http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Barack_Obama.htm
http://glassbooth.org/explore/index/barack-obama/11/gun-control/9/
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html
"Calls for permanently reinstating assault weapons ban"
"Obama did not sign a friend-of-the-court brief that urged the Supreme Court to overturn the District of Columbia gun ban."
"Obama said he believes "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."
On the handguns thing, Obama claims that it was a staffer who filled out the particular questionnaire and mischaracterized his stance.
Here's a recent article on Obama and the gun concerns -- http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/obama_and_guns_not_going_to_me.html
Originally posted by BackFire
On the handguns thing, Obama claims that it was a staffer who filled out the particular questionnaire and mischaracterized his stance.Here's a recent article on Obama and the gun concerns -- http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/obama_and_guns_not_going_to_me.html
Lol well that explains it all..it was one of his staffers of course.
Was it another staffer that supported SB 1195 (Semi-Auto Manufacture, Transfer and Possession Ban) in the Illinois Senate that would have banned private hunting shotguns?
Originally posted by KidRockWhy exactly is banning assault weapons bad?
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Barack_Obama.htmhttp://glassbooth.org/explore/index/barack-obama/11/gun-control/9/
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html
"Calls for permanently reinstating assault weapons ban"
"Obama did not sign a friend-of-the-court brief that urged the Supreme Court to overturn the District of Columbia gun ban."
"Obama said he believes "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."
Originally posted by Strangelove
So by all means, we need to protect the rights of people to own weapons that all but encourage killing your fellow man. The word "assault" in in the freaking name.
So. You want to take away the rights of free people because some are idiots. Assault weapons can obviously be used for protection. I'd assume you could also use them for hunting. Or you might just enjoy collecting them. Whatever it is, the point is that you shouldn't take away rights of people cause you are on a silly power trip...
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-GavNot only the state (who is a big bully) also other citizens in particular criminals (which are the ones that don't give a **** about laws, like, for example, weapons being banned)
The idea behind citizens owning guns is to allow them to defend themselves against the state.It makes sense.
Originally posted by Bardock42
So? Because the odds are incredibly against them, they should also get another handicap and not be allowed guns? That argument is just ridiculous, Sym.
No I'm just pointing out that the argument "Having an AK-47 is going to protect me when Obama rolls a tank through my church" is equally silly. The idea that owning a weapon helps you resist the government when it turns evil was rendered obsolete decades ago. I may be wrong but haven't most revolutions needed the help of the military to survive?