Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > The President & the Executive Branch
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

The President & the Executive Branch Discuss Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home at the Political Forums; As a state senator in Illinois, President Obama opposed legislation providing an exception to handgun restrictions if the weapon was ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 11:06 AM
MrLiberty's Avatar
professional curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,780
Thanks: 12,171
Thanked 11,588 Times in 7,726 Posts
Default Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
As a state senator in Illinois, President Obama opposed legislation providing an exception to handgun restrictions if the weapon was used in the defense of one’s home.

Obama’s vote would have maintained the status quo, which made it a violation of municipal gun ban law to use a firearm to save your own life in your own home. But the bill was passed anyway without his support.

The vote is a sign of how committed Obama may be to strict gun control measures.

The Illinois vote is hardly ancient history, having occurred in 2004 as Obama was running for election to the U.S. Senate. In opposing the measure, Obama lined up well to the left of the mainstream, as the Illinois Senate included 32 Democrats to 26 Republicans but approved the bill by an overwhelming margin and subsequently overrode a veto by then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Obama did not participate in the veto override, which occurred in November 2004, likely after Obama had resigned his state Senate seat in order to prepare for his new role in the U.S. Senate.

The Illinois legislation was passed after a man who shot a burglar in his home was fined $750 by his town for disobeying its handgun ban. The absurdity and injustice of the situation doesn’t seem to have made much of an impression on Obama.

Just eight years earlier, in 1996, Obama answered “Yes” to a survey question asking whether he would support state legislation to “ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.” The Obama 2008 presidential campaign claimed the form had been filled out by an aide who mischaracterized Obama’s position, even though Obama’s handwriting was found on survey.
Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home | The Blog on Obama: White House Dossier

And then today we read this..................

Obama Signs Bill Giving Him Armed Protection For Life

Quote:
Despite launching a gun control agenda that threatens to disarm the American people, President Obama has signed a bill that would afford him armed Secret Service protection for life.

“The legislation, crafted by Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, rolls back a mid-1990s law that imposed a 10-year limit on Secret Service protection for former presidents. Bush would have been the first former commander in chief affected,” reports Yahoo News.

The new bill, which will cost American taxpayers millions of dollars, is a re-instatement of a 1965 law which will see presidents protected for life as well as their children up to age 16.

The irony of Obama seeking to surround himself with armed men for the rest of his life while simultaneously working to disarm the American people via a gun control agenda that is likely to be enforced via executive decree represents the height of hypocrisy.

But it’s not the first time that Obama has lauded the notion of responsible Americans using firearms to protect himself and his family while concurrently eviscerating that very same right for the American people.

During an ABC Nightline interview broadcast on December 26 yet recorded before the Sandy Hook shooting, Obama said one of the benefits of his re-election was the ability “to have men with guns around at all times,” in order to protect his daughters.

In addition, the school attended by Obama’s daughters in Washington D.C. has no less than 11 armed security guards on duty at all times, yet the idea of arming teachers and school officials to prevent school massacres has been dismissed by gun control advocates who want school campuses to remain “gun free zones” where victims are disarmed and shooters are free to carry out their rampage unimpeded.

The hypocrisy of gun control advocates who feverishly work to create victim disarmament yet surround themselves with armed men is rampant amongst the political class.
Obama Signs Bill Giving Him Armed Protection For Life Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

It's funny how obama is always looking out for himself, giving himself raises and added security while giving the middle finger to middle America. And, yet, his legions of worshippers are to stupid to see what he is doing, not only to the country but to them as well. Go figure.
__________________
The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government

Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MrLiberty For This Useful Post:
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 11:21 AM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: in the natural state
Posts: 50,440
Thanks: 37,263
Thanked 19,417 Times in 13,380 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrLiberty View Post
Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home | The Blog on Obama: White House Dossier

And then today we read this..................

Obama Signs Bill Giving Him Armed Protection For Life



Obama Signs Bill Giving Him Armed Protection For Life Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

It's funny how obama is always looking out for himself, giving himself raises and added security while giving the middle finger to middle America. And, yet, his legions of worshippers are to stupid to see what he is doing, not only to the country but to them as well. Go figure.
1)We don't limit the military or secret service in their duties carrying weapons.
2)Politicians are often targets (see Gabby Gifford).
3)If the shooter in California had had a glock instead of his brother's shotgun, we'd have another Sandy Hook on our hands.
__________________
Heard a Bobwhite today. Summer is on it's way!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to saltwn For This Useful Post:
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 11:30 AM
MrLiberty's Avatar
professional curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,780
Thanks: 12,171
Thanked 11,588 Times in 7,726 Posts
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by saltwn View Post
1)We don't limit the military or secret service in their duties carrying weapons.
2)Politicians are often targets (see Gabby Gifford).
3)If the shooter in California had had a glock instead of his brother's shotgun, we'd have another Sandy Hook on our hands.
1. has nothing to do with the op.
2. more ordinary citizens get shot than do politicians, yet they want protection and will deny you the same right.
3. you don't know that, it's just rhetoric that you thinks sounds good.
__________________
The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government

Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MrLiberty For This Useful Post:
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 11:36 AM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Charlottesville
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,251
Thanks: 3,173
Thanked 10,158 Times in 5,812 Posts
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Anyone who supports a gun ban must support a ban on ALL guns, including those in the hands of police, secret service, etc. If guns are unsafe, then they are unsafe. Otherwise, they're a hypocritical piece of ****.
__________________


There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him. ~ Robert Heinlein

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rivrrat For This Useful Post:
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 12:16 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,922
Thanks: 6,518
Thanked 10,070 Times in 5,836 Posts
Post Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
Anyone who supports a gun ban must support a ban on ALL guns, including those in the hands of police, secret service, etc. If guns are unsafe, then they are unsafe. Otherwise, they're a hypocritical piece of ****.
There is a glaring difference between the two scenarios.
For the civilian populace, you can essentially get the guns in question with no background check from a gun show.

