Obama Town Hall: Obama Rips Gun Control Fiction

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: forkedtongue

Explain Iraq and Afghanistan

Easy enough, people shoot at you, you shoot back....kinda easy to understand really.

Got it, when I go into my neighbor's yard and they start shooting at me I can shoot back.

Is that what I said?

Funny, I dont remember saying that.....just looked and nopers, it is not there.

You know you cant imply your way to what you want right?

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: Agit8dChop


But an automatic machine gun similar to what the army uses?

Did you just come from a filming of The View? Do you even know how any of this works??

Who is selling "automatic machine guns" to US Citizens?

Did you just come from watching FOX and friends? Because you don't know what you are talking about. There are many places here in the states that sells fully automatic weapons to people as long as they have the proper permits.
Machine Guns For Sale
Class III Full Auto Weapons for Sale
Class 3 Rifles Class 3 Subguns For Sale

Sounds like current regulations have that handled, no?

*edit- "regulations" replaced "laws" in the sentence above.

a reply to: forkedtongue

Did the US not invade Iraq and Afghanistan? NOT US soil, for WRONG reasons, know openly acknowledged?

I appreciate your service good sir, but don't ever tell me you defended my freedom.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: forkedtongue

Did the US not invade Iraq and Afghanistan? NOT US soil, for WRONG reasons, know openly acknowledged?

I appreciate your service good sir, but don't ever tell me you defended my freedom.

What, pray tell, is your freedom?
And, who has defended that for you?

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: forkedtongue

Did the US not invade Iraq and Afghanistan? NOT US soil, for WRONG reasons, know openly acknowledged?

I appreciate your service good sir, but don't ever tell me you defended my freedom.

Did I?

Push come to shove though, I did serve for exactly that reason.

You might not like it or agree, but never the less, was the war here or there?

It was there, in their back yards not yours in suburbia.

That is in fact the point.

Sure it was the wrong reasons, sure it was the wrong place, but the war was still going to happen.

War is a fact of human existence, we can keep it away from our homes or we can wait for it to come to them.

You cannot name a single time in all of recorded human history war wasnt waged or on the verge of being waged.

Some of us know this and serve to keep it at a distance from our homes.

Others( this would be you) pretend it is not a maxim that will not ever end, or that it ever will end. And demonize those that make sure you dont have to see it.

Look at the natural world, it is in a constant state of war.

It is not meant to ever stop, it is natural.

Why do you assume hairless monkeys are immune?

Sure, we should aspire to greater heights, but they allude us today.

Today we either accept reality or we succumb to reality.

War is in our blood, it is in our genetic code, it will happen.

Will it be an Iraq and Afghanistan or will it be a world war?

I much prefer an Iraq and Afghanistan over a repeat of either world war.

War will end when life ends, not before period.

Here let me help you off your high horse.

Reality is right this way brother......

a reply to: boncho

According to the NRA spokesman the reason they declined to participate was they were told that they would only get one question, no follow up questions, and they must submit the questio0n in writing prior to the event. I can see why the declined the invite. That is not a conversation about the issue, that is allowing the Presidents speech writers to hand craft the perfect answer to the question.
Prescreened questions have no place in open and honest discussion.

You want to talk about reasonable... How is it reasonable to make gun owners fill out all kinds of paper work, wait 9+ months plus pay $200 tax stamp, just to get a suppressor that will help to prevent hearing loss. When has the government given anything back when it wants gun owners to make a "compromise".

You call allowing the government to suspend American citizens constitutional right without due processes reasonable.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: buster2010

Oh goodie......
So, Mr. Expert, what forms/permits are needed for these?
Are they new or old?
What are the costs associated with these full auto firearms?

Instead of making ignorant comments try clicking on the links for once. You need a class 3 license to be able to own fully automatic weapons. Here is a video to help explain it to you.

I am far from being an expert but then again I'm not ignorant when it comes to firearms like many people are in this forum.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Nobody has those.

Which town hall did OP watch?

Chris Kyle's wife handed BO his butt!

a reply to: forkedtongue

My best friend is high ranking AF. Yea the chair-force. He's in medic. I've never served, I won't lie I looked for every reason not to. I did not want to put myself in that. My youngest memories were watching the FIRST FIRST iraq war on TV, The Bush Sr./Clinton one. Was cool as a kid to see that tv. I had a big ass poster of the SR-71. I had a lamborghini poster too.

I never grew it in me to be a fighter if I didn't need to be, I was recruited too. It actually was REALLY common at my age of 18 to join ('99). Y2K was coming, gas was a dollar, but I just never saw the urge to go fight. Hate me, love me, I don't care, I never wanted to pick up a gun and fight someone unless my life was at stake. So far it never has been.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: forkedtongue

Explain Iraq and Afghanistan

Easy enough, people shoot at you, you shoot back....kinda easy to understand really.

