Obama's record on gun control

[ants]

I'm 28 years old. No matter who is president. It will never happen in my lifetime where authorities come to each and every house in America to take away guns.

Let's be serious.

Didn't they go door to door confiscating guns in New Orleans right after Catrina? Think they did. I know it would be way harder to do that on a national level, but it did happen.

[ants]

It doesn't matter if gun control is put into place. The honest people will get the big victims. This wont stop the a$$holes from getting there illegal guns and victimizing the hell out of people.

The s**t heads still get there drugs. The same will be for guns. They will still get there hands on them.

It's like when cities have a "gun amnesty" program to "get guns off the street" LOL Turn in your gun, no questions asked, and get $50 for a long gun or $100 for a hand gun. For some strange reason no gang bangers or other criminal scum ever show up. Know who does? little old ladies who want to turn in their dead husbands guns, poor people who want money for their old beat up long guns and crack heads who try to turn in b-b guns because they think they are real.

But the news article will read, "150 dangerous guns taken off the streets" What a freaking joke. Big publicity stunts, thats all those things are.

[d-bone20917]

I said "who ever is in charge "because I wanted to get away from making this an Obama Romney thing.

Copy. I just wasn't sure if you were referring to the single position of the President or if you were referring to all of the boobs in charge... congress included.

[Grouse]

The next president may have the opportunity to nominate as many as three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Second Amendment won't survive an Obama Supreme Court. Get the facts at www.GunBanObama.com!

[HuntOrBeHunted]

Anyone think it's possible for, who ever is in charge, to tax the crap out of guns and ammo. making them so pricey that most people cant afford them? A $400 gun is now $2000? a $20 box of ammo is now $100? Just asking

It's already happening. Ammo's price has increased dramatically in the past few years making it exspensive just to target shoot for a while let alone have ammo incase of something serious.

[shawnhu]

No, I'm serious.

I don't know anybody who smokes anymore. I don't see it anywhere anymore either. Barely anybody in Westchester County or NYC smokes these days. You can't smoke in public parks, train platforms, etc.

You obviously don't visit the financial center then Biz. I still know guys that smoke at least a pack a day.

[Doc]

There are still tons that do. swing by a reservation store and check out the lines. One south of Syracuse has a drive through window and there is a line there from the time it opens until it closes. They tax the ammo any more the Native Americans will be making ammo too. Not there is an irony for you. Use buying ammo from them...lol

Yes there are still a lot of smokers left, until you compare the number today with what there used to be. Once the government decided to change that particular behavior of its citizens and put the full force of the government against that activity, it really was wildly successful. And the result is a very tiny, insignificant minority of people that engage in smoking anymore.

When the government decides to decimate an activity, they certainly have discovered the means of doing it. And they have figured out how to do it without actually outlawing the activity. So if they decided to use the same practices on guns and ammo, we can all get a peek at just how effective that could be. And all without any tampering with amendments and such.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Yes there are still a lot of smokers left, until you compare the number today with what there used to be. Once the government decided to change that particular behavior of its citizens and put the full force of the government against that activity, it really was wildly successful. And the result is a very tiny, insignificant minority of people that engage in smoking anymore.

When the government decides to decimate an activity, they certainly have discovered the means of doing it. And they have figured out how to do it without actually outlawing the activity. So if they decided to use the same practices on guns and ammo, we can all get a peek at just how effective that could be. And all without any tampering with amendments and such.

I agree, Doc. I was a smoking casuality this past Feb. Health aspects aside it was too expensive.

[Sogaard]

I'm 28 years old. No matter who is president. It will never happen in my lifetime where authorities come to each and every house in America to take away guns.

Let's be serious.

That sounds a lot like common sense, better be careful, they'll start flaming you for talk like that!

[Culvercreek hunt club]

You guys heard him last night- He is coming after those evil AUTOMATIC AK 47's and other assault weapons....of and you know there is so much crime done with cheap handguns (tossed in at the end of his comment). He may not come for them but WILL be making it mor difficult and more expensive to get. he said it.

[Sogaard]

Who still smokes? It was cool in the 90's and early 2000's only.

Not to go all off topic when we are talking about all our guns being taken away, but the short answer is: Stupid people.

