Posted on 03/12/2015 9:22:08 AM PDT by rktman
President Obama remains committed to “common-sense” gun regulations, even though his administration backed off a proposal to ban a popular type of armor-piercing ammunition.
“The president’s commitment to putting in place common-sense rules that will protect Second Amendment rights, but also prevent those who shouldn’t have firearms from getting them, is as strong as ever,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters on Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Anytime Obama says, “common-sense” hold on to your wallet and fight for your freedom.
[[remains committed to “common-sense” gun regulations,]]
More ‘common sense’ than the nearly 20,000 gun laws already on the books? How many gun laws are needed?
Obama’s commitment should be immediate and irrevocable.
[[Who said Americans will stand for being disarmed by force?]]
Those in NY, Connecticut, Chicago, etc who had their guns forcibly removed from them, that’s who- They all claimed before hand “From my cold dead hands” Yet when the laws went down, officials came and confiscated guns and no one did a damn thing to stop them There are counties and districts all over this country where guns are not allowed- or severely restricted- yet the people in this districts did nothing to fight the laws- They claimed they would, but no one did-
If any of what they say was actually “common sense” they wouldn’t have to constantly call it “common sense”.
Tell me what is “common sense” about banning cheap practice ammunition that doesn’t penetrate any more body armor than any other rifle ammunition, in order to “protect cops”, despite there never having been a documented instance of this particular ammunition ever once having been used on a cop and despite the Fraternal Order of Police, Bloomberg, and the Brady bunch say that banning it wouldn’t solve anything.
not only that but the national police organization said that ammo is NOT a concern to them- it is very rarely used against police or civilians
“Those in NY..Yet when the laws went down, officials came and confiscated guns and no one did a damn thing to stop them”
Really, Bob? When did that happen?
Why does this president worry so much about ordinary citizens owning firearms ?
On this the ACLU and OBAMA are on different sides. The ACLU demands that a person who has a known, diagnosed, Mental condition not be included in the NICS instant back ground check system unless they have also been convicted of a violent or felony crime. Even if a mental health professional has determined that a person with a diagnosed mental condition is a threat to them self and others the ACLU absolutely demands, under threat of litigation, that their information not be included in the NICS data base unless they have been convicted of a violent or felony crime in which the conviction would, in itself, mandate the they be disqualified from buying a firearm.
In other words, according to the ACLU a person diagnosed with a mental health condition and known to their mental health professional to be a threat to themselves or others must commit a violent crime before they can be denied the right to buy or have firearms.
The ACLU and Obama are very close political buddies. Obama has made statements of support for the ACLU many times.... WOW, there is a big gap here in what they say and what they support...
So they, the ACLU and Obama, are not worried about taking firearms away from crazy people. They are worried about taking firearms away from law abiding citizens with no known or diagnosed mental health problems.
Just to put this in prospective;the NRA wants the data of anyone who has been diagnosed with a mental health condition to be included in the NICS system when a mental health professional believes that they may be a risk to themselves or others. The NRA does not believe that we should have wait until after this person commits a violent crime to prohibit them from buying a firearm.
Maybe Obama should call up his buddies at the ACLU and implement his ideas there.
N.Y’s ‘SAFE ACT” passed by Cuomo during the night without a vote- claimed ‘imminent need’ as his justification- banned all sorts of things, cops went around confiscating guns
http://www.infowars.com/new-york-state-police-admit-wrongly-confiscating-guns-under-new-laws/
[[The New York City Police Department is taking aim at owners of shotguns and rifles capable of holding more than five rounds, demanding such guns be surrendered, altered or taken out of the city.
The demand came in the form of some 500 letters mailed out to owners of registered long guns that are in violation of a 2010 city ordinance. The first option for the letter’s recipient is to, “Immediately surrender your Rifle and/or Shotgun to your local police precinct, and notify this office of the invoice number. The firearm may be sold or permanently removed from the City of New York thereafter.” ]]
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/05/nypd-targets-owners-multi-clip-shotguns-rifles/
[[One attorney representing several people who have been forced to surrender their guns spoke with TheBlaze and alerted us to some disturbing facts:]]
[[Tresmond says his client was ordered to turn in his weapons last week because he was once on anti-anxiety medication, which is a violation of the SAFE Act. Wednesday, State Police informed the Erie County Clerk’s Office that it made a mistake when it said Lewis was in violation of the state’s new gun law. ]]
[[Retired cop sues New York State for confiscating guns after insomnia treatment]]
Need more?
That’ll do. NY City is NOT New York State. We still carry 10 rounds in our CCW pistols, no problem.
[[I received a call from the local detective who told me he had to visit my home in order to make certain that my guns were properly secured and made safe.]]
http://www.2ampd.net/Articles/Mortellaro/jm02.htm
[[NY Assemblyman exposes real gun control CONFISCATION agenda of Democrats
“Here it is. This is the video where I was asked to keep the Democrat proposals for the NY SAFE Act away from the public. This list was given to me by a colleague and it is not confidential.
This bill was an attack on the 2nd amendment and the Democrats clearly wanted to dismantle the work of the Founding Fathers. None of these amendments were included in the final bill thanks to us fighting back. I will not stand silent while these unpatriotic proposals are pathetically thrown at us a 11 o’clock at night:
1. Confiscation of “assault weapons”
2. Confiscation o ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder’s information to be replaced to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as “assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons”]]
http://therightscoop.com/ny-assemblyman-exposes-real-gun-control-confiscation-agenda-of-democrats/
there’s more-
[[no problem.]]
Until you either get pulled over or contacted by the state who might have a record of your gun-
The vast majority of our military, both enlisted and officers, originate from the red states. There is no way they would participate in or allow this to happen. Our people??? Well maybe in the cities where the socialist masses are but that is less than 10% of our nation. The other 90% would stand against it.
As a people we are almost evenly split on the question of gun control but disarmament and gun control are two very different questions. Disarmament would be on the same level as taking our freedom of speech. The majority of those who support some kind of gun control would oppose the total destruction and abandonment of our second amendment. Then there is the SCOTUS who would also stand against the total loss of our secondment rights.
Disarmament is a fantasy wet dream of some on the far socialist liberal left but that is all it is, a dream. The blood bath that would follow any attempt to do this would destroy the left and could destroy our nation. The majority on the left knows this well.
>>You can bet your bottom dollar that once Americans are disarmed by force, Obama isn’t going anywhere.<<
Americans won’t be disarmed.
It’s who is the decider into who is “nuts” that concerns me.
>>I suppose if it came to gun confiscation, some of us will die on our doorsteps doing the same.<<
Right? Think of the alternative.
I’d rather die like a man, than go out whimpering and sniveling on my knees.
You mean like in Connecticutt and New York and California, where they are required to register by law, and have been met with massive civil disobedience?
It has not come to a shooting war - we are at a standoff. In many states, we are winning.
West Virginia is about to go Constitutional carry as we write.
Kansas is on the verge.
You will find that people elsewhere are made of sterner stuff. You might even find that their LEOs would stand with them. If yours won't, I suggest y'all fire them and hire some folks who will uphold the Constitution. If they can't get a little thingy like the Supreme Law of the Land right, well, I'm not so sure I'd want them doing traffic duty.
YMMV.
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.