Got it, when I go into my neighbor's yard and they start shooting at me I can shoot back.

More importantly, why are you in your neighbor's yard?

'twas the analogy good sir

Analogy? Yes it was.

While I can see both sides: the neighbor may be justified in shooting so as to protect what's theirs, and you may be justified in returning fire so as to protect yourself, it still begs the question as to your purpose for being in their yard in the first place. No one, willfully puts themselves into a potentially hostile situation without some motivation or justification for doing so.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Well the Louisiana National Guard, The New Orleans Police Department, The Louisiana State Police, and the Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Department have no problems following orders to seize guns from Citizens. They did just that, went door to door taking the guns from Citizens who have every right to possess them. So I do not share in your belief that other Military and Law Enforcement Personnel will not.

a reply to: buster2010

Well no, you're wrong as usual. I'm gone for 6 months and you still haven't changed.

YOU don't need a Class III, or correctly called an S.O.T. to own an NFA controlled item.
YOU need an SOT if you are a dealer or manufacturer. This goes for full auto, select fire, SBRs, SBS, silencers, destructive devices or AOW.

Now, in order to own as a US Citizen, a full auto firearm, the firearm has to have been manufacturer before 1986. Full auto firearms manufactured after 1986 are not allowed to be owned by US citizens. This includes not only the firearms, but trigger groups, lightning rods and such.

Now, for the average citizen, a full auto M16, pre-ban, can sell for around $15k ish or more.
A tax stamp is then applied for via Form 4 with the NFA. That costs $200.



Now, within the world of infringement, for firearms and say............voting.
Both are protected. Both have set standards, say..........I don't know, a poll tax.
What the tax stamp is, is a poll tax for firearms. Poll taxes are illegal.
Yet, people like you will bitch and moan about requiring an ID for voting, but have no qualms about imposing a tax on something that is explicitly stated "shall not be infringed".

You're stance is hypocritical at best.


The next time you think that your "google-fu" is up for a challenge, you go ahead and PM me and we can start right back where we left off.

a reply to: forkedtongue

Also I would like to add I thank you for your sacrifice to our country. You are a member of the US military, and that's a pretty great force to have my back, so with great gratitude, I truly thank you

Surprisingly, this Fox News opinion mostly agrees with you. However, the author does point out some major whoppers Obama did get away with.

Taya Kyle, the wife of the late “American Sniper” Chris Kyle, was the first person Cooper called on. Kyle recently won a gun competition using the latest in sniper technology. She is a confident straight shooter. She pointed out that while the murder rate is at an all-time low, gun ownership is at an all time high. And then she asked, “Why not celebrate who we are?”

President Obama began shifting on his stool and searching for words to lawyer his way out of these basic facts. He finally pointed out that national trends don’t necessarily hold true in all locales, but he never had to answer why the areas with the strictest gun controls tend to have the highest murder rates.

They did allow him to face tough questions, but without follow ups, he was allowed to squirm out of give mostly non-answers. That sort of thing doesn't happen in a forum like this one. If the two parties here are so engaged, you either answer the question or abdicate the discussion.

There was also a rape survivor, Kimberly Corban, who, when called on said, “I have been unspeakably vandalized once already” before asking why she shouldn’t be able to carry a gun to protect herself.

President Obama was really uncomfortable then. He began back peddling and said his current executive actions won’t interfere with her right to carry a gun. But he never had to explain that he has supported bans on concealed-carry permits.

My husband has a coworker whose parents made her learn how to handle a gun and earn her CC license in Texas before she went to college. It came in handy as she was forced off the road by two men on a back road on night. All she had to do was flash her weapon and they got back in their truck and drove off, leaving her to make her way back on the road and to wherever it was she was headed.

Without that CC permit and her weapon, who knows what they were up to. The president opposes letting women like her have that weapon to defend themselves.

President Obama also repeatedly said that people can “just go on the Internet and buy whatever weapon they want.” But he was never forced to explain that any gun bought from a dealer over the Internet has to be sent to a local dealer that by law has to perform a background check before they can transfer the gun.

Everyone says this all the time and NO ONE ever challenges this.

But Cooper didn’t force the president to address his advocacy for a renewed “assault weapons” ban, or for his administration’s public desire to use black lists, such as the no-fly list, to take away citizens’ Second Amendment rights without giving them even the basics of due process.

It's only a conspiracy Mr. President if you are actively looking for ways to keep people from owning weapons. Here are two major ways you have advocated for it.

