“The White House on Monday all but ruled out the possibility that President Barack Obama would make a push for new gun control laws in the aftermath of the shooting rampage in Oak Creek, Wis.,” abcnews.go.com reports. “Press secretary Jay Carney noted that Obama had called for better enforcement of existing laws in the wake of the massacre at an Aurora, Colo., movie theater last month. ‘I have nothing new to announce,’ Carney said at his daily briefing.” Does that mean gun control is the third rail of American politics or is the Commander-in-Chief keeping it on the down-low until his [theoretical] reelection? Keep in mind . . .

that the Prez created a long gun registry for America’s border states by Executive Order, bypassing Congress, violating the Firearms Owners Protection Act (bans all local, state and federal agencies).

And consider the following statement made after the Jared Lee Loughner spree killing in Tuscon . . .

And where there’s an extraordinarily heartbreaking tragedy like the one we saw, there’s always an outcry immediately after for action, and there’s talk of new reforms and there’s talk of new legislation. And too often those efforts are defeated by politics and by lobbying and eventually by the pull of our collective attention elsewhere. But when I said in the wake of Tucson was we were going to stay on this persistently. So we’ve been able to take some actions on our own, recognizing that it’s not always easy to get things through congress these days.

Recommended For You

50 Responses to Obama’s Silence on Gun Control Speaks Volumes. Or Not.

      • Would that make you a serial loser? Or do you think that the guy who tapped our nation’s billionaires for more money than they pay in taxes in order to buy the election and screw the rest of us actually has a chance?

        • The taxpayers will be serial losers if ObamaCare continues. So if you want to put it that way, feel free. If you think the federal government will make healthcare more efficient, go for it. I’m not drinking that Kool-Aid. For some reason, people forsake Tort Reform and National Competition.

          That being said, Obama will probably win because he is the more politically correct choice.

    • Also keep in mind that the Democrat in the race signed a bill allowing guns in National Parks, while the republican in the race signed a bill banning assault weapons.

  1. Obama is an ego-driven opportunistic politician as are most of them. His concern is getting re-elected. Obama’s principles and values are currently all negotiable to his larger goal of keeping his office. Since Obama is about half-white, if he had a son, he might look like James Holmes the Joker who shot up the Colorado theater.

    BTW, Trayvon Martin’s mother is suing for damages demanding compensation from the Home Owners Association where TM was killed and she also wants money from a state fund given over to crime victims and their families.

    • Romney is an ego-driven opportunistic politician as are most of them. His concern is getting elected. Romney’s principles and values are currently all negotiable to his larger goal of gaining an office. Since Romney is white, if he had another son, he might look like Wade Page the Neo-Nazi who shot up the Sikh Temple.

      ***

      Sorry, I had to do it.

      • He wasnt a neo-nazi, he was a member of Volksfront, a white nationalist organization, which is very different from a neo-nazi organization. From their website

        “As a group we believe in the right of all people to live free from alien and foreign domination, including and especially, persons of European descent. As a group, we do not believe in the inherent superiority of a particular race over another as it relates to the value of human life. We do not seek to oppress, victimize or intimidate any other racial or religious group, but we will defend our own race and VF family without apology or question from all comers. We do not believe in or support tyrannical or totalitarian government of any type.”

        The only people who call them neo-nazis are the SPLC and the ADL, hardly reliable sources.

        • It also isnt confirmed that he was a member, the press attributes that to a anonymous law enforcement offical. Volksfront said that Page “has never been a member of, or associate of our organization…”

        • Volksfront? Isn’t that supposed to be German for “peoples front?” They are not like neo-nazi’s? what, are they more like the Klan then? A nonviolent racist organization, that’s an oxymoron if I ever did hear one. Their a group of epic A-holes non the less. I’m whiter than wonder bread and I don’t need this group of jokers defending my white ass.

        • They are not like neo-nazi’s? what, are they more like the Klan then?

          As I said before, white nationalists.

          A nonviolent racist organization, that’s an oxymoron if I ever did hear one.
          Apparently then you havent heard of the ADL, La Raza, SPLC, NAACP, Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, etc.

          Their a group of epic A-holes non the less.
          How so?

        • They were started in Oregon state penitentiary, they were a prison gang… I live in Oregon, I hear about these guys, they are a POS organization. If there not skinheads why do most of them have shaved heads, and dress like skinheads (bomber jackets, wife beaters, combat boots) One question will clear this up, do they like Jews?… yeah, what I thought.

          How are they a group of epic a-holes? I think I already stated my case clearly enough. Besides maybe the Israeli state, I support no racial organizations, no matter their intentions, no matter their race. Why you would support one I don’t know, unless of course you are a racist and a anti-Zionist. In which case I have no respect for you.

