Obama to go for guns in 2013 'there will be resistance'

This is a discussion on Obama to go for guns in 2013 'there will be resistance' within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; In his second term Bill Clinton did NOTHING without consulting his Oracles, the Sacred Opinion Polls. Let us hope this second term White House does ...

Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 205
Like Tree353Likes

Thread: Obama to go for guns in 2013 'there will be resistance'

  1. #31
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,229
    In his second term Bill Clinton did NOTHING without consulting his Oracles, the Sacred Opinion Polls. Let us hope this second term White House does the same. By sending it out to a "Study Group" with Biden, he's is acting politically astute, and Opinion Polls are Verse Two of Political Astuteness. Both buy time, which is what he really wants.

    Having said that, his current attitude and demeanor may well lead him to believe he can unilaterally sway public opinion via use of his Grass Roots Ground Machine that stomped his opponent. Obama does lean towards significant piles of warm smelly hubris, so he may try that.

    This stuff is no fun.
    oneshot likes this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array shadow247's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Hampton Roads, VA
    Posts
    53


    This is our new generation. I am sad to say I am a part of it. However I did not vote for Obama in 2008, nor did I vote for him in 2012. This video though explains everything I already knew about your typical Obama voter.
    Truth is treason in an empire of lies - Ron Paul
    No b@stard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb b@stard die for his country. - General George S. Patton

  4. #33
    VIP Member Array zacii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    arizona
    Posts
    3,749

    Re: Obama to go for guns in 2013 'there will be resistance'

    I have read different news articles hinting at a Biden run for the presidency in 2016.

    I don't know, but if it's true maybe Biden will be aware that whatever his gun control committee comes up with, may have an impact on a presidential bid.

    Of course, that's assuming that he runs, or cares... plenty of fools gave us what we have now.

    Sent from my Galaxy S2
    Trust in God and keep your powder dry

    "A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source

  5. #34
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,254
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Well...he's got everything else that he wanted...
    He is not even close to being done yet

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    5,944
    I don't have to type anymore. All I have to do is keep on copying and pasting the following because it fits in most of the threads now:

    I will not volunteer to give up all or part of any of my Rights. If someone thinks they have the right or authority to take my Rights from me, then they are enemies of the Constitution of the United States. If these enemies believe they have the right to force me to relinquish my Rights, then they should be prepared for me to resist their attacks. They should know that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. The enemies of the Constitution of the United States should be aware that I do not stand alone. I stand united with all the other protectors of Freedom. If there ever comes a time when one of our protectors is no longer able to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, there will always be another hero who will rise up and become the next protector of Freedom.


    I'll write something new when I have some more time.
    co9mil, SgtRick and J.Thompson like this.
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  7. #36
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Ah, this, what you wrote in bold, is the way it should be; this and nothing more. This is our system
    and everyone who believes in our constitution and has sworn an oath to preserve it must understand that
    the only legitimate actions are in the political and legal sphere; not armed resistance or law breaking.
    And when all the courts have become "kangaroo courts" with all the judges appointed by the King... Is it still legitimate?

    Not everyone who took an oath to protect the constitution believes in the constitution. Obama himself has said as much. He has made it quite clear in public speeches he believes the founding fathers "got it wrong" in not outlining what the government can do for (to) us.

    He has shown us that he doesn't even understand what that document represents. It was not, and never intended to be an outline of what the government can do. In fact, it's quite the contrary. It is a document which outlines what the government can not do!

    He has said, he doesn't accept the constraints on government that was laid out in the constitution.

    The founding fathers understood quite well that power in governing is intoxicating and corrupting. Hence, the 2nd Amendment. They wrote that specific provision to allow the people to rise up with arms to be able to quell a tyrannical government who has become sick and intoxicated with power and corruption.

    Why is it do you think all those bloated, egotistical, corrupt, power hungry fat cats in Congress is so hell bent on chipping away at the 2nd Amendment? You don't really think they care about mass shootings that occur in so called "gun free" zones, do you?
    TX expat, zacii, nedrgr21 and 6 others like this.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  8. #37
    Distinguished Member Array Doghandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    West Branch
    Posts
    1,946

    Re: Obama to go for guns in 2013 'there will be resistance'

    Quote Originally Posted by Pistology View Post
    Obama's "making sure criminals can't take advantage of legal loopholes to get their hands on a gun". You would think a lawyer would know better about loopholes. It's the illegal loopholes that are the problem.
    A lawyer is a philosopher with rope.

    Follow the Boy Scout Law.

    Engage the Boy Scout Motto.

    A bow line and a noose will set the boundaries of the debate.

    ...
    The world is a ghetto
    War
    There is a solution but we are not Jedi... not yet.
    Doghandler

  9. #38
    Member Array Coltman 77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    406
    I'd suggest you all join the NRA and send them a donation asap. I just sent them $250.00 (a good bit of cash for me) FWIW.

    Also call/write your senators/congressmen and let them know that you oppose any new gun laws.
    "Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less".
    General Robert E. Lee

  10. #39
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,878
    The difference between now and 1994 (when the last AWB was passed) is that the Supreme Court has ruled that, at a minimum, we have a right to firearms for self defense in the home.

    If any new law is actually passed, I would imagine it would be challenged almost immediately in court. It remains to be seem what restrictions would pass Constitutional muster. And of course, if the composition of the Court changes, so could the reasoning that goes on there.