President Obama didn’t have a clear answer to say why he isn’t swayed by these facts. He meandered before saying, “The young man who killed those children in Newtown didn’t have a criminal record but he had access to an arsenal.” He referred to an attack in China where a person attacked people with a knife and said “the vast majority survived because he wasn’t wielding a semiautomatic.”

Again, Cooper allowed President Obama to escape an obvious allusion to the fact that he would like to ban semiautomatic firearms.

Here's familiar leftist cry. Let's just get rid of the semi-auto and no one will ever die again. We can all pretend to ignore that pretty much all rifles and handguns are semi-auto these days ...

But no one wants to ban your guns ...

No conspiracy.

Nevertheless, this is a clear and provable fabrication by President Obama. As I detail, with interviews with many gun makers, law makers and gun experts in my book “The Future of the Gun,” the NRA and the NSSF, to name two pro-Second Amendment groups, have statements on their websites saying they are not opposed to “smart-gun” technology. All the manufacturers, the NRA leadership and more, point to laws that seek to mandate smart-gun technology—regulations previously backed by the Obama administration—that are what is impeding smart-gun development. Even “60 Minutes” noted this, and pointed out a New Jersey law on the books that would do this, in a recent report.

Maybe if the government got out of the way ... smart guns might be possible.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: reldra

It was an Administration campaign event for Obama's policies. You can't really call it a "Town Hall" event/discussion/debate or whatever when it's invite only by CNN and the White House.

And it's not like anyone there who's opinion differed from the Democrat's narrative was going to change Obama's mind about anything.

Add in the fact that the executive actions are going to have zero impact on stopping crazy determined individuals from killing people if they want to.

It was an ego stroke fest for Obama to make it look like he was accomplishing something. A puppet show for the masses.

CNN organized it, it was their idea. You may not believe it, but it is true.

What is an administration campaign event?

So the only way the NRA could be represented was with 1 pre-selected question was the claim being made. The whole town meeting was scripted. I do not own a firearm, not I can certainly see my rights being stripped away by an abuse of executive power.

Obama's Executive orders are designed to infringe upon our rights. Shall not be infringed, what does infringe mean ? Don't that mean that no laws or statutes can be made to change a natural Right.

Merriam-Webster"s definition of infringe-
: to do something that does not obey or follow (a rule, law, etc.) ( chiefly US )

: to wrongly limit or restrict (something, such as another person's rights)

a reply to: Vector99

No need to thank me, I was glad to do it.

Dont think less of yourself, you are not!

All are not meant to be soldiers any more than all are meant to be doctors or preachers!

We all have our own merits and abilities, we are very diverse.

This ensures that we always have what we need when we need it, this is what made us the top of the food chain!

Many different skill sets, all just doing their parts.

Some kill others heal, while others still others are meant to protest against both, because it takes all types to make this world work, and without even one mindset it wouldnt work correctly!!!!

No matter yours, do not feel shame or like you are lesser in any way, we all play our part!!

I am the type that is head strong and willing to work myself to death and fight to protect my people, some would never fight, and think it deplorable to do so, I am no greater than they. We simply serve different tasks in this world, both are of equal value, at different times.

We all serve have a role.

Just like the engine in a car, it takes many different parts playing many different roles to make it all work.

We agree to disagree, that doesnt mean we cant share some beers and sausages!!!

a reply to: TheSemiSkeptic

Those entities also got their asses handed to them by the federal courts for violating the 2nd amendment. The action was taken under a state of emergency declaration status. It occurred in New Orleans yet did not occur in any other area of Louisiana or the surrounding states that were also hit.

The entities you listed were all state agencies and were not under any federal authority nor were they ordered by the feds to confiscate weapons. The police told officers looters could be shot and again a very large number of officers refused to comply with that.

The Governor also refused to place her guard units under Federal command.

If you researched the topic you would also know orders to confiscate weapons were ignored by law enforcement / military personnel because it was illegal. Also Ray Nagin called for martial law. Whats sad about that is martial law does not exist under the Louisiana constitution.

Trying to paint all members of those organizations as taking part in gun confiscation is problematic because its simply not true.

Since the federal courts reaffirmed what we all knew, that gun confiscation is illegal / unconstitutional, it will be almost impossible to do a gun grab under those scenarios.

So I stand by what I said about those types of orders not being followed. Secondly Katrina landfall occurred on August 29th. On September 23rd the courts started issuing rulings at the state and federal levels that guns cannot be confiscated. The courts also found, in addition to 2nd amendment violations, 4th and 14th amendment violations occurred (illegal search seizure of private homes / equal protection under the law).

In this incident rule of law prevailed over government actions and that was on top of the refusals to carry out said orders.