Posted on 11/29/2008 3:45:10 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
During the 2008 Democratic primary debate in Philadelphia, April 16, 2008, here is how Barack Obama responded to a question pertaining to the right to keep and bear arms (emphasis added):
Q: Is the D.C. law prohibiting ownership of handguns consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms?
A: As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.
Q: But do you still favor the registration & licensing of guns?
A: I think we can provide common-sense approaches to the issue of illegal guns that are ending up on the streets. We can make sure that criminals don’t have guns in their hands. We can make certain that those who are mentally deranged are not getting a hold of handguns. We can trace guns that have been used in crimes to unscrupulous gun dealers that may be selling to straw purchasers and dumping them on the streets.
Based on news reports from The New York Times and Politico, it’s quite possible that Obama intends for the federal government to “constrain the exercise of that right.” From the The Times:
Want a top job in the Obama administration? Only pack rats need apply, preferably those not packing controversy. [snip] Applicants are asked whether they or anyone in their family owns a gun.
Politico digs a bit deeper:
Obama’s transition team declined to go into detail on why they included the question, suggesting only that it was done to ensure potential appointees were in line with gun laws. “The intent of the gun question is to determine legal permitting,” said one transition aide. But even some Democrats and transition experts are baffled by the inclusion of the question. Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”
There may be a bill introduced which would make it illegal to discriminate in federal hiring based on gun ownership:
“It’s very odd and very concerning to put out a question like that,” said Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), adding that it may also be “unprecedented.” The freshman senator, who is up for reelection in 2010, had his campaign organization send an e-mail to supporters this week, pledging to enact legislation to bar federal hiring discrimination on the basis of gun ownership.
Unfortunately, DeMint’s strongest ally will likely be the organization which stabbed one of their own in the back in order to endorse another gun-grabber:
The NRA, the gun-rights group that spent millions to defeat Obama, only to see him easily carry sportsmen-heavy states such as Michigan and Pennsylvania, is signaling that it intends to keep up the fight. “Barack Obama and his administration are showing their true colors and true philosophy with regard to the Second Amendment,” said Chris Cox, the NRA’s top political official. “It shows what we’ve been saying all along — this guy doesn’t view the Second Amendment as a fundamental constitutional right.” Cox said the group had put the word out to their members on the question.
First of all, Obama must be pretty out-of-touch with gun laws around the country — based on the wording of the gun questions, at least. In much of the country, we don’t even have to register firearms. In places where registration is required, gun owners usually aren’t forced to register family heirlooms.
How and when used? Umm, for shooting… Squeezing the trigger… As often as possible?
Are blown up cans and bottles considered property damage?
Also, if Obama doesn’t have an anti-Second Amendment agenda, why isn’t he asking the following question on the questionnaire:
Do you or any members of your immediate family own a motor vehicle? If so, provide complete ownership, insurance and registration information. Has the registration or insurance ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.
Cars are certainly a lot more dangerous than firearms.
Mom! Barry's smoking crack, again...!
Two points were made by the Supreme Court in the Heller decision striking down the DC Gun ban 1.) you have a right to defense of your life, 2.) you have a right to militia weaponry in common use to defend your country from tyranny, wherever it comes from. Both of these clarifications by the Supreme COurt are not going to sit well with Obamunists pushing Obamunism.
But then again, we can let Obama apply his very same interpretation to abortion and see how that twists out.
Its worked well in Chicago hasn’t it.
What a bunch of idiots.
Here’s something that most of us probably don’t know. Black constituents, for the most part, are very much in favor of the Second Amendment including pistols.
Many suburban white Democrats would like to ban firearms, yes.
But I lived in a black neighborhood for a few years. All of my neighbors for several blocks were in favor of private ownership and carrying of pistols. That was also the general anti-crime and self-defense consensus for miles. Black folks are a more conservative lot on many issues than most white people know.
Not to a socialist who wants to control your property and life!
"IT"?
"Yeah..Obama..that dang there gun just leaped out of the safe one day and went on a real-life rampage!!"
If he plays his cards right and by this I mean in his timing, he could ride the wave crest of a resurgent party and a resurgent conservative movement as the outrage over the real consequences of Obama's socialism come home to roooooost! 2010 could see the near destruction of the democratic party as they inevitably overreach because they feel the sheer power of numbers. They'll forget 1994 and it will come back and chomp them in the A$$.
And they want to protect themselves, just like I want to protect myself. They also know the police can't do it.........
Harold Washington, late great Mayor of Chicago in the 80's was in favor of doing away with the City's ridiculous handgun regulations. The city council establishment was hearing none of it.
You are right about blacks, they remember the not too distant day when Democrats tried to ban blacks from owning guns, the Jim Crow Laws. Sec Rice has spoken about it on several occasions.
Show me one of those in 12ga. and we’ll talk.
it’s .45 long colt and .410 buckshot
And oh yes, there will be pain.
Hubby and I have been considering the purchase of a handgun. Would you suggest doing it before the end of this year? I’m thinking yes...
Actually, Zero, we can't. Even in merry Old England, or India, where they have much stricter gun laws than we do.
“Hubby and I have been considering the purchase of a handgun. Would you suggest doing it before the end of this year? I’m thinking yes...”
Not just “yes,” but “Hell yes!”
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.