    There is going to be tremendous pressure to "do something." Let's hope that reason prevails. If it does not, then we may have to remind our fellow citizens of the difference between laws, and Natural Laws. And it will get ugly.
    co9mil likes this.
    The more good folks carry guns, the fewer shots the crazies can get off.
    www.armedcitizensnetwork.org - member
    Glock 30, 19, 26; Ruger SP101, LCR, LCP (2), Mini 14; Marlin 336 .30-30
    CT Lasers

  11. #40
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,593
    Quote Originally Posted by TX expat View Post
    Umm, no. It may be the safest way for some, but it's not the only way. Like many wars, armed confrontation is not always avoidable. And it's actually kind of funny that you'd bring up The Constitution and yet ignore that our Second Amendment was put there specifically because the Founding Fathers understood that sometimes violence is necessary to protect the things we value. They put their lives on the line to secure the freedoms we enjoy. The Second Amendment isn't a punchline or window dressing.

    I'm most certainly not advocating any sort of armed confrontation; on the contrary, I'm hoping that our government abides by the very document that they have sworn an oath to. If they continue down a path of turning America away from the rights and liberties that made America what it is, they may very well find that our country (or parts of it) just will not accept anything less than the freedom that we were guaranteed.
    re: part in bold. Sure you are. You may not realize it. You may be adequately law abiding and responsible to not get sucked in
    by the rhetoric, but others will. So stop pretending that this kind of talk is harmless.
    Doghandler likes this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  12. #41
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,593
    Quote Originally Posted by 10thmtn View Post
    The difference between now and 1994 (when the last AWB was passed) is that the Supreme Court has ruled that, at a minimum, we have a right to firearms for self defense in the home.

    If any new law is actually passed, I would imagine it would be challenged almost immediately in court. It remains to be seem what restrictions would pass Constitutional muster. And of course, if the composition of the Court changes, so could the reasoning that goes on there.

    There is going to be tremendous pressure to "do something." Let's hope that reason prevails. If it does not, then we may have to remind our fellow citizens of the difference between laws, and Natural Laws. And it will get ugly.
    Re: Part in bold. Yes, it will get ugly, for those foolish enough to break the actual laws. Very ugly. No one in our society
    has a right to take it upon themselves as an individual or group of individuals to act outside of our established legal framework.

    When folks harken back to the Declaration of Independence for justification, they need to keep in mind that there was no
    representation of the colonies in the English Parliament of the that day. We, to the contrary, do have representation at
    every level of government from the smallest town and municipality to the highest office. The concept of natural law is
    bunk in this context.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  13. #42
    Distinguished Member Array RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,221
    ..and let us not forget the Zimmerman action coming up June/July 2013 that will once again grace the front pages of every liberal rag in America.

    I wonder how the anti 2A people will use it to their advantage?

    Talk about getting ugly. Whichever way it goes, one of (2) major groups are going to be outraged.
    "When those who are governed do too little, those who govern can, and will, do too much." Ronald Reagan

    Do what you can; then do what you must

  14. #43
    Distinguished Member Array sniper58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,631
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    The agenda isn't new, and the outcome isn't inevitable.
    It is until or unless the pro-2A elected representatives get some fortitude and stand up for our rights. Don't count on Boner to anything except cry. He hasn't demonstrated a willingness to lead anything except a rush for the door for a recess.
    Tim
    BE PREPARED - Noah didn't build the Ark when it was raining!
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    ________
    NRA Life Member

  15. #44
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,669
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    re: part in bold. Sure you are. You may not realize it. You may be adequately law abiding and responsible to not get sucked in
    by the rhetoric, but others will. So stop pretending that this kind of talk is harmless.
    No, I'm really not. I do, however, realize that standing up for our Constitutional rights may come to such a thing. It's far from harmless talk, just like the current administrations desire to disarm the American people is far from harmless.

    The only one who seems to be pretending anything is you. You seem to believe that this sort of thing is OK and if the government gets away with it, it must be legal. It's not.

    There were plenty of "British citizens" living in America that felt the exact same way you did when we declared our independence from England. They didn't want any sort of confrontation and were very vocal about how the sky would fall if we tried to go our own way. We did and it didn't. Thankfully our country's founders chose the hard path that set us down the road to freedom and liberty. People died for the rights that you were born under, Hop. They may mean little enough to you that you'll give them up for whatever you think your party promises you. I don't buy into it and I won't accept a president who feels that he should rewrite the Bill of Rights because he's smarter than everyone else.

    Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. Those aren't my words, those are the words of James Madison.

    "But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever." John Adams

    “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” Thomas Jefferson
    NRA Life Member

    "I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady

  16. #45
    Ex Member Array Doodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tomball TX
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Re: Part in bold. Yes, it will get ugly, for those foolish enough to break the actual laws. Very ugly. No one in our society
    has a right to take it upon themselves as an individual or group of individuals to act outside of our established legal framework.

    When folks harken back to the Declaration of Independence for justification, they need to keep in mind that there was no
    representation of the colonies in the English Parliament of the that day. We, to the contrary, do have representation at
    every level of government from the smallest town and municipality to the highest office. The concept of natural law is
    bunk in this context.
    Are you kidding me? Are you serious? NO-ONE has the right to act out side the law when the law becomes tyranny? Aren't you ex military? Did you not take an oathe? I tell you what Hop, I'm gonna look up a forum for people who don't mind selling out everyone around them and are ok with only carrying the people's republic approved guns. Once I find it I'll introduce you. Or do you just like slapping us in the face?

Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

2013 missouri gun laws
,
2013gunband
,
feds and guns 2013
,
gun laws 2013
,
new firearms for 2013
,
new gun laws in texas 2013
,
new guns for 2013
,
new missouri gun laws 2013
,
new pistols for 2013
,

new texas gun laws 2013

,
proposed federal gun laws 2013
,
second civil war 2013
Click on a term to search for related topics.