Posted on 01/08/2013 4:33:15 PM PST by SJackson
- FrontPage Magazine - http://frontpagemag.com -
Off With a Bang: Assault on Second Amendment Begins
Posted By Matthew Vadum On January 8, 2013 @ 12:40 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage | 40 Comments
President Obama is planning an aggressive, in-your-face, blitzkrieg-style campaign against Americans’ fundamental Second Amendment right to self-defense.
After a madman murdered 26 people including 20 young schoolchildren last month at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, Obama initially urged a reinstatement of the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban. The demonstrably useless law lapsed in 2004 and had no detectable impact on crime. It was designed to cater to big-city liberals and their irrational fear of firearms.
But the Obama administration’s plans to assault the Bill of Rights grew more ambitious over the Christmas holidays. The administration has now had an opportunity to brainstorm more extensively with the left-wing gun-grabbing lobby, which is heavily financed by radical financier George Soros.
The president is hoping to use the bloody Newtown massacre to impose sweeping new restrictions on firearms and to create a massive new database to track and spy on law-abiding gun owners. Americans are wise to be wary of such proposals. Governments the world over have used such databases time and time again to crack down on internal dissent, lay the groundwork for gun confiscation, and clear the way for genocidal slaughter.
Citing multiple sources “involved in the administration’s discussions,” the Washington Post reports that the Obama White House is now “weighing a far broader and more comprehensive approach to curbing the nation’s gun violence than simply reinstating an expired ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition.”
According to the newspaper:
A working group led by Vice President [Joe] Biden is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks, and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors…
Vice President Biden “guaranteed” Boston Mayor Thomas Menino that President Obama would push through sweeping firearms restrictions before February.
“He said, ‘Tommy, I guarantee you, we’ll get it done by the end of January,’” Menino said, according to the Boston Herald. “They’re going to get it done.”
Obama may intend to bribe and blackmail businesses in order to win their support for his assault on law-abiding gun owners, the Post article suggests.
“[T]he White House is developing strategies to work around the National Rifle Association that one source said could include rallying support from Wal-Mart and other gun retailers for measures that would benefit their businesses,” the article stated.
The Obama White House is coordinating its strategy with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an outspoken enemy of the Second Amendment. Bloomberg co-founded Mayors Against Illegal Guns with Boston’s Menino.
Biden’s working group is reportedly gearing up to present a package of recommendations to the president soon. After that the Community Organizer-in-Chief intends to head up a public-relations campaign to further inflame the public before the passions generated by the Newtown murders cool.
“They are very clearly committed to looking at this issue comprehensively,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which is participating in Biden’s group.
Despite ceaseless cheerleading by their allies in the mainstream media, leftists probably won’t be able to shoot holes in the Second Amendment easily.
Lawmakers from both parties are opposed to further crackdowns on the ownership of guns, which author David B. Kopel notes are already “the most severely regulated consumer product in the United States — the only product for which FBI permission is required for every single sale.”
Newly sworn-in Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said gun control proposals now being discussed –including a plan by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to create a national gun registry– are unconstitutional. The federal government doesn’t have “any business having a list of law-abiding citizens” who choose to exercise their right to keep and bear arms, he said.
After Newtown “within minutes, we saw politicians run out and try to exploit this tragedy, try to push their political agenda of gun control,” Cruz told “Fox News Sunday.”
What happened in Newtown is “a tragedy, but it’s not a tragedy that should be answered by restricting the constitutional rights of all Americans.”
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) also cautioned against taking aim at gun owners’ rights.
“I think you need to put everything on the table, but what I hear from the administration — and if the Washington Post is to be believed — that’s way, way in extreme of what I think is necessary or even should be talked about. And it’s not going to pass,” the new freshman senator said on a Sunday TV talk show.
Heitkamp said mental health-related proposals have to be part of any package aimed at reducing violent crime.
“Let’s start addressing the problem. And to me, one of the issues that I think comes — screams out of this is the issue of mental health and the care for the mentally ill in our country, especially the dangerously mentally ill. And so we need to have a broad discussion before we start talking about gun control,” she said.
Obama’s sudden reversal on gun rights shouldn’t come as a surprise. Obama has a long anti-gun track record that he carefully distanced himself from when he began running for the presidency. In his academic days he told a colleague: “I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”
As a candidate for state office in 1996, Obama promised to ban “the manufacture, sale & possession of handguns.” Seeking his U.S. Senate seat in 2004, Obama advocated blocking citizens nationwide from receiving concealed-carry permits.
This documented antipathy toward Second Amendment rights stands in stark contrast to Obama’s statements on the presidential campaign trail in 2008 when he promised to respect Americans’ individual right to bear arms.
“When you all go home and you’re talking to your buddies and you say, ah ‘He wants to take my gun away.’ You’ve heard it here, I’m on television so everybody knows it. I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people’s lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won’t take your handgun away.”
What Obama really admirers about Lincoln is he suspended writ of habeas corpus, and signing arrest warrants for Congressman and the Chief Justice of the United States.
“The evidence of their lies is painfully apparent. If their purpose is to somehow save lives with gun control they should logically start in the inner cities where most gun violence occurs. They have taken no steps in this direction and won’t.”
Yup, should starr with inner cities like south central L.A., south side Chicago, Bedford-Stuyvesant, etc.
starr = start
In simple terms: We already have the right to bear arms -- the government has no power to infringe upon that right.
Which document are you reading from?
Read the whole post.
Read the words. What to they say? They imply there's a pre-existing right to bear arms, and not a right being given by the 2nd amendment -- As much of the Constitution is written to protect the people from the government.
Prezdent MuzzieBoy is a lying licker of stinking dog squeezins.
Exactly, amendment 3 explicitly says why.
The Declaration tells us where we get the Right to Keep and Bear Arms - from our Creator.
vortigern is correct.
Just because I own a couple cars doesn't mean I want car prices to continue to skyrocket. In the short term, you'd still be able to trade one you own for a different one, even if prices plummeted 90%. In the long term, if those are the kind of guns you like, you WANT them to be cheaper and obtainable with fewer infringements on your rights. And philosophically, I'm sure that anyone that's into freedom enough to own a machine gun would gladly pay $18K to live in a free country. I would, and I don't even own a machine gun.
REally? According to my know-it-all liberal sister-in-law, Canadian gun bans have been wildly successful. (eye roll)
If you want to have some fun, you can register an AR-15 with the Canadians and take it across the border.
Takes about nine months to get all the paperwork done, but it is entirely possible to do.
I've never had a problem transporting rifles and shotguns into or through Canada. Used to be able to transport handguns that customs would seal in a plastic bag.
....But yet, history has been, very, very kind to Lincoln because he is viewed as having “preserved the union”.
Thank-you for standing up for those who serve the USA in the armed forces.
Interesting to note how rational this new D Senator is on her first weekend in DC. Let her attend a few caucus meetings so Harry can tell her how things work in DC and she'll be sponsoring a bill to outlaw Red Ryder BB Guns.
I didn’t mean to infer they were. Quite the opposite actually: I said that the ONLY way he could get their support would be to re-frame the fight as Fed vs state(s), not Govt vs People.
I have a NFA weapon and would gladly take the hit on the money if it was repealed. S&W 76 was supposed to be named that because that was what it cost to manufacture. Cost me $6700
I’d just like to FIND an AR-15 at this point.
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.