Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obama to end BIG City gun violence

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

Source

Obama comes from one of the biggest cities in the US. HE has seen what kind of devistation that can be brought about by 15 year old kids carrying assault weapons.

The NRA, is started a smear campaign against Obama that says in no less words that he will take away our guns. This is way out of context of what Obama really wants.
Its unfortunate that the uneducated will listen to smears and possibly divert the country from a path of repair.

Mod edit: Please don't use the code tags, they stretch the page. Also.
Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 16-10-2008 by GAOTU789]




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   


Another poster pointed this out to me but go have a look at the Brady-Bunchs website and their maps and stats. The map shows the high gun-crime areas of which Chi-Town is one. The stats rank all the states with virtually no gun violence as F's because of their lax gun laws and generally ranks the states with high gun crime in the A's and B's.

What is the Brady Campaign trying to tell you? They're telling you they love states with out of control gun crime because the average law-abiding citizen can't get their hands on one. Essentially the Brady-Bunch wants you dead.
So does Obama.

His support of the AWB is THE reason I wont vote for him.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 


Can you post a link to that external reference please? Thanks.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Douggie,
The Bill of Rights contains several inalienable rights that have no restrictions upon them.
Taking away guns, from big cities will increase crime not reduce it.
Obama and Biden are anti gun and anti second amendment.
How a politician views the Second amendment to the bill of rights tells you whether he/she thinks you are a citizen or a subject.
You



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


Right on his own website:

origin.barackobama.com...-and-law-enforcement

Make AWB permanent. I hate him for that.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 


I dont know. Im an avid gun owner. I have a pretty good collection. I dont live in a big city but do see Obamas plan as a commonsense way to curb the Big City violence.

Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them.

Just because they want to curb American violence doesnt mean they want to go house to house and grab your guns.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   
All guns should be allowed because they are our right to have. This right is for our protection from tyrannical leaders. They aren't for robbers or any other type of protection, they are for TYRANNY. Here is a good quote from Jefferson:

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson

or...

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

or...

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
-- in "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

Who are we to argue with Thomas Jefferson? Sure times have changed when it comes to micromanaging the people, but the major concept is still extremely important in protecting the USA. We as a people, even without a military, cannot be won over without one hell of a fight.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 



Considering the fact that most gun violence that happens in big cities is handgun related. Do you know how difficult it is to acquire an ACTUAL assault weapon. The ban he is trying to put forth is being placed on target and hunting weapons that just LOOK like military hardware. Mainly for nostalgia purposes. The guns criminals buy are the cheapest quality handguns you can find. They do not take care of them, or care about much in general. The only thing that will happen if they start banning guns is that crime rate in general will go up.

I support my 2nd amendment right, and I recently purchased an AR-15. NOTE: I wouldn't have bought it if they weren't threatening to take away my RIGHT to purchase it.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:26 PM
link   
I was never in favor of Obama, but when he picked Biden as his running mate, he lost any chance of getting my vote. Biden, has always been anti-2nd amendment. Taking guns away from people who use them to protect themselves will not stop gun crime. We have seen this proven to a great extent in the UK. Like the guy that shot an intruder while protecting himself and his proerty and got life in prison because he killed the intruder with a gun.


If you want to lower gun crimes, increase the education budget and increase the number of jobs. Give the people that commit these crimes an option other than stealing, robbing, and killing.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by emptee]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 


If you've collected some guns I assume a reasonable amount of time has passed since you were a naive child and are now an adult or at least close to being an adult. When the hell has banning anything ever made the problem less of a problem? Drugs? Prostitution? How exactly does making it harder, even impossible, for the average guy to get a gun for fun, sport or whatever reduce in any way the number of assclowns in the world that would shoot a kid for a pair of sneakers?

Then there's the "assault weapon" garbage. Ghetto trash idiots arent running around with AR-15's. They using crappy 4th, 5th, 6th hand pistols that have been stolen or lose years ago. Probably lost by or stolen from a sleeping cop or fed. The FBIs crime stats show all rifles to be involved in less than 3% of all homicides. Which means that the scary "assault" types are involved in even fewer. That 3% number trails handguns which amount to some 15% which trail bare hands and feet which amount to over 30%.

Have you read the text of the AWB? Tell me how keeping a bayonet lug or barrel shroud off the market makes me safer? Drive by bayonettings much?

It's knee-jerk ignorance that makes one look at "ban assault weapons" and jump up and down for joy.

