Get More: Music News

“Looking at how we keep guns out of the hands of kids shooting each other is a critical component,” President Obama opines in that stilted, non-teleprompter prompted way of his, “and we will work to find solutions to that particular problem . . . ” Missing: any mention of an assault weapons ban, as per the Constitutional scholar’s remarks at the last presidential debate. No surprise given that the promise supplied some last-minute rhetorical firepower to the NRA and gun rights advocates. Nor should we be startled that the media’s picked up on the quote wherein the CIC says gun violence is happening just blocks from his home in Chicago. True story?

61 Responses to President Obama on MTV on Gun Control: All of the Above

  1. Look at the dem dominated places,California, Chicago, DC and tell me who’s best for gun owners. Difi held up the reprocity bill and has a new AWB in the wings. I know how I’m voting and I’m not helping barry by voting for johnson.

    • Anyone who can look at longtime Dem strongholds and say any hardcore Dem is a friend of the gun owners is a fool. Barry plays the moderate very well. I have a feeling that if we give the big O another term he may show his true colors.

    • In California, in 1968 it was the conservative Republicans led by state assemblyman Don Mulford (R) who wrote and pushed for the law that banned open carry, signed into law and blessed by Governor Reagan (R); in response to the actions of the Black Panthers who were teaching that being armed was the only way to guarantee your rights. The Panthers also taught socialist and black nationalist ideas, and bought their guns with money earned by selling copies of Mao’s Little Red Book in Berkeley.

      Being well-educated in CA state law, the leaders of the Black Panthers were observing and confronting the police to discourage illegal intimidations and arrests by the police. They also made a heavily armed march on the state capital in response to assemblyman Mulford’s law prohibiting Open Carry in CA cities. Rather than seeing that the law was unpopular with the people, the state assembly instead chose to swiftly pass the law. The rest of the story of the black community in Oakland, CA where the Black Panthers were born is one of increasing drug abuse, violence, and laws. The people lost their battle for their rights, and were imprisoned or killed in the millions over the next four decades as they tore their community apart with help from the pro-gun-control GOP and now the pro-gun-control Democrats.

      How the times do change. I’m no fan of the Black Panthers, socialism, or laws that ban open carry, but it is important to remember how CA go to be the way it is. Both the Democrats and the Republicans have a long history of flip-flopping whichever way they think will gain them the most votes. The answer to this problem is not to become and even stronger Democrat or a stronger Republican, but to vote loudly and often and leave no doubt about what you as voters want. Right now, to win elections both parties rely on their uninformed bases of support (who vote by party regardless of the issues), plus as many independent voters as they can get. Independent voters who, according to the polls and campaign professionals, make their voting decisions based on the quality and quantity of campaign ads, and largely do not base their votes on any real knowledge of the facts.

      How often do you hear of the pro-gun socialists vs scared rightwing origins of CA gun control? You don’t, instead the story is usually told as oppressive leftwing socialist Democrats playing the nanny state. Quite the opposite. And you certainly don’t hear about the GOP’s history through Governor and then Presidents’ Reagan and GW Bush of infringing upon nearly every one of the 10 Amendments in the Bill of Rights. The War on Drugs, the Patriot Act, the War on Terror, the Mulford Act in CA under then Governor Reagan, and on and on. And yes, Policies that President Obama has largely left in place with support from the Democratic Party, but was not the originator of.

      • Now, now Chris. You’re letting those silly facts get in the way of the popular mythology as sold by the marketing firms and their tools. How dare you quote history…

        Next thing, you’ll be reminding them that St. Ronnie grew government as Gov and Pres (as Pres the same rate as Obo), that he doubled the National Debt (just like Obo) and that he raised taxes 11-19 times (depending on how you count) on everybody but the rich folks during his tenure.

        Oh yeah. St. Ronnie quite happily took away our auto-guns.

        Let’s not even get into the Treasonous acts of GW. ‘Patriot’? My relatives fought the Brits for the things that are in there. They also wrote a thing called “The Constitution” and “Bill of Rights” to prevent this sort of statism.

        The ‘Two Party System’ has been completely bought and paid for, for the last 50-odd years. Thinking there’s any difference betwixt and between these ‘candidates’ shows a complete lack of knowledge of what they both do and have done.

  2. If we look through the political dogma, it is very clear.
    Sure Obama might not have ever said anything on an AWB ban or anything, but that doesn’t mean others in his administration hasn’t taken very clear steps towards this.

