If he doesn't Biden will.

September 5, 2008, 2:38 pm
Obama: ‘I’m Not Going to Take Your Guns Away’

Christopher Cooper reports from Duryea, Pa., on the presidential race.

The Obama campaign talks a lot about new ideas and expanding the political map, but in the swing state of Pennsylvania, which the campaign has focused on almost exclusively since the Democratic convention, old-school issues still rise to the fore.

The latest example came Friday during a small political event at SCHOTT North America Inc., a glass factory in Duryea, Pa., where even a hand-picked crowd threw Barack Obama a curve ball.

A woman in the crowd told Obama she had “heard a rumor” that he might be planning some sort of gun ban upon being elected president. Obama trotted out his standard policy stance, that he had a deep respect for the “traditions of gun ownership” but favored measures in big cities to keep guns out of the hands of “gang bangers and drug dealers’’ in big cities “who already have them and are shooting people.”

“If you’ve got a gun in your house, I’m not taking it,’’ Obama said. But the Illinois senator could still see skeptics in the crowd, particularly on the faces of several men at the back of the room.

So he tried again. “Even if I want to take them away, I don’t have the votes in Congress,’’ he said. “This can’t be the reason not to vote for me. Can everyone hear me in the back? I see a couple of sportsmen back there. I’m not going to take away your guns.’’

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/05/obama-im-not-going-to-take-your-guns-away/

I agree with what Obama says right now about taking away our guns. Instead he will get them over the next four years if elected by nominating extreme liberal judges to the bench. That way he will not have to rely on enough votes by congress to get the guns away from American citizens. His record in the US and IN senate are as anti-gun as you can get. Again, Obama, talk is cheap and your deeds don't lie!!!!

He just doesn’t get it. Its not that he cant its that he wants to. that is reason enough to not vote for him. Not to mention he would appoint judges that have the same views as him.

The fact he mentioned he didn't have enough votes, let's me know he's already done the math. So it's an idea that's floating around in his head.

Why would he even need to think about the amount of votes he has if it weren't an idea of his?

The fact is that "God, Guns, & Gays" is not going to go away no matter how badly Obama would like it to.

I think the following letter responding to the article about sums it up.

well, one needs to look no further than a few cities that have extreme anti-gun ownership laws, Washington DC and Chitcago. Very high crime rates against its citizens.

I've heard the malarkey since I was hatched about the government taking my guns away. Ain't gonna happen I don't care who is president.

Don’t fool yourself just look what happened after Katrina, there are those who want to take your guns away.

I beleive his true opinion, based on all the statements he has made, is he doesnt think anyone should have guns except cops and i wouldnt be suprised if he didnt feel there are times cops shouldnt have guns.

He says he will protect the right of hunters? Those of us who have guns for self-defense, home defense, target shooting etc... will be in danger of losing those guns under an Obama administration and thier appointed judges!

gun bans dont work EVER! the criminals keep thier guns while the law abiding citizens lose thier ability to protect themselves.

gun bans, overwhelming tax burdens esp. on business (which means less jobs and companies moving out the country), live birth abortions, socialist healthcare, military cutbacks and defense reduction, 100s of billions of dollars out of Americans pockets given to global interests like the UN etc... etc... THIS IS WHAT TO LOOK FORWARD TOO IN AN OBAMA ADMINISTRATION!

you can't have mine barry....NYA

Says it all:

“Even if I want to take them away, I don’t have the votes in Congress"

Well said Deputy. I watched a show a few months ago about a town up north that has a Different approach to this. They have a law that says all citizens of that town must own a firearm. Their break-in and robbery rate was zero.
If we were all (Except known criminals) allowed to carry weapons the crime rate would fall drastically. Saving thousands of lives every year. Plus the simple satisfaction that we are a lot safer.

It`s movies like Tombstone that makes us think this wont work. At the beginning of this movie it states murder rates were higher then than they are today. That`s Hollywood talking. Fact is, everyone carried a gun and they watched what they said and did. They knew the other person probably had a gun on then so they better not do anything wrong because they just might get shot over it.

Just look at the number of States who are following in Texas`s footsteps for CHL. The crime rate falls when a state brings in CHL holders. They think twice before committing a crime because they just might get shot for it by a normal citizen.