If you search ATS you'll find thread after thread of this argument. Not that it will do any good. It usually doesnt. Fear and ignorance have a way of winning against logic and reason that still amazes me after all my years on this earth. Couple that with Obamas blind "messiah" support and reason doesnt have a chance.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
look at Switzerland every adult male has a automatic wepon in the house mandated by the government as there military is citizen based.. low low low crime rate, would you think twice about robbing homes in a place where everry house has a well trained person behind a fully automatic weapon.. ahh no thanks..

There gun related crime rates are so low they dont even keep statistical records on them any longer, its like the USA keeping statistical records of there nuke attacks.. you don't need to keep records when they only happen once every 100 years, every one remembers it.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Contagion2012
The only thing that will happen if they start banning guns is that crime rate in general will go up.


Kennesaw vs. Morton Grove


... I recently purchased an AR-15. NOTE: I wouldn't have bought it if they weren't threatening to take away my RIGHT to purchase it.


I've spent thousands the past few months because of this jackass Obama. I don't want to get stuck in another Clinton AWB scenario hoping to one day own what by right I damn well should be able to own.

Maybe if I spend enough on "assault weapons" the government will bail me out of the debt



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Here is even more excellent evidence that backs up the Switzerland way of thinking. This is a town in the US that mandates gun ownership for heads of household. They have been murder free for over 25 years.

www.worldnetdaily.com...



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by vapedson
All guns should be allowed because they are our right to have. This right is for our protection from tyrannical leaders. They aren't for robbers or any other type of protection, they are for TYRANNY. Here is a good quote from Jefferson:

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson


But there's no room for common sense limitations? If the argument is to defend against the army of tyrannical governments (foreign or domestic) then you need top-of-the-line equipment. They're gonna have tanks and jets, for starters...so you'll need bazookas and anti-aircraft missiles. I wouldn't trust my neighbors to responsibly use that kind of hardware.

That's why we have citizen, volunteer armed services...so you don't need to worry about facing tanks and jets attacking your home.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
You're thinking in terms of war though. I mean, if our gov't was going to ATTEMPT to take us over, ya they would easily have better technology to increase their odds.

But as long as everyone has guns, we have sheer numbers. Plus the size of the country is near impossible to hold control of if there are people with guns everywhere opposing the tyranny that is trying to take over.

The problem is, once one type of gun gets taken away, they are one step closer to disarming the public. They will do it slowly and in steps and eventually we won't have the ability to protect ourselves from all that they have.

With less guns, their greater technology will for sure prevail.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by E-ville
 


I see what youre saying. But America is totally different from any other country out there. Because of Immigration.
Without some sort of restriction in the US the gang bangers escpecially in SW US going up to Colorado will have a field day.
I read an article the other day about colorado that was sickening.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Vault-D
 


You know you neighbors probably have a gallon jug of bleach under the sink. You trust them not to poison your home water supply? You trust them with lighters? Matches? Not to drive their car through your living room?

There is no such thing as a "common-sense" gun law. "Common-sense" has become a cute term for "I'm afraid of life wont mommy please save me" type totalitarianism.

I'm tired of the semantic BS game played by the gun-grabbers and if you honestly think there is some difference between a Ruger Mini-30 carbine and the oh-so scary AK-47 besides the way it looks than I really feel for you and the ignorance you must be suffering under which allows you to buy into garbage like "common-sense" gun laws and be manipulated by the politicians who use your fear/ignorance to bolster their paychecks and power.

This little "how much of a right can we whittle away before they notice" crap is tired and I wont have any more of it.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Obama to end BIG CITY gun violence?

That's a hoot!

Obama has done NOTHING for his own Chicago.
Chicago is one of the WORST offenders.

BTW - taking guns away from those with a LEGAL and CONSTITUTIONAL right to own them will NOT reduce violence. In fact, IMHO it will cause more. The criminals will know that their targets, the general population, is unarmed. They'll be like kids in a candy store.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 


Ah so your saying that Switzerland doesn't get people from Italy or the uk coming into there country .. they probably have more immigration than we do.. however they don't have the crime from immigration because there heavly armed.. again the more armed you are the less problems you'll have , trust me if every citizen in the USA was armed and trained with automatic weapons immigrants would think twice about coming in and causing problems.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by vapedson
 


I guess I'm arguing that, based on common sense, we don't need military-grade hardware in our homes. (I'm being sloppy on defining 'military hardware' i know.) That's a gun-control law I'm comfortable with.

Maybe some conspiracy folks will disagree, but I just don't see the President addressing the 5th Battalion and saying "OK, time to start seizing guns from everyone in Texas. Let's get to it." And I don't really see the slippery slope of common sense laws leading to the outlawing more and more guns, culminating in a total ban. We love guns in America.









 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join