Obama Administration's War Against The Second Amendment...Continued...

No such thing as natural rights.

 

I believe if you check, the DINOs were moderate democrats that lost their jobs and they lost them to liberal democrats. I didn't ask if they tried to amend or delete the 2nd Amendment, I asked if you thought they would attempt to take guns if he had a majority, and let me modify that a bit if he had a majority now.
Let me ask another question, what were Obamas early initiatives on gun control when he had control of both chambers?

Thanks glad you support it. So does that mean you'll condemn any public official who dares to try to ban a class of weapons?

 

Some DINOcrats lost to Republicans.

Obamas early initiatives? I don't recall off hand and would have to look that up.


"Thanks glad you support it. So does that mean you'll condemn any public official who dares to try to ban a class of weapons?"

I stand by the 2d Amendment but as for banning a class of weapons that must be done on a case-by-case basis. For example, I think we can all agree that the government has the right to void owning nuclear weapons.

 

I guess I am asking...do you believe Obama would ban any type of currently legal class of weapons if he got control of both chambers again?

 

A solution that would heavily reduce the number of gun murders every year AND still comply with the 2nd amendment would be to ban metal bullets and only allow rubber bullets. Rubber bullets are used by the police in Europe when riots occur. These bullets act to knock people unconscious without killing them as they don't penetrate a person's skin.

>>>MOD EDIT Rule 15 Link to Petition Removed<<<

 

The right to life, and to protect that life.

 

No such thing as natural rights. I agree you and I have the right to do those things, but there is no "natural law" or "natural rights". They are human constructs.

 

I do not know as I am not a mind reader - perhaps if you were more specific I could check his website for an answer.

 

I think I got my answer but one more college try, DO YOU (the only mind you would have to read is yours) believe that IF Obama got a majority in both chambers, he would ban ANY class or type of weapons?

 

Google is your best friend.

 

What you think, is on Google?
I get it though....you are avoiding answering my question, cool enough. A lack of response shows me my answer.
Thanks

 

I answered your question but in your hysterical delusionalism you fail to see it.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, by the way, I'm still waiting for proof that Obama has taken away so much as one gun like Republican hero Bush did by the thousands in NOLA

 

I'm still waiting for proof he didn't try to attack the 2A through introduced or attempted introduction of legislation to ban entire classes of weapons. This is in keeping with the OP "Obama Administration's war against the second amendment....continued"

It's a matter of semantics, You want to singularly focus on guns taken away, I believe that war is being waged by attempting to pass legislation restricting classes of weapons. Hence Obama is attacking the 2A!

 

There's an old rule that you can't prove a negative.

Still waiting for the "proof" that he has taken so much as one gun.


... and waiting ....

 

It is pretty natural to want to protect oneself.

 

Sure. But "natural law" simy does not exist. Survival is an instinct.

- - - Updated - - -

What legislation did he enact or attempt to enact banning a class of weapons.

 

He endorsed Dianne Feinstein's attempt to re-instate her assault weapons ban which had sun-setted. A bill that added many more weapons such as legal mini-14 and shotguns if they had a pistol grip attached.
He would of signed it in a heartbeat.
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/18/obama_will_back_feinsteins_bill_to_reinstate_assault_weapons_ban/

News release on the bill
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/01/24/Feinstein-introduces-gun-ban-bill/UPI-86811359012600/

This list included more weapons than the original assault weapons ban from Clinton!

Ultimately given an opportunity one would be foolish to believe that they would have stopped there. Obamas active support wasn't enough to overcome the will of the people in the end.

Harry Reid actually stopped it for several reasons.

It ends up being a matter of view points, mine is, Obama is actively supporting legislation going after certain weapons and if successful would go after more. How you view it is up to you. I also choose to promote the view point that this current regime errr administration is rabidly anti-gun based on the news reports I have seen.

 

His plea for Universal Background checks that everyone knows can not be successfully implemented without a central registry (Gun registration) is proof enough that he is anti 2A. The gun legislation defeat last year in congress was his administration's biggest failure of his presidency. He was on record saying he was angry and disappointed that he could not get it passed. You would have to be in denial or a liar not to admit that Obama, Bloomberg,and Feinstien are all cut from the same cloth.

 

So he didn't enact or attempt to enact any legislation banning a class of weapons. Thank you.

- - - Updated - - -

No it isn't. And universal background checks in no way infringe on the 2nd amendment. I am as pro gun as it gets, and wholeheartedly support them.

 

He actively supported passage of said legislation...which is an attempt...so Thank you!

 

So he didn't enact or attempt to enact any legislation to ban a class of weapons. Thank you.

You can try to move the goalposts but I will call you on it.

 

If you support registration of all firearms then you are not as pro gun as you think. UBC's wont work without registration.

- - - Updated - - -

Play semantics if you want, but the bottom line is Obama is anti 2A.

 

I'll lay it out for you one time...then you can play word games with some one else...or pretend call them out if you will.
Legislation was proposed by a chamber, the president liked said proposal and could either have had a hand in it's crafting or he could attempt to get it passed by calling legislators and twisting their arms, offering favors, promising re-election support in an attempt to get said legislation passed. It's called actively supporting it.
You can deny/defend/deflect all you want...but that is an attempt in anyone's book.

 

When the legislation was defeated, he held a press conference and was so angry he was almost in tears. He scolded congress for not taking action to "save the children". He is not a friend of anyone who believes in the constitutional right to bear arms.

 

Right. So he didn't enact or attempt to enact any legislation banning a class of firearms. I got it the first time.

- - - Updated - - -

Background checks aren't registration.

It's called reality, not semantics.