Obama's mouth, inexperience and naivity is the gift that keeps on giving.
He goes back to the place that he insulted people about clinging to their guns and religion and reinforces what everybody knew by saying “Even if I want to take them away, I don’t have the votes in Congress".

“This can’t be the reason not to vote for me. Can everyone hear me in the back? I see a couple of sportsmen back there. I’m not going to take away your guns.’’

the only thing a criminal is scared of is a citizen with a gun.

What does a sportsman look like? Is that some kind of special look and way of life?

What does an un-sportsman look like? A pompous politician talking down to you like somebody trying to screw you?

I guess we all look alike.

I guess so. Is their like a handbook that shows a picture of a sportsman? I want to make sure I have the look down correctly so they don't under count on the census.

Silas I supose you will say they didn't take them away in England. If enough judges on the supreme court want it it will happen. What kind of justices would Obama appoint?

"sportsman" is code for "dumb rednecks who cling to guns and religion"

I'd like to see him take away Sarah Palin's gun. She might mistake him for a moose.

What makes you think people who live in England can't own a gun? How do they go hunting?

Silas, you might want to check those English laws.

Maybe they'll socialize gun ownership if they get elected. Take guns from folks who have a lot of 'em and give 'em to folks who have few or no weapons.

maybe theyll institute a gun tax, where you have to pay so much a year for each gun you own

Don't give them any ideas.

Why would I check them? This is what I don't like about all the political jargon. You can say anything you want about England Canada Italy or any country and say if so in so gets elected we will be just like them.
Is there anybody here that is dumb enough to believe Dallas will have a law that says you can't own a gun? I have a bridge I want to sell you.

Now....how could he have known they were "sportsmen"? How did he know that they weren't members of a local militia group?

The word "sportsman" here is important. What the gun-grabbers try to do first is not go for hunting rifles and shotguns. They go for the evil black assault rifles. That way, they can say they aren't going after hunting guns....just evil guns.

Of course, the fact that the 2nd amendment ain't about hunting doesn't come up in the discussion.

Silas, why don't you talk to some residents of the People's Republik of Kalifornia.

I can tell you from first-hand experience that gun rights have been taken away out there. In fact many of us here on the forum, if we had to move to Kalifornia, would have to sell several of our guns before we could move to the state, or risk becoming felons the minute we crossed the state line.

Don't be so naive. If Obama is elected, he and the Democrat controlled Congress WILL ban MANY different types of guns as quickly as they can.

And don't kid yourself. They want the hunting guns too.

A brief look at English gun laws:

http://www.nraila.org/issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=78

"Licenses have been required for rifles and handguns since 1920, and for shotguns since 1967. A decade ago semi-automatic and pump-action center-fire rifles, and all handguns except single- shot .22s, were prohibited. The .22s were banned in 1997. Shotguns must be registered and semi-automatic shotguns that can hold more than two shells must be licensed."

Do I have to remind you that the 2nd amendment is not about hunting?

Are you also aware that the battle of Lexington and Concord came about because Britain was going there to disarm the people?

I don't own any guns. Who said I own a gun?

me either

no guns here either.

Bad you need to be a spokesman for the NRA.

Or here. Guns kill people.

You can carry a gun in your auto in California. You see this is where all the twisted stuff starts. You can own guns in California but on here folks say you can't even cross the border. Just bull like most of this stuff. I must finds something better to do.

How about being just being a spokesman for myself....as someone who has lived in a state with restrictive gun laws?

I'll never forget buying my first gun here after I moved back from that "worker's paradise". I couldn't get over how I just walked in, filled out the form, payed for the gun and walked out. Just like that.

It would have taken me close to two weeks to do the same thing out there. No wait....I couldn't have done it there at all. At least not for the gun I bought.

And you know what that gun was? A Uberti reproduction Colt SAA "peacemaker". That's right....an old six-shooter. Those are illegal in Kalifornia. Because Kalifornians are considered too stupid to know how to handle them properly. They are considered "unsafe".

Silas, you are either mis-informed or are being intentionally dishonest. I'll assume the former.

