Posted on 07/02/2009 7:53:26 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Rasmussen poll confirms Americans fear Obama gun control agenda
By CCRKBA
Thursday, July 2, 2009
BELLEVUE, WA – A new Rasmussen poll reveals that 57 percent of American citizens believe gun sales are up over the past several months because of widespread fears that the government will tighten restrictions on gun ownership.
“The poll results confirm what we’ve been saying,” noted Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. “American citizens are fearful that the Obama administration and a Democrat-controlled Congress will pass new laws to further erode the individual right to own firearms. This concern was further enhanced by yesterday’s ruling in Minnesota that far left anti-gunner Al Franken should be seated as a U.S. Senator representing that state, giving Democrats a 60-member majority.”
The Rasmussen telephone survey found that only 23 percent of the respondents believe gun sales have risen due to concerns about rising crime. Twenty-one percent are not sure. The poll also revealed that 63 percent of male Americans and 51 percent of women believe gun sales are linked to concerns about new gun control schemes. Another finding is that 65 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of those not affiliated with either major political party think booming gun sales are connected to fears about increased government restrictions.
“Americans realize that despite all of the campaign rhetoric, Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi are waiting for the right moment to spring new gun control measures,” Gottlieb stated. “There is little doubt they would like to renew the ban on semiautomatic sport-utility rifles, place limits on the number of firearms someone may purchase, and maybe institute some kind of licensing and registration scheme, as Pelosi hinted......
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
Just imagine if law abiding citizens are forbidden to own guns. Then, only the criminals and the elite will survive.
If they had any sense they would fear ANYTHING that Obama proposes.
“only the criminals and the elite will survive.”
And if the elite use the criminals to keep the people in line while offering more loss of freedom to keep people safe from the criminals, you ave a pretty tight system that is self-perpetuating.
Sort of like Tsarist Russia or New York or Chicago, except on a national level.
It seems like I’m seeing a trend here in Oklahoma City. There seem to be more and more home invasions that are involving violence. As economy tanks, we’ll see more. We also have a guy in the White House who thinks redistribution of wealth is okay. This makes criminals feel entitled to other people’s stuff.
“The Rasmussen telephone survey found that only 23 percent of the respondents believe gun sales have risen due to concerns about rising crime.”
I beg to differ. They ARE concerned about rising crime...the crimes being perpetrated against the people by the Federal Government, including violations of the US Constitution, anti-Constitutional spending and the advancement of the 0bamunist agenda.
It’s time to take back the country.
They won't forbid us to own guns, we will turn them in voluntarily.
When the government controls our health care they will decree that the guns in our homes are health risks. They'll either raise the premiums we pay to some outrageous amount or deny us coverage altogether.
We'll turn them in because one of our loved ones has a medical condition and needs constant care.
We'll turn them in because we ourselves are in need of an operation.
We'll turn them in because our spouse will look at us and say: "what are you going to do with those guns, march on Washington? Little Suzie needs a doctor."
That's the problem with statists, they never consider the unravelling of societal standards their utopian fantasies unleash.
They can have my guns, when they pry them from my cold, dead, hands.
Even more frightening: If the Government outlaws guns then only the government will have the guns. Such a state is called a POLICE STATE for a reason. The old USSR while always suffering with a mafia, had very little street crime and that's because the government was a deadlier threat than could be found on any street corner. Criminals became a minor worry in comparison.
Canada Free Press???
Agreed.
Yes.Questions?
A lot of folks will do exactly that if it comes down that way...
“Then, only the criminals and the elite will survive.”
No. Instead, there will be fewer law abiding citizens. They can forbid all they want.......
Our government is unique among governments in that it has real and tangible cause to fear the people. That is good and right, as it should be. It's also in our founding documents: "shall make no law". The teeth of that fear is to be found in the 2A. Ever stop to wonder why elections and transfer of power in the U.S. is generally peaceful?
If we ever lose that right, the last dam against arrogance and autocracy will break. Does anyone see any symptoms of arrogance and autocratic tendencies afoot among those who allegedly represent us?
They had best tread very, very lightly in this area because this is the people's security against tyranny.
Hussein was elected to represent the people as was the Congress. They have proven the opposite. Vote Them All Out
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=3CAX3aJCoDg
Another excellent article from Canada Free Press.
Anyone know anything about it?
If it's use 'em or lose 'em. I vote for USE 'EM!
Unlike some, I know I'm not going to live forever. But I do have kids and grandkids. How could I rest knowing the sort of would capitulation would leave them with?
the sort of world
A bit of a dyslexic digits attack there. :)
There are those who are mistaking our government for our politicians. There is nothing wrong with our government. It’s by the people and for the people.
The problem is our politicians are forgetting that fact and passing illegal laws.
"You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide these people with freedom. And I go to make sure that they have it."
A friend was very surprised I had never seen “Braveheart”. I had every intention of seeing it when it came out until a loudmouth told me the ending after I asked him not to.
His reason is much like yours - we both learned of William Wallace's fate when we in high school (we both had a history teacher that had a pointed interest in Scotland).
There's an online DVD review blogger out there somewhere that once opined "... every man should see Braveheart annually, if only to remind them that they possess testicles..." - or words to that effect. You can probably pick it up in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart now. Trust me on this one, you'll find much in that film to appreciate.
Thank you sir for the advice. I didn’t want to see it because of the ending and what happens to his wife. I call them revenge movies and didn’t need that sort of emotional tricks on my mind.
I always kidded that it shouldn’t take the brutal death of a loved one to motivate the hero. Couldn’t the bad guys just insult his dog? Shouldn’t that be enough to open that can of whoopass?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.