[Sogaard]

You know, everyone will simply ignore this post and instead talk about how impossible a repeal of the second amendment is, but I would like to mention that it doesn't take a repeal of any amendment to effectively eliminate guns and ammo, as ants' reply mentions.

Case in point is cigarettes. They are still legal to purchase, so supposedly everyone has the right to purchase those products. However, look at how effectively the government has put a hurtin' on the tobacco industry through citizen behavior modification, via taxation. If they decide to tax guns and ammo to death, how is the 2nd amendment going to stop that? If you have a renegade, 2nd term, nothing-to-lose, president who now feels politically free to push his anti-gun agenda, I guess he can probably figure out a way around a pesky old Constitution. It's not like there's no precedent.

Doc, I'm not saying this couldn't happen, but your own example is indeed a perfect case. These taxes (if it were to happen) would be levied at a state level, not a federal.

[Sogaard]

The next president may have the opportunity to nominate as many as three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Second Amendment won't survive an Obama Supreme Court. Get the facts at www.GunBanObama.com!

Complete and utter crap. I'm really looking forward to four years of laughing at you all for your paranoia if Obama wins.

And if Romney wins, hey, there are two main ways to redistribute wealth in nation. Taxes are the most common form. Marie Antoinette can tell you about the other way.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Sogaard

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Doc, I'm not saying this couldn't happen, but your own example is indeed a perfect case. These taxes (if it were to happen) would be levied at a state level, not a federal.

FYI

On February 4, 2009, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 was signed into law, which raised the federal tax rate for cigarettes on April 1, 2009 from $0.39 per pack to $1.01 per pack.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Culvercreek hunt club

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Complete and utter crap. I'm really looking forward to four years of laughing at you all for your paranoia if Obama wins.

SO you don't see a ban on AR and AK semi auto rifles as against your 2nd ammd. rights? How about when the Remington 7400 (becasue of an external mag falls on that list)

[Sogaard]

And what % of the total tax rate of NYS is Federal compared to State? And you quoted the wrong section of my post (EDIT: nm, you fixed it).

Can't really expect the Feds not take a little taste. Lol

Edited October 17, 2012 by Sogaard

[Sogaard]

SO you don't see a ban on AR and AK semi auto rifles as against your 2nd ammd. rights? How about when the Remington 7400 (becasue of an external mag falls on that list)

My personal views on the subject are this (and yes, they will be very unpopular) :

I do believe fully automatic weapons should be banned.

I agree with current NYS high capacity clip limits

I do not see semi auto hunting rifles being banned federally.

I'm a hunter. I'm not a gun nut. Give me my bolt action and a few hundred acres to roam and I'm a very happy man. I'm not saying anyone should agree with me, or even that I'm right, its just how I feel about the subject.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Sogaard

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Sorry, got it fixed. The percentage is about 10% of total price if you look at NY. Pushing 25% in other states becasue their state taxing is less. Then you hae NYC getting in on the feast. The taxed portion is higher than the cost. Could just as easily be done in a liberal agenda on Ammo.

[Sogaard]

Sorry, got it fixed. The percentage is about 10% of total price if you look at NY. Pushing 25% in other states because their state taxing is less. Then you have NYC getting in on the feast. The taxed portion is higher than the cost. Could just as easily be done in a liberal agenda on Ammo.

I really do understand your concern, but I just don't see it happening. It would be just too unpopular. They can tax the crap out of cigs because they are so unpopular to the vast majority of non-smokers. Hitting guns and ammo that hard would cause way more harm than good from a political stand point. Guns are the least popular in states that are already guaranteed Democrat state. Most of the current swing states have fairly loose gun laws. It would be political suicide to go hard after guns and ammo like some people here are suggesting.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

My personal views on the subject are this (and yes, they will be very unpopular) :

I do believe fully automatic weapons should be banned.

I agree with current NYS high capacity clip limits

I do not see semi auto hunting rifles being banned federally.

I'm a hunter. I'm not a gun nut. Give me my bolt action and a few hundred acres to roam and I'm a very happy man. I'm not saying anyone should agree with me, or even that I'm right, its just how I feel about the subject.

Not to bust chops but they are not clips. They are magazines.