In California, if you carry a gun inside the passenger compartment of your vehicle, it must be unloaded, inside a LOCKED hard-case container. And the ammunition must be in a separate location. Not in a magazine in the container with the gun. Additionally, you must be on your way to or returning from a gun range, or transporting the gun to a different location (moving or hunting). You can't just carry it around with you in the car all of the time.

As for crossing the border....

If you enter Kalifornia with a standard AR-15, AK-47, FN-FAL (just naming a few here) or even some variants of the SKS rifle, you have committed a felony. Also, it is illegal to take hi-capacity magazines into the state. High capacity is defined as 10 or more rounds for a pistol or rifle. There are also certain handguns that are illegal. Basically anything that can accept a high-capacity magazine is a big no-no.

No point arguing this with me Silas. I lived there.

By the way....as for obtaining a CHL in Kalifornia......it is a practical impossibility. The law exists on the books, but from a practical point of view, very few of the counties in Kalifornia issue them. Most of them that do are the rural counties. You have a better chance of getting struck by lightning than obtaining a CHL in Kalifornia.

You know bad I don't like folks that aren't natives but I sure like the way you write things. i'm glad you moved here from wherever you started out.

Well...I'm kind of half native. I wasn't born here...but I was raised here. Lived in Kalifornia over 20 years and moved back about 6 years ago.

By the way, my knowledge of Kalifornia gun laws is dated from when I lived there. They've made changes since then. I don't know the details on those, but I do know that they have NOT made things easier for gun owners. I do know that in some regions of the state, they have banned lead bullets. They've done this for "environmental" reasons, but even the Department of Fish and Game says it's stupid. Translated, that means if they can't ban the guns, they'll ban the ammo. Yes...you can make bullets from other metals, but the PRACTICAL effect is to ban the gun...at least for recreational reasons.

As an aside....after the assault weapons ban in the early 90's (Kalifornia led the way on that by the way)....a couple of off-duty police officers were shooting their own AR-15's out in the desert. The San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department descended on them in a helicopter and confiscated their guns. That was part of the ban out there. You could no longer shoot banned weapons (even if you had registered them) anywhere but at a range or designated shooting area. Again...the practical effect was to ban the guns, even if they weren't confiscated.

Also, at that time, they put certain SKS variants on the banned list...but you could register them and keep them. Shortly before I moved back here, they changed their mind and demanded that all of these guns be surrendered. If you were caught in possession of one of these after that date, it was a felony. And of course, since they were registered, they knew exactly who had them.

I had one of these, but sold it shortly after the first ban went into effect. I had to sell it to a dealer out of state, as it was illegal to transfer to a Kalifornia resident.....EVEN A FAMILY MEMBER.

So much for freedom in Kalifornia, The People's Republik of.

edit: by the way...thanks for the kind words.

So, this gun is illegal in the PRK?

I'm not sure MBradford. When I moved from there, it was still legal, though I think the hi-capacity magazines were not....or they were talking about banning them. There may be an exception also because it is a .22 rimfire.

The center-fire weapons are the ones they really get uptight about.

Also, there was a lot of controversy over the high-capacity issue because originally the law banned ALL hi-capacity magazines, attached or detachable. The practical effect of this was to ban all lever-action rifles that shot pistol cartriges...such as Winchester, Uberti reproduction lever-actions, etc. etc. Cowboy action shooting is pretty big out there and that law would effectively ban most any of those guns.

edit: Also...there were some exceptions made for rifles like the Springfield MI-A rifle. I think the reason was because so many of the rifle match shooters use those. But I know that the 20 round magazines are no longer legal to take into the state. 10 rounds or less is the law I believe.

I wish they would make laws against the use of guns. If you use one while committing a crime life with no parole. Done deal.

Now there ya go. THAT makes sense. Those are the kinds of laws that even the NRA supports. Because it deals with the REAL problem...human behavior.

while current laws do not provide for life without parole if a gun is used. the law does make enhancements for offenses commited with guns.

A moose?

A half-starved squirrel maybe, but no way a moose.

TFP

Silas an example a year or so ago a man came home from work just a two crooks had broken into his house the one was raping the mans wife he had a gun and shot the two crooks. GUESS WHO WENT TO JAIL. HE WAS SENT TO PRISON FOR HAVING A GUN.