford an AR, i love shooting it, it's sexy, it makes liberal p!ss their pants and if the SHTF, it's reliable as hell, ammo is cheap...need i go on?
 
So basically it's a "sexy" toy? Perhaps the cheap ammo is why criminals love them so much. One of my friends got robbed twice by a guy with an AK while he was delivering pizzas.

If anything short of WWIII goes down I'd rather have a shotgun.
 
The fundamentals TPFI needs to be called on are that he lumps in criminals with the law abiding and legitimate ownership with criminal acquisition, and completely ignores the 14th Amendment. People in Cleveland deserve no less rights than people elsewhere, and it is illegal to discriminate against people based on where they live. And equating legal owners of AK's with criminals is like telling Porsche drivers that they must have stolen their car and treating them accordingly.
 
to each their own...

If you don't like 'em that's your choice, but don't lambaste them as a reason for an AWB. i like anything that goes bang, and i guess you as a gun owner would think the same.
 
One of my friends got robbed twice by a guy with an AK while he was delivering pizzas.
Click to expand...

Tell your friend to buy a lottery ticket. The odds of getting robbed twice by someone using an "assault rifle" are probably about the same as winning.
 
Yea it's pretty unlucky. Knoxville's a screwed up place sometimes. That's where he got robbed, it's nothing personal, I've never had a bad experience there
 
Have you got a link to an article on it? I hadn't heard of any robberies of a pizza delivery person in a long time, nor of any crimes using an assault weapon.
 
This was about four years ago, but I don't think he filed a report on it since the morons only stole about $15 and their pizza they ordered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top