Posted on 10/03/2015 5:43:49 AM PDT by KeyLargo
October 3, 2015 Obama's wink and nod on gun confiscation By Thomas Lifson
President Obama couldn’t be more eager to change the subject of national news discussion away from the catastrophic failure of his Middle East foreign policy. So the shooting in Roseburg, OR offered an opportunity to gin up his base and re-focus his domestic opponents on playing defense against gun control.
By framing his goal as the extremely vague phrase “common sense gun control legislation,” he avoids specifics. And in fact, nobody on his team has yet come up with a concrete suggestion that would have saved the lives of the Oregon junior college students and faculty. That is by design, since the entire point is not to accomplish anything positive, but rather to refocus the subject of political debate.
Nevertheless, in his October 1 statement just a few hours after the incident and before the killer’s name was known, he offered a wink and nod toward those who want to confiscate firearms:
We know other countries in response to one mass shooting have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours, Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.
Australia, a continent-sized country like ours with many rural residents who hunt, actually confiscated a large share of its privately-held firearms in 1996. And there is already a media chorus urging America to follow in its wake. Mark Antonio Wright in NRO:
In the last 24 hours, New York magazine, CNN, and NBC have also sung the virtues of the Australian model. But the Australian 1996 National Agreement on Firearms was not a benign set of commonsense gun-control rules: It was a gun-confiscation program rushed through the Australian parliament
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I lost all my firearms in that dreaded canoe accident.
This administration has purposely attacked the provisions of the Bill of Rights and the 2nd has had the most push-back from the population. The 4th is all but gone.
“In the last 24 hours, New York magazine, CNN, and NBC have also sung the virtues of the Australian model. But the Australian 1996 National Agreement on Firearms was not a benign set of commonsense gun-control rules: It was a gun-confiscation program rushed through the Australian parliament”
That’s because Australia’s Constitution does not have a Second Amendment. If it were not for our 2A, the government would have rounded up all the guns here long ago.
“......nobody on his team has yet come up with a concrete suggestion that would have saved the lives of the Oregon junior college......”
Because the POS and his ilk KNOW that had anyone had a gun with them at the time of the shooting, it may well have turned out a lot better.
I read the shooter we on the suspected terroits list for some time..............Guess we can blame odumbo then since it was on HIS watch.
Three months ago:
Obama Dreams Of Gun Confiscation
Posted by Bob Owens on June 25, 2015 at 2:25 pm
“Obama isn’t coming for your guns” is the constant cry on the left… and it’s also clearly a lie.
In an interview with comedian Marc Maron that aired Monday, President Obama cited Australia’s gun laws as an example the United States should follow. Australia established strict gun control in response to a massacre in Tasmania that left 35 people dead in 1996. Since then, Australia hasn’t witnessed any mass shootings.
“It was just so shocking the entire country said, ‘Well, we’re going to completely change our gun laws’, and they did. And it hasn’t happened since,” Obama said, discussing the shooting deaths of nine people at a historic black church in Charleston last week.
Predictably, the media immediately saw the elephant in the room that came with Obama’s support of Aussie gun control, and promptly shoved it out the door, hoping that no one would notice what the Great Divider was suggesting.
What these outlets pointedly refuse to mention about Australian gun laws in the wake of the Port Arthur massacre is that the comprehensive gun buy-back scheme happened in a nation without a Bill of Rights, and that the buyback was mandatory.
Yes, Australian citizens faced the threat of coercive government force being used against them if they did not surrender their firearms.
In a meticulously thorough post at The Federlist entitled The Australia Gun Control Fallacy, Varad Mehta notes that while Australian gun control was a comparatively simple matter of confiscating less than a million firearms from a willing population. This is radically different environment that what we have in the United States, where gun ownership was viewed as a pre-existing natural right before the Constitution and Bill of Rights were even written.
He then went on to notice the utter failure of “assault weapon” registration in the blue states of New York and Connecticut, where the citizenry flatly refused to register their firearms with the government.
As Bearing Arms readers know, Connecticut’s gun owners groups went so far as to openly challenge the Connecticut State Police to attempt to arrest those gun owners who refused to register their weapons… and the government, sensing that they would end up on the wrong side of an insurrection in which they were heavily outgunned, wisely backed away.
Mehta notes that Obama’s desire for mandatory buybacks would end poorly if the federal government was foolish enough to attempt confiscation.
http://bearingarms.com/obama-wishes-for-gun-confiscation-and-with-it-a-second-civil-war/
Damn the canoe. They can have it all one carefully aimed round at a time.
Come and get ‘em, you filthy f—kin’ Kenyan.
They still somehow manage(lsm complicity?) to put the idea out there that the NRA is SOOOOOOOO powerful that they control congress. And the IPOS/UPOS/SPOS/LPOS buy it. If anything, pro 2nd folks need to get a LOT more vocal to silence these sceamin’ meemees. Guess the lyin’ king missed my post the other day about the Aussie IT worker that was shot and killed by a.....................muslim immigrant. In Sydney where we know the gun ban has worked. Well, except for the bad guys cause they don’t care.
Local Indy Moms Demand spokesperson was out the day of the Oregon shooting saying we need Universal Background Checks(which the shooter already passed), which will close the loopholes that allow criminals to buy guns at gunshows (Name the mass shooters who have bought from a gunshow), buy guns and ammo online (BULLSQUAT!!!) and will keep them from buying guns on a streetcorner(MORON ALERT!!!)
Great graphic, bookmarking now.
What you said——I’ll second that!
Shoulder to shoulder brother, believe it. ;)
I believe it—but I’m a sister—LOL!
Another “poster child” for banning no-gun zones.
The only people who abide by them are the law abiding.
Garland Terrorist Bought Gun Under Obama’s Fast And Furious Program
http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/02/garland-terrorist-bought-gun-under-obamas-fast-and-furious-program/
Evidence touted in agent’s death
Trial begins for 2 charged in murder
Astrid Galvan
6:05 PM, Sep 26, 2015
state
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/state/txfastandfurious-trial_03147696
They should ban canoes—clearly, they are dangerous!
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.