    • He did say he wanted AWB I heard it on the last debate.I also heard him say no civilian should own a gun when he ran in 08.

      • President Obama and Governor Romney also were strongly implying that full-auto weapons were common on the streets and that they both would support a ban on full-auto weapons in the streets. It was a lot of baloney to scare the uninformed swing voters now, and offer a feel-good (but do-nothing) solution to the problem that doesn’t actually exist if only they vote for one of these two candidates.

      • As opposed to Romney who has actually enthusiastically done an “AWB”? Look up his 2004 MA nonsense, and his quotes that are almost dupes of the Obo rhetoric.

        They both suck.

  3. Obama could say he loves his AR15 and shoots it every day–folks will still be screaming AWB from the rooftops. The firearm industry is loving it.

    “Oh but he said it during the debates!” Of course, according to those same people he was lying about everything else in the debate–but the mention of the AWB was Gospel. People hear what they want to hear how they want to hear it.

    The same people gloss over when he makes the larger point about the issue. It ain’t “assault weapons” stupid. Guns aren’t causing the war zone, kids who feel they have no future are.

    As far as an AWB or other restrictions, if it’s politically expedient count on any president selling us out, as presidents on both sides of the aisle have in the past. Even the internet gods…I mean Libertarian candidates…would throw us under the bus. The answer is activism, not relying on politicians to keep our best interests in mind when securing their position of power.

    • “Obama could say he loves his AR15 and shoots it every day–folks will still be screaming AWB from the rooftops.”

      If he said that and openly disagreed with the calls for an AWB from those in his own party I’d sit this election out.

      If you guys like him so much, convince your own party to stop ****ing with my 2A rights.

      Don’t try to convince me that they won’t really try to do what they say they want to. I ain’t buying it.

  4. I’m looking forward to seeing the comments in 4 years, at the end of President Obama’s second term, theorizing how he’s going to slip in an AWB as an executive order during his two lame-duck months after not having done it in the preceding 8 years. What will his 2A critics say if his entire term as President passes without AWB 2.0?

    Conversely, if there is a successful push for AWB 2.0, I will endure my shame with grace and dignity even as I ensure that I’ve accumulated as much grandfathered “evil” equipment as is reasonably practical.

    • Hopefully AG the voters will save you from the shame and not give barry a second term. It’s the least we can do to preserve your dignity.

        • Seriously, can we stop with the Gary Johnson stuff please? He isn’t going to win the election and voting for him increases the Obama wins the election. You have one of two choices for President, Obama who has said he wants an AWB or Romney who passed one and has gone on record changing his mind. The NRA has endorsed him so you would think they did their due diligence before giving him their endorsement. A person can change their mind and make reparations for past mistakes but you have to allow them that chance.

        • “Seriously, can we stop with the Gary Johnson stuff please?”

          No. the stakes are too high this year. everybody that chanted “lets take our country back” when obama was elected now has a chance to. Youre not going to take it back by electing a identical idiot that wears a different hat.

          A vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson, just like a vote for Romney is a vote for Romney etc etc. This horse manure needs to stop getting spread around. Vote for THE best candidate.

          Give them a chance? f–k that. Ive made that mistake once with ‘Dubya.

        • Wow Average_Casey, I didn’t know that the only people I could vote for are the two that the machine has proscribed. That kind of bs thinking is why we are where we are.

          Please GTFO, you have no idea what our Constitutional Republic is about.

          Your blind slavery to media and money have ruined any hope of credibility.

  5. I watched the debate in question. I heard what Obama said. You can try to spin it all you want.

    He said “Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced.”

    He said that, Romney did not.

    All of your tortured logic and “the other guy is no better” will never change that.

    A vote for Obama is a vote against gun rights.

    • No, Romney didn’t say that. What he did say involved distancing himself from the permanent assault weapon ban he signed into law in Massachusetts by saying “it had at the signing of the bill both the pro-gun and the anti- gun people came together, because it provided opportunities for both that both wanted.”

      What “opportunities” will both sides want with Romney as president? To quote this site: “Remember, More Gun Control Always Represents the ‘Moderate’ Position.” A vote for Romney is a vote against gun rights.

      • Spin, spin away.

        But voting for a man that says: ” I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on guns and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal” is more in line with our civil right than voting for one that said: ” Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced.”

        It is what it is and if you think otherwise then logic is decidedly not your friend.

        • Spin what? They have both stated their anti-gun rhetoric.

          Mittens has already done a “Permanent AWB”.

          How is either our friend?

