{Gun Control} Obama: "Why Are You Afraid Of The Govt. That You Elected?"

reply to post by Honor93

soooo, you're claiming that quoting historical statements is reflective of an 'imbalance' ??

Yes I am, when that quote in the context used is a direct threat to citizens of my nation, it is very reflective of an imbalance.

What these people are saying is: "Do what we say or we are going to start killing you and we are going to call that freedom."

reply to post by beezzer


I just love the photo shoots with all the cops in the background. Nothing against cops mind you. But it looks so "authoritarian" and makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Mind you these cops, cops in general are if not elected on a local basis are paid for on a local basis and serve the people of their jurisdiction but these washington boys would make you think these LEO work for them!

Originally posted by beezzer
Can someone please show me a proposed law by the progressives that increases the punishment on people who commit crimes with firearms (as a deterrent).

Because all I can see are restrictions on people who have not committed a crime!

And Obama has the gall to say, "Why Are You Afraid Of The Govt. That You Elected?"

Damn right Beez ! They simply ignore the more logical deterrents / solutions, that any one capable of critical thinking can come up with. And he wants to know what it is we fear ? Obviously he hasn't studied recent history at all. Quack.

reply to post by HauntWok

so, just out of curiosity, what kind of threat would you classify a tyrant ?

or do you believe there is no such thing as tyranny ?

none of those 'imbalanced' ppl you mentioned targeted a tyrant so i don't follow your generalization at all.

as for the quote, sometimes, as history has proven, such methods are necessary.
why is that so difficult for you to accept ?

reply to post by Logarock


I occasionally ask the question about gun laws towards criminals to prevent more crimes committed by guns, and I get no answer!

512 people died in Chicago last year due to firearms.

Were they all prosecuted to protect the innocent?

No.

Just more laws about legal gun owners who commit no crimes.

reply to post by beezzer

Can someone please show me a proposed law by the progressives that increases the punishment on people who commit crimes with firearms (as a deterrent).

The toughest punishment on the books that I know of is Florida's 10 to 20 gun law not really sure if Jeb is a "progressive" tho.

reply to post by beezzer


Its real simple, as simple as it seems......they are working for some outside force as plants to destroy the US. Puppets is what they are and we should by now understand that they well never make any sense untill we understand that about them and stop waiting for some day when they come to themselves.

reply to post by Honor93


History is a great thing. We should learn from it so that WE DON'T REPEAT IT.

But for some, they learn from history JUST TO REPEAT IT.

Here's the thing, in this country you have the right to petition your government, hell, you can create your own lobby if you want to.

You can sue your government.

You can even with enough support kick out people in the government and replace them with people you find more agreeable to you. IF YOU HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORT.

That's the thing. That's what pisses you people off, you think that a small minority of people should dictate what the rest of us do. And if we don't cow to your demands, your idea is to start a bloodbath for it? Because of a quote from history? From a time when they had REAL tyranny real oppression and a real reason to fight back.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by sprtpilot
Because, EVERY national level politician is corrupt. That simple.

You know I saw an interesting pic the other day
It said:

Real Presidents are assassinated & corrupt ones are re-elected!

sad stuff

Yeah, but then there was Lincoln. Obama wishes he was half the tyrant Lincoln was.

reply to post by HauntWok

should and do are very different verbs
for most throughout history, repeating it seems to provide some level of 'comfort' and that in itself is disturbing.

in this country, i have the right to do just about anything that doesn't infringe on the rights of another.

some of those things are even 'illegal' and can warrant a punishment, however, there is nothing limiting my 'right' to do it. including quoting good commentary from a historical perspective.

that you or anyone would be alarmed is equally disturbing.

technically, i cannot sue the government, they are exempt.
yes, i can petition them for redress but that isn't the same as 'suing' them.

"you people" ????
did you actually go there ?

hmmmm, guess i was mistaken, i thought you were an American.

in this country, we strive to protect the rights of the 'few'.
you might want to study up if you believe differently.

