Posts
NRA-ILA Alert 7 Nov 08
It's already starting. Obama isn't even in the White House and has already announced the start of his anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment policies. We're going to get change all right! Here's the text directly from the Obama "change.gov" website (it's buried under "Urban Policy" -- like most things with Obama, you have to dig around if you want to find his real position): [Update: Like most things with Obama, since this information went public, the paragraph below was removed from his transition website.]
"Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."
Click on the NRA-ILA article here to read more about how none of these policies do anything but introduce de facto gun control. Here's a brief rundown:
1) Repealing the Tiahrt Amendment allows anti-gun groups to bring frivolous lawsuits against gun manufactures and gun shops. It'd be the same thing as allowing people to sue car makers because someone was an idiot and got behind the wheel drunk. The crap about law enforcement access is the typical BS smoke screen. Law enforcement ALREADY has access to this information when investigating a crime.
2) "Commonsense measures" has ALWAYS been anti-gun speak for ways to ban guns. First, the laws on the books already keep guns out of the hands of criminals IF ONLY THEY WERE ENFORECED! Convicted felons are prohibited from owning firearms. "Making guns in this country childproof" means requiring non-existent or highly expensive technology on guns, resulting again in a de facto ban on all guns. The whole idea of "childproofing guns" is just another scare tactic. The fact of the matter is that accidental firearms deaths of children have declined 86% since 1975, even as the number of children and guns have risen. Children now have a less than one in a million chance of being killed by a firearm. When you take the time to look at the facts, it becomes a complete "straw man" argument.
3) There is NO gun show "loophole" PERIOD! If you purchase a gun at a gun show, the dealer is STILL required to complete the Federal criminal background check. Yet another scare tactic and an attempt to ban gun shows.
4) The so-called "Assault Weapons Ban" did nothing to reduce crime. In fact, since the 2004 sunset of Clinton's "assault weapons ban," the murder rate has been lower than anytime since the mid-1960s. The whole term "assault weapon" is completely misleading. A so-called "assault weapon" is nothing more than a semi-automatic rifle. Some look like the rifles used by militaries, but the ones civilians can purchase are NOT the same and are NOT the ones found on "foreign battlefields." There is NO difference between a so-called "assault weapon" and any other semi-automatic rifle other than appearance. Appearance does not make them somehow more lethal than any other semi-automatic rifle. Once again, other scare tactic to sucker the uninformed and ban guns.
Make no mistake about it, Obama and Biden do NOT want US (legal, law-abiding citizens) to own ANY guns - PERIOD! They don't want us to be able to choose to take advantage of our Second Amendment rights, but it's perfectly okay for them to have 24-hour armed security to protect them and their families, because, after all, they're just more important than us. Brush up on your George Orwell Animal Farm: "All pigs are created equal, but some pigs are more equal than others."
This is one battle we cannot afford to loose. If we willingly give up one Constitutional right or allow it to be severely restricted and distorted from the meaning clearly intended by our founders, we place ourselves on a slippery slope as we'd say in philosophy, where EVERY other right would be in jeopardy. Which one would be next? The First Amendment and our right to free speech?