        • or you can vote for a man that says this, “”I don’t believe there should be any restrictions when it comes to firearms. None.”

          That is the problem. you are painted a illusion that you have just TWO choices.

        • There are just two choices. One of two are going to win and you can’t choose another who can actually win. Quit acting like there is another option because there isn’t. If anyone wants a different choice than a republican or democrat, then you need to start laying the groundwork now for the election in four years because it will take at least that long to have a third party get enough support to have that chance. I would love to have at lest three parties because the system is flawed right now but another party needs to emerge and that will take time.

        • There are more than two choices. Anybody who disagrees is a statist plain and simple.

          “If anyone wants a different choice than a republican or democrat, then you need to start laying the groundwork now for the election in four years because it will take at least that long to have a to”

          …there ya go…youre starting to catch on. That is why people are voting for the libertarian party candidate.

        • Thanks for being an American. There are whatever choices you choose to be correct. Those that are suckers and tools of the machine know no different…

  6. They’re coming for our guns, liberties, wealth, sanity, self-sufficiency, safety, peace, access to knowledge, health, etc. Simply stated: they are coming for our right to the pursuit of health, wealth, and happiness. They are the conservative fascists and the liberal fascists. They are the modern Republican and Democrat Parties.

  7. People, lets put a stop to the FUD and nonsense here.

    Romney DID NOT sign an Assault Weapons Ban in Massachusetts. Here’s the historical record on the matter. That state’s AWB was signed during the period of the Federal AWB, and as such used legal language which relied on the Federal definition of an an “assault weapon” for the state statutes. Well, in 2004 the Federal AWB died a rightful death, which caused a problem because now Massachusetts had no definition for an assault weapon.The leftists tried to spin the situation as their state’s AWB expiring which was completely inaccurate, but because of the spin and negative public opinion on firearms( remember lots of liberals live in MA) actually jettisoning the Mass. AWB was politically impossible, and leaving the leftists in Mass. Government to write an “update” would mean The End of the 2nd Amendment in that state.

    So in point of fact, Romney helped gun owners by keeping the Disarmament Lobby from tightening the screws even worse on MA gun owners. Oppose Romney if you wish, but please cite the facts folks.

    As far as Obama goes,I’ll put it like this-he doesn’t need an AWB to wreck our lives as gun owners.Lets pretend the SCOTUS nominations aren’t in play and he never said that comment at the debate about another Assault Weapons Ban. All Obama need do is exorbitantly tax certain firearms so as to make them unaffordable for common use -a tactic used in the 20’s with the NFA. He can claim no one’s rights are being hurt because natch, nothing’s being banned. You can buy an AR15 or AKM , just as long as you send a $250 check to Uncle Sam every year per gun. He doesn’t need congressional approval to do that.

    Nor would he need Congress to shove a Bullet tax on the books. Heck Chicago’s already trying that tactic. I can hear the speech now :

    **********”We must do our part as Americans to prevent gun violence, and asking shooters for another quarter per bullet isn’t an unreasonable request.My hometown’s trying it, and I think its an idea which has merit across the nation. Gun owners need to step up and take responsibility for the deadly abuse of weapons in America……”********

    Bottom line, Obama has many avenues to attack the RKBA ,and as such it is the height of foolishness to believe that just because he doesn’t have legislative support for a national AWB that he’s powerless to hurt our rights.

    • Spin? Good god, I hope you are on Mittens’ payroll…

      He signed it. He was enthusiastic about signing it. Read the news quotes from 2004 – anybody with the sense to google it can. Romney is NO friend of ours, and only has pretended to be in the last 18 months or so.

      He sounded just like Obo, spouting nonsense about ‘sporting guns’ and ‘keeping military weapons off the street’. Mittens ‘helped’ gun owners like Ho Chi Minh ‘helped’ the South Vietnamese.

      Try to rewrite history all you want, the facts are a matter of public record. MA still has some of the worst gun laws in the US for all of this supposed ‘victim of coicumstance’ nonsense.

      • Please turn down your vitriol dial .

        Returning to terra firma, lets look at the factual situation and not what the media is spinning it as. The mainstream channels would have you believe that one day out the blue Romney signed a “permanent” AWB. MA has had an assault weapons ban on the books since 1998!

        Considering the odds of that left-leaning state repudiating it in 2004 were about as high as Chicago passing right to carry, Romney included some provisions which *actually helped gun owners!*

        Provisions like a 90 day grace period for holders of CCW & ownership permits to renew their documents, plus establishing a review board for people denied CCW permits-no small feat considering if you’re arbitrarily denied in other “may issue” states its game over for your rights without appeal. Speaking of the licenses, permits and CCW’s were extended from 4 to 6 years in duration.