Why is anyone afraid of a socialist government, because the next step is communisim. Ask the people in China and Russia if they are afraid of there governments.

Obama is rubbing his reelection in our face by asking this question.

My opinion is the people did not elect this pesident................the machines did...............just like the machines will vote in a democratic congress and keep the senate democrtic, then we will see the real reason why we are so afraid.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


I did not nor would I ever dare elect such a horrible president.

I would tell him to his face how disgusting he is as a president and as a person, even if my life depended on it.

Originally posted by Cosmic911
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

He knows full well that his status as the Meal Ticket led to his re-election.

It's the democratic way. It's definitely what got Obama re-elected. Unfortunately, I live in New York, but luckily I live in Upstate NY, not the city. Unfortunately, it's NYC that is killing the rest of us in the state. I really wish NYC would drown and float away. While I support the short-term use of social programs, democrats prefer to keep the poor poor, ensuring votes for generations and generations. For the poor there is no incentive to get off social welfare programs, and democratic politicians like that just fine. We have a triumvirate of evil here in N.Y., Cuomo, Bloomberg, and Schumer.

I'm not a fan of either democrats or republicans. Both parties wreak of decay, dishonesty, and deceit.

Ummm...hear...hear, another fine Upstater, (I live in "Allmost Canada" NY) 90 or so miles NORTH of Syracuse. I'm also of the opinion...like every other Upstater that NYC should be fenced in and there should be no..."Escape from NY"...(sorry Kurt). That's where we should pile all the progressives...let them feed off of each other, it'd make a great episode for "The Walking Dead". You could probably get a whole season out of it.

Obama is preaching to...his...choir that handful of progressives that went around collecting votes from the deceased. I'm sure the office parties centered around "who voted the most"...I hear there were even plaques, ribbons and trophys.....like at any dog and pony show...

YouSir

reply to post by Honor93

should and do are very different verbs
for most throughout history, repeating it seems to provide some level of 'comfort' and that in itself is disturbing.

Yes it is.

in this country, i have the right to do just about anything that doesn't infringe on the rights of another.

Yea, putting a bullet into someone's head just based on ideological differences in my opinion counts as infringing on the rights of others.

some of those things are even 'illegal' and can warrant a punishment, however, there is nothing limiting my 'right' to do it. including quoting good commentary from a historical perspective.

Yea, quoting is fine, but putting it into practice is the problem

that you or anyone would be alarmed is equally disturbing.

It's a direct threat to my way of life, and our countries liberty. It's not even a hidden threat, it's a direct threat.

technically, i cannot sue the government, they are exempt.

People sue the government all the time, and many times they win.

yes, i can petition them for redress but that isn't the same as 'suing' them.

Yes, it's not the same thing.

"you people" ????
did you actually go there ?

Yes, I went there, being PC isn't my virtue.

hmmmm, guess i was mistaken, i thought you were an American.

To be technical I am a Native American but let's not muddy the waters here.

in this country, we strive to protect the rights of the 'few'.
you might want to study up if you believe differently.

Yes protect the rights of the few is a good thing, but we don't cow to the demands of a few nuts.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
It's 19:00 in
He says why are the people so afraid when they elected me.

Is he joking?
He is constrained he says? Constrained by the rules of the founding fathers???
Mr. Executive orders is really saying that?

First of all, I didn't vote for the fools he refers to, and second, you bet your boots I don't trust you Mr. President. For example, as long as I can't fly without being treated like a potential criminal, and be touched in places that as a woman, I'm not comfortable with in a public area, what do you expect from me as a citizen? WE are treated as if we are not trusted, so why should I trust you?

The people who elected people like Dianne Feinstein, who want guns taken away from Mr and Mrs America, are we to trust her too?