Fully auto weapons are highly regulated and extremely expensive to own. for us common Joes thhey are banned. Have been for a very long time. Capone saw to that...lol. THis ban has not kept the fully automatic weapons out of the crimnals hands.

I wonder why the position on the High capacity mags? If you have no experience with thes weapons, it is extremely quick to drop a mag and reload. So if a nut job has 9 ten round mags or 3 30 round mags. there are seconds between the total time expended. Seems like a feel good law to me, but that is my opinion.

There is no difference in how some of the rifles could be viewed in a federal assault ban. as proven by Obamas comment last night the politicians don't correctly convey the differences in them. (automatic vs semi) I can easily see how these clowns could goof it up.

Now let me ask you this, you do seem very at ease with a restricion like this, and that is your rite. but there are a lot of gunowners in between the two categories you stated, hunter and gun nuts. Currently the only"automatic" weapons I have are my shotguns and my 22lr's. I would like to get an AR platform someday. they are highly customizable, easy to change parts and work on, very accurate and very fun to shoot.

Don't be short sighted in tossing a right away becasue you don't have an interest in in now. You never can be sure what the future holds.

That is my view.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

The taxes can take many forms. It may not actually be an outright tax. suits brought against ammo and gun makers act in the same manner as taxes. they are cost and that cost is pushed on to the end consumer through higher prices. It is the perfet avenue becasue they can sit back and claim no wrong doing. They can push the actions off to others all the while creating an environment that is suit friendly.

I deal with this same mind set every month in EEOC claims. (Equal employment Opportunity). any empl;oyee can file a claim and the Govt provides the lawyers, although if you are a white male the liklihood is it won't be addressed. But any claim. no matter how unfounded is taken up and pursued by the feds and many states. Even with no judgements against a company they incurr huge legal costs fighting them. Many times payment of a settlement is cheaper than the fight. This is the same approach you could see for the ammo and firearms. huge costs forced on makers and passed to us. Chances are that bolt gun you carry is made by a company that also makes semi's

[Sogaard]

Just to restate my opinion, I do not agree with banning semi-automatic weapons.

I look forward to getting a nice semi-auto .223 for predator hunting someday (had my eye on a Rem R15 VTR for a while). Down the road I'm also planning on getting a Benelli semi.

My position on the high capacity magazines is based on the fact that, yes, you can swap them fairly quickly (I do have some experience with them), but you still have to take the time to do it. Sometimes those seconds make the difference. Personally, I'd like to make it as difficult as possible for someone to do what happened in Colorado, without banning the weapons from law abiding citizens.

[steve863]

I don't know if Obama and the democrats will have the guts to go after assault type weapons in the next 4 years if he wins knowing it could effect the 2016 results, but I think everyone here needs to face the fact that someone will sooner or later. I just feel that the government has come to the realization that a LOT of people now have these type weapons, and the potential for someone to wreck havoc with them is getting greater. That's just how I think they are seeing all this now. Yeah, I think we all can understand that there isn't much difference mechanically between a Rem 7400 and an AR-15, but the high capacity magazines I think are the kicker here. Sure, one can custom make something for the Rem 7400 which will hold a bunch of rounds, but these high capacity magazines are as easily available as candy for AR and the AK type rifles. This is where the difference lies in my opinion. No, statistically there haven't been too many crimes committed with these type guns up to now in comparison to handguns, but like I said a whole LOT of people have these guns now. And for any Joe Schmoe to legally get one is a whole lot easier than it is to legally get a handgun in most places. The Colorado killer surely wrecked more havoc with his legal AR and his 100 round magazine than he would have if he had some other weapon with less ammo capacity. Ain't saying that banning these weapons or the magazines is right or will make any sort of real difference, but that's just how I think the government, along with MANY people in this country are looking at this. In my mind it won't matter if the democrats or republicans are in power. Sooner or later laws will be proposed to put limits on them or their ammo capacity somehow.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I have to disagree on one point Steve. If he had stayed with the shotgun and used speed loaders the death toll would have been higher.

[waterweasle]

Currently the only"automatic" weapons I have are my shotguns and my 22lr's. .

certainly you mean SEMI AUTOMATICS, since full autos arent allowed in NY state, so your guns are semi automatics................unless you're breaking federal law? you know......

The National Firearms Act of 1934