        That doesn’t sound like policy a Brady shill would endorse.

        • MY Vitriol dial? Actual factual? This is like watching FOX….

          I could not care less about “what the media is spinning it as”. I know what the actual facts are. They were there in 2004. You can’t argue them, and all you do is disinform and propagandize.

          You can’t, nor have you addressed ANY of the ‘actual factual’ points at issue, you merely try to shift the debate to nonsensical whimsy. A few crumbs? T
          hat’s what they are. Crumbs.

          So – do please validate that Mittens didn’t sign that 2004 ban as per your BS allegation – I’ve got 100K+ google articles that say he did. And I remember it too. Pony up.

          You have nothing and you are reaching for completely disconnected straws. I’m smarter than that and so are most of the folks here.

        • There’s a huge problem with somebody’s credibility here…and it sure isn’t 16Vs…LOL

          “Romney DID NOT sign an Assault Weapons Ban in Massachusetts. Here’s the historical record on the matter.”

          Im not sure where you learned of this “historical record”, but here’s mine:

          http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/18/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-exhibits-marked-change-gun-rhetoric/

          read it and weep.

          Romney is certainly no friend of the american gun owner. those that think so are either stupid or incredibly naive. If anybody rode a fence as hard as romney does on the gun issue, they would have toothpick sized splinters in their ass.

          Reason number 364 why Im voting for Gary Johnson (FTMFW!!!!!)

        • Mitt was in a dem controlled state and made the best of a bad situation. Vote for Johnson and we’ll have a dem controlled country with Difi waiting to bring her new nationwide AWB to an eager barry to sign it.

          Spin it any way you want. Voting for johnson is just a way to ensure barry’s second term and bleed off support for our guns,

        • “Mitt was in a dem controlled state and made the best of a bad situation. Vote for Johnson and we’ll have a dem controlled country with Difi waiting to bring her new nationwide AWB to an eager barry to sign it.”

          How about I vote for johnson because thats who i want in office?

          This “a vote for another party candidate is a vote for obama” is utter bullshit and im quite fed up with it. At least us independents have the intestinal fortitude to vote for somebody we want instead of picking tweedledee from tweedledum. They were in 100% agreement on foreign policy and have quite a “colorful” history in regards to firearms. No thank you. If either one of those charlatans gets into office, it will not be because I picked one of the &%@!-suckers.

          “Spin it any way you want. Voting for johnson is just a way to ensure barry’s second term and bleed off support for our guns”

          Let me tell you something chump: my ancestors, who date all the way back to the mayflower, have had a long and violent history in the service of the American armed forces. Many were killed in those wars or horribly wounded to secure freedom and the American way of life. Hell, I am a combat veteran myself.

          My point is that our forefathers sacrificed so much in the name of liberty and you wont even wager a f–king vote!? you wont wager a vote because the candidate you really want might lose? nice set a priorities bud. Im sure you will lose so much by voting for somebody who you really want LOL.

          Cowardice. No wonder we are a dying empire.

        • Mr 16V, there are two electable parties in America. The Republican Candidate is no sworn friend to gun rights, but he’s not pursing gun control as a campaign issue. The other candidate is-and Gary Johnson is no threat to Obama on the ballot.

          WLCE, here’s *my* link. If the 2004 MA law was so awful why did the gun rights organization GOAL support it?

          Sure Romney and CO. were wrong in spinning the bill as a public safety initiative-but if you’re going to pillory Romney, do it on the truth and not on inflammatory BS.

          http://web.archive.org/web/20040718190839/http:/www.goal.org/Alerts/reformbillsigned.html

        • First, wlce, chump back at ya. You’re not the only one with a long family history here or service to your country. Johnson is going to get just enough of the vote to bleed support from the GOP in a very tight race. So yes, regardless of your motives or insane levels of courage in the face of my “cowardice” voting for Johnson is simply supporting barry.

          Johnson knows he can’t win. What’re his motives? A bag full of cash or other favors from the dems?

          And I and my family served our country, not an empire.

        • “Mr 16V, there are two electable parties in America.
          The Republican Candidate is no sworn friend to gun rights, but he’s not pursing gun control as a campaign issue.”

          Right and thats supposed to make everybody feel better? LOL. Sorry, but a candidates history is just as important now as it was back then. With a attitude like that, it is unsurprisingly that we have the same bought morons in government right now.