This is ridiculous.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
We, the People, have to be afraid, VERY AFRAID, of the govt that was elected, simply because of the issue over the sacred 2nd Amendment Right and the Constitution as a whole.

edit on 5-4-2013 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)

What makes me angry about this is, he's talking down to all of us like a parent that would berate it's child for having some "silly fear". You know, we're just being silly because we don't trust in these corrupt elected officials. Shame on us.

Based on Obama's international policy there should be no doubt in any American citizen's mind, that if he could he would murder us all. Look at Benghazi, Operation Fast and Furious, and Syria. Obama administration has funded the civil uprising in Syria and handed out weapons to the people. The end result is the murder of well over 100,000 innocent Syrian citizens. Only a psychopath could address the citizens of a nation with the calm lack of emotion Obama has shown after murdering hundreds of thousands around the globe. His international policy would make Hitler proud and the only thing holding him back from murdering each and every one of us is the fact that we are armed to the teeth, and I suspect that in the end that won't stop him from trying.

reply to post by HauntWok

Yea, putting a bullet into someone's head just based on ideological differences in my opinion counts as infringing on the rights of others.

fortunately, the law doesn't support your opinion.

Yea, quoting is fine, but putting it into practice is the problem

how do you figure that ?

It's a direct threat to my way of life, and our countries liberty. It's not even a hidden threat, it's a direct threat.

so, you're publicly confessing to being a tyrant are ya ??

Yes, I went there, being PC isn't my virtue

what does 'being an American' have to do with being PC ??
or, was that an intended racial slur ??

To be technical I am a Native American but let's not muddy the waters here

oh, so you're of the opinion that everyone else is an 'invader' ??
or what exactly ?

we don't cow to the demands of a few nuts

so, why are you supporting the whims of a few 'nuts' ?????

In all honesty I don't think americans could have done any better during the 2012 election as the media ignored or belittled third party and independant candidates. The only time an independant of third party candidate had a real chance at becoming elected was Ross Perot because he was a multimiliionare and could afford to pay his way. All the other times we see candidates with shoestring budgets that don't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. Not to mention most of the smaller parties are not even listed on the ballot during national elections and you have to use the "other candidate" section.

If small parties and independant candidates don't get the necessary exposure people are reluctant to vote for something they don't know thinking the choice could be infinitely worse than voting for a known evil. The national debate requires 15% poll acceptance to allow the candidate inclusion within and all these small party candidates combined get 1%-2% total vote. The pollings are fake as hell as they only poll 1500 people at most, thus no chance in hell of getting 15% with such a miniscule sample.

Catch 22 all the way to kingdom come. I am just glad romney lost as he was a known zionist shill and we would have had world war three by now. Better to have a 60% globalist shill than a 100% globalist shill. All was not lost this time, just a lot. Hopefully people wise up fast and put an end to the two party dictatorship while we still can.

Obama won cause he got 3 million more registered votes than romney. Fair is fair in this regard. We have ourselves to blame and the corporately controlled, globalist media which makes learning difficult with so much misinformation/disinformation being purposefully spread.

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

 

It doesn't infringe on your second amendment rights to bear arms. Just like it doesn't infringe on your right to own a car to have insurance on it. Of course I do love it when gun nuts conveniently forget the first part of the 2nd Amendment even though it's only a single sentence long. (you know, the well regulated part.)

Why should the rest of the taxpaying public have to pay for the messes gun owners create? When one of you snaps and decides to blow away a school or a movie theatre or a college campus, why should I have to pay to keep you behind bars or execute you. It should be up to your fellow "Law Abiding Gun Owners"

to pay for your jail time. and compensate the victims of gun violence because of "Law Abiding Gun Owners"

And since most gun nuts are only concerned with wanting to blow away their fellow countrymen anyway at any opportunity they can, I really don't see why this shouldn't be enacted.

edit on 6-4-2013 by HauntWok because: (no reason given)

It's obvious you have no idea what "well regulated" means which makes your statements completely ignorant.