Secret service? Police?
Not only is there a hiring practice involved, but typically background checks, psych evals, and ongoing evaluations of their fitness to be in that line of work (and their fitness to be armed).

If they are deemed unfit, they can be fired and have that firearm taken from them.
When the civilian populace has a similar situation, then your analogy would hold water.
Until then,


Quote:
Originally Posted by MrLiberty
2. more ordinary citizens get shot than do politicians, yet they want protection and will deny you the same right.
"More ordinary citizens" get shot because ordinary citizens vastly outnumber the politicians.
Not to mention that death threats to politicians probably far outnumber (per capita) those to "ordinary citizens".
A "per capita" approach would obviously be more appropriate.


Quote:
Originally Posted by saltwn
3)If the shooter in California had had a glock instead of his brother's shotgun, we'd have another Sandy Hook on our hands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrLiberty
3. you don't know that, it's just rhetoric that you thinks sounds good.
Wow dude.
That was a ridiculously weak reply...

An easy turnabout is to recognize that the NRA + gun owners are very insistent on keeping high volume magazines in their repertoire.
It's funny how they can stress how important it would be for THEM, when realistically they would be defending themselves against typically one or maybe two adversaries...
But when we talk about what that means in the hands of a mass killer, THEN they want to pretend it's trivial...
__________________
"The issue is not the size of government. The real issue is who the government is working for."
- Robert Reich
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 12:17 PM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Charlottesville
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,251
Thanks: 3,173
Thanked 10,158 Times in 5,812 Posts
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
There is a glaring difference between the two scenarios.
For the civilian populace, you can essentially get the guns in question with no background check from a gun show.

Secret service? Police?
Not only is there a hiring practice involved, but typically background checks, psych evals, and ongoing evaluations of their fitness to be in that line of work (and their fitness to be armed).

If they are deemed unfit, they can be fired and have that firearm taken from them.
When the civilian populace has a similar situation, then your analogy would hold water.
Until then,
I was talking about a gun ban, not background checks. Reading... it's fun!
__________________


There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him. ~ Robert Heinlein

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rivrrat For This Useful Post:
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 12:35 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: in the natural state
Posts: 50,440
Thanks: 37,263
Thanked 19,417 Times in 13,380 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
Anyone who supports a gun ban must support a ban on ALL guns, including those in the hands of police, secret service, etc. If guns are unsafe, then they are unsafe. Otherwise, they're a hypocritical piece of ****.
bull sh*t
__________________
Heard a Bobwhite today. Summer is on it's way!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 12:36 PM
Manitou's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,468
Thanks: 138
Thanked 1,994 Times in 1,513 Posts
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

There is no damned reason for an ex-public servant to require government-paid security for his ass.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Manitou For This Useful Post:
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2013, 12:37 PM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Charlottesville
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,251
Thanks: 3,173
Thanked 10,158 Times in 5,812 Posts
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by saltwn View Post
bull sh*t
Yes, it IS bull**** for someone to support banning guns EXCEPT for guns to protect THEIR sorry asses. Bull**** indeed.
__________________


There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him. ~ Robert Heinlein

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rivrrat For This Useful Post:
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-20-2013, 11:37 AM
mlurp's Avatar
INDEPENDENT
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,548
Thanks: 14,274
Thanked 7,669 Times in 6,036 Posts
Default Re: Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
There is a glaring difference between the two scenarios.
For the civilian populace, you can essentially get the guns in question with no background check from a gun show.

Secret service? Police?
Not only is there a hiring practice involved, but typically background checks, psych evals, and ongoing evaluations of their fitness to be in that line of work (and their fitness to be armed).

If they are deemed unfit, they can be fired and have that firearm taken from them.
When the civilian populace has a similar situation, then your analogy would hold water.
Until then,





"More ordinary citizens" get shot because ordinary citizens vastly outnumber the politicians.
Not to mention that death threats to politicians probably far outnumber (per capita) those to "ordinary citizens".
A "per capita" approach would obviously be more appropriate.



Here is where you lose my support, below.


Wow dude.
That was a ridiculously weak reply...

An easy turnabout is to recognize that the NRA + gun owners are very insistent on keeping high volume magazines in their repertoire.
It's funny how they can stress how important it would be for THEM, when realistically they would be defending themselves against typically one or maybe two adversaries...
But when we talk about what that means in the hands of a mass killer, THEN they want to pretend it's trivial
...
My understanding is that many shooters (like me) have sold their assult type military weapons, knowing that these were going to be banned.

That is why I gave mine to a good friend, and we signed papers. As I didn't really need it after owning it for over 22 years the fun was over.
We bought them together, for the Y2K possible madness.

And this part of the debate you make it sound like it is just your opinion. Care to back it up with any studies, etc., etc.
__________________
"There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation... One is by sword... The other is by debt."

John Adams 1826
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ban, defend, exception, gun, home, obama, one’s, opposed

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0