        • They were started in Oregon state penitentiary, they were a prison gang…

          What a ambiguous term, “gang”. You do realize that our founding fathers meet the definition of a gang? A violent gang at that, compared to Volksfront who says on their website that “We do not seek to oppress, victimize or intimidate any other racial or religious group…” You don’t seem to have a problem with violent gangs such as the Irgun either, who were responsible for the largest terrorist incident in Israel, and have a actual service ribbon dedicated for them by the IDF.

          One question will clear this up, do they like Jews?… yeah, what I thought.

          I don’t like Jews, but I have long hair? What am I?

          Besides maybe the Israeli state, I support no racial organizations, no matter their intentions, no matter their race.

          Gee, why am I not surprised you’re a Jew.

        • I’m English, German, Norwegian and Dutch. I was raised Protestant, I’m a total WASP. I am definitely a Zionist, am don’t pretend other wise. But, thanks for growing some balls and clearing up the fact that you and Volksfront are in fact full of $h1t and really are a bunch of racist, anti-Semitic morons.

      • g,

        No problem. It fits. Politicians are politicians. I’m as much against Romney as I am against Obama. The Democrats and Republicans are the most dangerous and destructive gangs in America.

        My comments earlier were sarcasm and only to point out the bs and hypocrisy of a progressive politician such as Obama.

    • Exactly. Most people don’t relish the choice of voting for either party in this election, but pretending that it’s going to be a gun-owning paradise under Mitt Romney makes me laugh.

      Do you seriously trust a guy who’s richer than the past EIGHT PRESIDENTS combined?

      I’m not saying President Obama is a saint, but the Republican party seriously screwed up letting him become the party’s candidate for the presidency. Sigh.

      • Do you seriously trust a guy who’s richer than the past EIGHT PRESIDENTS combined?

        I don’t trust Mitt, but his money doesn’t have anything to do with it- his demonstrated ‘flexibility’ on issues I care about does. The best remedy for that will be a solidly Republican Congress.

        Besides, John Kerry (the 2004 D nominee) is married to around $750 million. If you don’t trust Mitt because he’s rich, I hope you didn’t vote D in ’04.

        • Upon further review, I am forced to conclude that I have been trolled.

          The cutoff of ‘last 8 presidents’ is the tell. The 9th back was LBJ, who was worth around $100 million, and the 10th was JFK- who was one of the beneficiaries of the Kennedy family trust, worth around a billion dollars.

      • ” a guy who’s richer than the past EIGHT PRESIDENTS combined”

        Not exactly contradicting but would like a link or three confirming that.

        • It’s accurate because he cut it off at the last 8 (from Nixon to Obama), but including LBJ and JFK would have ruined his talking point.

      • If you are supporting a candidate based on how much or how little money they have your just another Obama tool.

        The 2nd. Amendment can and without doubt will be amended for the worse if Obama wins a 2nd. term.

        • Sorry man, but there’s no way that would happen. The 2nd amendment as a piece of text is here to say. Read up on the process for that and explain to me how on earth it would ever pass.

  2. The factual record is clear-Obama is the worse choice for gun rights by a hair, only because Romney actually used the due process system in Massachusetts to pass that state’s permanent Assault Weapons Ban.

    Odious as that law is , at least Romney did his own dirty work assaulting the rights of gun owners without involving the ATF or negotiating with criminal cartels.

    No matter who wins in November, we gun owners should prepare for a glorious 10-round future.

  3. We will continue to have the 2A regardless of the outcome of the election.
    I am not sure why this keeps coming up. However, we have won! Other issues should decide who one votes for in November. Let’s take a victory lap and move on. Of course, as a person living in two states I selfishly want to see reciprocity ; but I realize there are more pressing issues out there.
    Stay safe.

    • We had the 2nd Amendment in 1992. Yet to this day we cannot buy arms at a dealer without filling out some funny looking document which asks what race I am.

      So long as one person in America thinks guns need to be banned, we cannot presume victory.

      • +1. Just look at all of the rank opportunists who are seeking to join the blood trail for one ban or another, most of whom have been duly noted here. There will always be two major players to deal with until the Supreme Court (if ever) says something definitive rather than leave the law to “future cases to develop”: politicians and the “news” media.

  4. If Baracky is reelected, his regime will do a full court press on the 2A, going around the republican congress. As these types always overreach, a stab at outright gun confiscation isn’t an impossibility.

    • Not hard to imagine. He’s shown no shame for skirting Congress with his unconstitutional executive orders. If he gets a second term, and being the insolent baby he is, he’ll hurl executive orders right and left to get his way.

