Obama Seeking to Shame 2A Supporters

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BarryLee

New member
As before Mr. Obama is marshalling support for his gun control initiatives by using emotion and seeking to shame supporters of the Second Amendment into submission. While surrounded by Mothers of crime victims he commented on recent high profile school shootings stating, "Less than 100 days ago that happened. ... Shame on us if we've forgotten," Obama said. "I haven't forgotten those kids. Shame on us if we've forgotten."

Sen. Mike Lee of Utah responded, "The proposals the president is calling for Congress to pass would primarily serve to reduce the constitutionally protected rights of law-abiding citizens while having little or no effect on violent crime," Lee said in a statement. "It is deeply unfortunate that he continues to use the tragedy at Newtown as a backdrop for pushing legislation that would have done nothing to prevent that horrible crime."

We’ve had some positive news recently, but I can assure you the battle is not over. Mayor Bloomberg is running some very good anti–gun adds even in pro gun States like Georgia. There are also numerous uninformed celebrities adding their often confusing voice to the mix. So, please contact your Congressman! Visit their WEB site and send them a message it only takes a few minutes. Send them some snail mail or even call. Please don’t sit on your hands and then wonder what the heck happened.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/28/obama-moves-to-hame-congress-into-approving-gun-control-package/
 
We’ve had some positive news recently, but I can assure you the battle is not over. Mayor Bloomberg is running some very good anti–gun adds even in pro gun States like Georgia.
Click to expand...

...and here in Ohio as well.

Bloomberg must have spent a real chunk of change cause his commercial is running non-stop on all three major networks here.

I'm waiting on a rebuttal commercial to run here starting with giving the violent crime stats of NYC and ending with something to the effect of Bloomberg not doing a very good job controlling violent crime in his own backyard with his anti gun ideas, stay the hell out of Ohio.

But then again, we have our own anti gun Mayors running around this state as well blaming the current gun laws for high crime cause they don't enforce our already existing gun laws.
Guess when you're incompetent in your job, it's best to blame something, eh.
 
Obama and Bloomberg are at it. I suspect they think this will be their last chance at serious gun control from a public support perspective. Support is ebbing.
 
they are playing on Americas emotions and trying to blind us by meaningless "issues" like the marriage "debate."

why should 85 million law abiding gun owners feel shame when someone commits a crime?
 
bloomberg_southern_stereotype.jpg

So, this is how Michael Bloomberg thinks all southerners dress and present themselves. Way to stereotype, buddy. The accent isn't one I can place, and I think it may be faked.

Nice trigger discipline, BTW.
 
I found it rather telling that they disabled comments for this video. I think they know what kind of responses it would get.
 
I find it repulsive when members of society that do not agree with us try to restrict our rights or blame us for the wrongdoings of others, but then go breaking all of the rulers that responsible gun owners follow religiously. Feinstein had her finger on the trigger a while back as well. It never ceases to amaze me that the public is willing to accept "facts" from people who know so very little about what they are talking about.
 
Yep, that picture. I wonder if they were ever told what gun owners think of them after their superb display of trigger mastery.:rolleyes:
 
Yes, I was amused as well.

No manners?? What do you expect. This is the same overbearing guy with communistic tendencies that thinks he should have the power to tell people how much soda they are allowed to drink.

He has surely forgotten that he is a servant of the people but rather thinks he is in control of the people. Typical loudmouthed NYC politician.

Noticed the trigger control also.
 
Central casting.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be the first time. Remember the campaign to ban "assault clips?" The shooter in the video demonstrates several technical gaffes that suggest he doesn't have much idea what he's doing.

You'd think they could at least hire an off-duty officer for a few minutes to consult.
 
How did I ever miss that "assault clip" video? Wow...

They might have found that guy on YouTube; his gun handling is right up (or down) there with some of what you see there. :eek:
 
putting purchase restrictions on alcohol would do far more to save lives then this so called gun control crap
Click to expand...
It's funny you should bring that up, because I was discussing that with someone the other day.

We still have booze. Responsible adults should be allowed to consume it at their leisure. We tried restricting it once, and the results spoke for themselves.

Folks who shouldn't have it can get it. Sometimes, they cause mayhem. But does that justify disallowing the responsible folks from having it? I'd say not.

Now, one of the particular dangers of alcohol consumption is drunk driving. In the early 1980's, Mothers Against Drunk Driving attacked the problem. They went after a specific behavior: the act of driving under the influence. They did not push for lowering speed limits, taxing booze, or restricting its sale. They simply lobbied for stricter punishments (and the enforcement) for a specific, destructive act.

The result was a dramatic decline in drunk-driving fatalities. I'd suggest we apply the same approach to crime involving firearms, but the government refuses to do so. Instead, we're asked to accept all sorts of peripheral restrictions on the law-abiding, many of which have been tried and which have failed to address the problem.

How did I ever miss that "assault clip" video?
Click to expand...
 
Nnnnoooooo.... please.... anything but Clippie. :eek:

I'd suggest we apply the same approach to crime involving firearms, but the government refuses to do so. Instead, we're asked to accept all sorts of peripheral restrictions on the law-abiding, many of which have been tried and which have failed to address the problem.
Click to expand...
I've been thinking about something along these lines lately, which would involve treating violent behavior as the problem: taking it seriously, and making the consequences for gun ownership more severe than they are now. As I just wrote in another thread, the best predictor of violent behavior is a prior history of violence.

If we're serious about preventing violence, keeping guns out of the hands of violent people would be a good place to start. I'm thinking of something along these lines: in addition to the prohibition on felons from owning firearms, there could be a graduated system for people convicted of violent misdemeanors, so that a first conviction for, say, misdemeanor assault would carry a suspension of rights for perhaps three to five years, and two convictions (or three -- I'm not dogmatic about the details) would result in a lifetime prohibition.

I'm aware of the boys-will-be-boys argument, and I'm not impressed by it. If a someone commits a single violent misdemeanor, a "youthful indiscretion," that would have reversible consequences. If the behavior isn't repeated, his rights are restored. But if someone is convicted of a second or third such act, that's a pattern, and suggests that this is someone who's likely to repeat, and escalate, and shouldn't have access to guns.
[Flame suit on...]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top