          “WLCE, here’s *my* link. If the 2004 MA law was so awful why did the gun rights organization GOAL support it?”

          I could care less about your link simply because of credibility issues. To be honest, it doesnt stack up against a pulitzer prize winning fact checking organization. Its always easier to re-write history I guess.

          “Sure Romney and CO. were wrong in spinning the bill as a public safety initiative-but if you’re going to pillory Romney, do it on the truth and not on inflammatory BS.”

          Which I have so gladly provided. Youre so willing to get obama out of office that youre willing to compromise with the scraps that romney will allot you.

          “First, wlce, chump back at ya. You’re not the only one with a long family history here or service to your country. Johnson is going to get just enough of the vote to bleed support from the GOP in a very tight race. So yes, regardless of your motives or insane levels of courage in the face of my “cowardice” voting for Johnson is simply supporting barry.

          Not remotely. you are demonstrating yourself as a number of “patriots” in this country that are unwilling to sacrifice a vote in order to get the person they really want into office, instead settling for a guy that passed assault weapons legislation as governor. Some compromise.

          A vote or johnson is a vote for johnson. If barry is voted in, well, then he’s voted in. Im going to vote for who I want in office. Besides, both are just as bad as the other and I cannot imagine the logic that it takes to justify voting for romney.

          “Johnson knows he can’t win. What’re his motives? A bag full of cash or other favors from the dems?”
          And I and my family served our country, not an empire.”

          well like it or not, thats how it turned out.

          Youve always wanted a chance to “take back your country”, well heres the opportunity.

        • ST, Did you even read that linked press release from GOAL? It calls upon the members to ‘protest this travesty’ among other things.

          Oh, and contained this charming quote from Romney himself…

          “Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts ,” Romney said. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”

          I can tell he was all broken up, signed under duress, and was held hostage by those dirty Dems. Which is why he spent tons of time touting the achievement.

          During the selection process, his anti-gun stance (and record!) was a big problem. Now that he’s been chosen, we’re supposed to fall into line and just buy the lies that he’s somehow instantly more pro-gun than his entire history indicates.

          WLCE covered the rest of this so I’m not going to make this post any longer than it is.

  8. Wow, are you sure you haven’t written his other speeches? I could hear Big 0’s voice reading that, it was kinda creepy.

  9. Robert you really cued up an avalanche of paranoid, knee-jerk responses to what the president said. The truth is, if any of you are interested in it really, he talked about the broader causes of gun violence. He almost sounded like one of you guys arguing with me when I say it’s all about gun availability. Didn’t ANY of you notice that? No, of course not. You’re suffering from inexplicable Obama hatred.

    • Mikey if you’re going to attempt to paraphrase people here at least get it right. The problem isnt gun availability. The problem is that gun control laws do not stop criminals from having guns, as evidenced by numerous gang shootings in Chicago. Why dont we pass a law against murdering people…..oh, we already have that, and the criminals dont follow that one either. Funny how that works.

        • Sorry mikey, no views for your blog from me. Feel free to explain yourself here if you want me to read it.

          Chicago’s gun violence has everything to do with it. They have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the US. If gun control worked, you would see that reflected in gun violence in Chicago. Is it reflected in the facts of gun violence in Chicago that gun control works? Nope, quite the opposite actually.

        • So….You dont even have a tiny bit of BS that you want to try Mikey. Sad, I was kinda hoping for a good laugh at your expense today.

        • “You’re talking like a simpleton because it’s convenient for your argument.”

          FLAME DELETED – (OTT)

          Im sorry. Im just laughing so hard I cannot sit up straight. mike numbers never ceases to tickle me.

    • I am suffering from Obama hatred. Anybody that continues the same bullshit under george bush should have serious credibility problems with his constituents. of course, why would they have a problem? THEIR tyrant is in office.

      I could care less about obama’s position on guns. The foreign entanglements, war on drugs, drone strikes, and NDAA, are reason why he needs to be out. Not that romney will be ANY better whatsoever because he wont.

      Jesus…if only Obama and our media really were liberal…

    • Exactly. As I said previously, Barry actually coming out and saying was really the straw that broke the camels back for me. I was leaning towards voting third party, but his anti-gun comment at the debate swayed me to cast my vote for Romney.

    • NDAA should have incited riots in our country. but nope…apparently americans like the idea of being indefinitely imprisoned by the military and tortured with no representation.

Leave a Reply

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