    • I am actually unconcerned about this. The 2nd A currently enjoys the highest level of public support that I have seen in my lifetime- and Congress knows it. If a Supreme Court stocked with another Obama appointee (or two) should rule the 2nd a nullity, the main result will be a massive legislative backlash- possibly another Amendment.

      There are reasons the only politicians talking about gun control as a solution to what happened in Colorado and Wisconsin are Democrats in very safe seats.

      • This.
        I can’t see an amendment but the only anti gun rhetoric we hear is from the true leftists in safe seats. They know there isn’t a chance in hell of getting anything through but they get to run their mouths.

    • I see this every where, People bitching about their 2 choices! Obama or Mittens? Fuck both of them! There is a third! I vote Gary Johnson if Ron Paul doesn’t get the nomination!

      If everyone wouldn’t vote for the lesser of the 2 evils we could get out this mess we are in! Obama or Mittens doesn’t matter they are the same! except ones is White and the Other is Black!

  5. Obama vs Romney on Gun Rights. It’s irrelevant. Even if they both had the exact same identical record and said the exact same things…. Romney would STILL be the better choice.

    The reason is Leverage.

    This is Obama’s second term. He’s a lame duck. He can do whatever he wants without having to face the voters again.

    For Romney it would be his first term, and like all first term Presidents he’ll want a second term. And a second term is put at risk if you start messing with Gun Control. So he won’t.

    So it’s Romney in 2012.

    • I think the thing people aren’t getting about Romney is that he does what his constituents want him to. Democrats point out his changes in policy, but look at how public opinion and demand for certain things has changed? Republicans and others point out his left-leaning politics and actions in the past, but remember he was in MA! He wouldn’t have had a chance for election playing strict party-line politics. Is he a saint? Far from it. Has he shown very plainly that he listens to what the people want and, in most cases, does that rather than pushing some personal agenda? I think so. Most importantly, has he shown he knows what the hell he’s doing economically? Yup. Romney 2012. It can’t be worse than what we’ve had, and it certainly won’t be worse than what we’ll get if we stick with Zero.

      Personally, I think America should take the same attitude as Japan has with their prime ministers. They’re never safe, any time they screw up they’re immediately voted out. Their version of congress provides the consistency, while the leadership is very much accountable for every little mistake. Screw this untouchable Executive thing.

  6. Obama has shown that he will use executive orders to get what he wants no matter the cost or how stupid the cause. Romney’s only shown indifference to gun laws.

    With Romney, nothing will change, with Obama we can expect executive orders and at least one hard left SCOTUS to be elected.

  7. I think his position on guns will evolve shortly after January next year. Unless he moves back to Chicago in which secret service protection will render his views on guns moot.

  8. I don’t know if there’s a logical divide or if people are just unaware of Romney’s record – the guy signed the assault weapons ban in Mass, and has a history of nonstop, uncompromising flipfloppery. He will say or do positively anything to get your vote, and then say or do whatever is popular thereafter. In terms of gun control, and essentially everything else, there is absolutely, positively no difference between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.

  9. there’s a definite difference between the 2. with barry in the office people like schumer. feinstein, pelosi and the clintons have a bigger say in government. and there’s always the possible supreme court appointments to be made. and what do you achieve by not voting? the system will continue running even if most people abstain from voting.

  10. I’ll say this for the umpteenth time: Obama’s social mores and goals aren’t dependent on firearms. He’s all about soft-control. Why disarm a populace that’s already mentally disarmed and has been for years? Outliers like Page, Hassan, Holmes, and Loughner will continue to rock the boat here and there….no structural harm done.

    @John R and Matt:

    How odd must it be to accept a Jewish-centric notion of history? So what if a prison gang doesn’t care for them? Plenty of people are bigoted against prisoners. Too many incarcerated for drug charges. Cooking meth can give you hard time. Big Pharma can cook it, call it Ritalin, and feed it to kids….legally. Every ethnicity has its nationalists. So get over it.

  11. As an investigator if I want to know about you, I’ll ask your wife. Michelle Obama clearly outlined the prez’ position on gun control 10/11/11. Read for yourself and if you want, try a search on youtube for “michelle obama 2nd amendment”. This is what I found: “At a recent fundraiser for President Obama’s re-election campaign in Providence, Rhode Island, the first lady told her audience:

    “We stand at a fundamental crossroads for our country. You’re here because you know that in just 13 months, we’re going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come” . . . http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/11/michelle-obamas-warning-to-gun-owners/#ixzz22vVsE52Z

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *