Quote of the Day: Unless They’re “Assault Weapons” Edition

President Obama meets with cops to discuss civilian disarmament (courtesy (lasvegassun.com/news)

“The president said to us he wasn’t there to take any firearms from an average person who needs them for self-protection or sporting purposes.” - Calhoun County Sheriff Larry Amerson, president of the National Sheriffs’ Association [via blog.al.com]

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

53 Responses to Quote of the Day: Unless They’re “Assault Weapons” Edition

  1. avatarLarry says:

    And shoots skeet regularly and will have the most transparent administration ever and won’t raise taxes on the average American.

    • avatarSammy says:

      Yeppers, and all pending legislation posted on the intranet for at least 3 days before floor votes!

    • avatarpat says:

      Obummer just wants the ‘evil’ guns that could actually be affective in Asymetrical/Guerilla warfare against a potential future totalitarian regime (though Barry seems to be working on shortening that potential future date).

  2. Yeah right. More like unless they have a trigger, barrel, hammer, striker, magazine, clip, sights or a stock. Everything else is safe, promise!

    heyjackass.com

  3. They deliver a delusional message. They feel that as long as they allow grandfathering they are not taking anything away from you.

    • avatarunapologeticallyamerican says:

      The problem with “grandfathering” is that it isn’t what you think. With the ’94 ban it was what you think. But NOW IAW Feinstein, she will institute the same proceedure you have to do in order to get a NFA class II weapon (local police sign off, background investigation-not just check, fingerprint, and a fee which is currently $200 for a class II weapon) . That means $200 per weapon and maybe $200 per magazine, plus you are on a database like the one for sex offenders.
      Infringement. Look it up in the dictionary.

      • avatarSammy says:

        Grandfathering presently owned firearms without allowing transfer of any type equals the Second Amendment will sunset.

      • avatarH.R. says:

        The problem with a grandfather clause is that it still leaves any American who may want to obtain a modern self-loading firearm and standard capacity magazines for defense won’t be able to the day after the law is signed.
        It does not respect anyone’s rights. It turns that right into a courtesy that can be revoked at will. And it will leave millions of Americans less able to defend themselves against criminals who have never had a problem getting weapons.
        A grandfather clause is just a tactic to divide gun owners, get a little more compliance, and look more “reasonable.” Don’t be selfish or stupid. Don’t fall for it.

  4. avatarJoatmon2 says:

    He’s not there to take firearms from the average person. YET

  5. avatarBecca Putman says:

    Won’t take them away from those who *need* them… uh, huh…

    *scans list* No, sorry, you’re not on our list. You don’t *need* a gun. Turn all your weapons in over at that table, please.

  6. avatarGregolas says:

    Reminds me of another promise that was quickly repudiated:”The Sudetenland is the last bit of territory I will demand in Europe!”
    I always teach my students the three biggest lies:
    “I promise I’ll respect you in the morning.”
    “The check’s in the mail.”
    “Hi! We’re from the government and we’re here to help!”

  7. avatarMAC365 says:

    I am perfectly capable of determining what I need and don’t need… thanks, I’ll take it from here.

  8. avatarJoe says:

    The problem is this is all a lead up to a high cap mag ban… The number of people I talk to daily who say ” I’ll be ok if he only sticks to magazines and background checks” is unbelievable! And these are people who own multiple fein sten type guns… (ok that was a reach… I’ll come up with something more witty) the point though is don’t be fooled, he knows he won’t get an AWB… Wait ’till the word ” compromise” starts coming up, that’s when we have to really start getting up in arms.

    • I can’t believe the term compromise gets used. What compromise? Compromise means both sides get something. Plus in this case all the facts and founders intentions are on our side, so why should we give up a damn thing?

      • avatarLarry says:

        Compromise would be offering national right to carry. No exclusions. Then we can talk.

        • avatarTex74 says:

          Yep. Problem is, too many politicians who “support” the 2nd don’t understand what compromise means and what they really do is cave in and give.

        • avatarBarstow Cowboy says:

          Compromise means that the democrats only get most of what they want, not ALL of what they want.

  9. avatarDavid W. says:

    I still don’t get how they don’t include practical gun competitions as “sporting”. I mean, they are huge competitions involving hundred of thousands of people (if not millions) that span the entire country and even other countries too.

    • avatarJesse says:

      I’m right there with you. I’m trying to look for stats on injuries or deaths related to the shooting sports vs any other sport because I would venture to say that more people have died playing Basketball or Football than in 3-Gun or USPSA.

    • avatarRalph says:

      David, it’s not they’re against 3-Gun. But if they recognize it as a sport, then all the guns used in the competition have a “sporting purpose.” And if the guns meet the “sporting purpose” test, then the Secretary of the Treasury can’t ban their importation into the US. Ipso facto, they cannot recognize 3-Gun as a sport.

      • avatarMatt in FL says:

        It’s a shame that exposing false logic doesn’t immediately reverse or at least nullify all decisions made using that point.

  10. avatarJesse says:

    Sporting purposes? Good then I’m safe, I use my AR for both 3-gun and NRA High Power sports.

  11. avatarJosh says:

    So… are we above average or below average?

  12. avatarpk in AZ says:

    “To conquer a nation, first disarm it’s citizens”

    - Adolf Hitler, 1933

  13. avatarTom Collins says:

    Sorry, Mr. President, you don’t get to decide what I “need” or don’t need…

  14. avatarChas says:

    “Amerson said ‘basic handguns’ are the weapon of choice in Calhoun County crimes. He said they do see some assault weapons which are of a particular concern for law enforcement because of their ability to pierce body armor.”

    I didn’t know an AR or AK had the ability to penetrate body armor. Is he lying?

    • avatarRandy Drescher says:

      If you watch the tube videos the AR will go through both sides of a level 3 vest with no plates. I believe plates will stop it & the cops should have plates unless the departments are too cheap to buy them. Randy

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        I’ve never seen an AR pushed through body armor. Seems like it would be kind of hard to get the barrel to make a hole that you can shove through the armor. I must be watching the wrong YouTube videos.

        In all seriousness, virtually any intermediate-caliber rifle can fire a bullet through the typical LEO’s pistol-rated ballistic vest, including the the family of light hunting rifles chambered in .270. This is why we have supplemental trauma plates for protection against rifle bullets.

        A pointy small-diameter (6mm) projectile propelled at 2000+fps will defeat a vest designed for a medium-diameter (9mm) projectile moving at 1100fps. No mystery there, it’s basic physics and engineering.

    • Standard Kevlar body armor only stops pistol rounds. Military vests have pockets to insert metal or ceramic plates that will defeat higher velocity rifle rounds. But then less than 2% of gun crimes involve rifles.

    • avatarJesse says:

      Most vests that police wear are only resistant to pistol caliber rounds. To stop a rifle round you need steel or ceramic plate, something much thicker and uncomfortable to wear.

    • avatarDaveL says:

      It doesn’t mean much to say a round can pierce body armor, without any further context. A level II vest is rated against .357 magnum handgun rounds, but not against 5.56mm NATO.

      Of course, he won’t be mentioning that grandpa’s .30’06 deer rifle will penetrate a lot more than an AR-15. Because stuff.

    • avatarKelly in GA says:

      He isn’t lying, technically. 5.56 and 7.62 will go thru level 3 armor that most cops wear.

    • avatarDyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Most high powered rifles will go through most soft body armor designed for use by police.

      Military vests will resist a high powered rifle, but they have inflexible ceramic-based plates to resist penetration by a bullet.

      Soft body armor wouldn’t stop wounding or death of the wearer if hit by a sufficiently high powered rifle, even if it could prevent penetration. The subject would merely die of a flailed chest instead of a GSW.

      • avatarBarstow Cowboy says:

        Just wondering, no one else has been willing to answer this: At what point does a rifle go from being a regular powered rifle to a high powered rifle? Is it anything bigger than a .22? Is a .17 a high powered rifle? Is there a family of “regular powered” rifles I can get if I don’t want to endanger my family by bringing a “high powered” rifle into our home?

  15. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Then he won’t take the self defense AR’s then. I guess though its daddy obama who thinks he can decide how a person defends themselves. He either needs to back off or get backed off, Randy

  16. avatarFYI says:

    “According to Homeland Security, a Personal Defense Weapon is an M-4. In civilian hands that would be an AR-15. Except for full auto fire, every feature of a government defined Personal Defense Weapon is an AR-15.”
    http://2ndamendmentnj.blogspot.com/2013/01/personal-defense-weapon.html

  17. avatarRon says:

    ” the daily gun deaths that do not make national headlines.”
    How about some input on the daily lives saved and crimes prevent by legally armed citizens that do not make national headlines.

  18. avatarRon says:

    “The president said he wasn’t there to take any firearms from an average person who needs them for self-protection or sporting purposes.”
    With the exception of my sporting .22 all of my firearms were purchased for self-protection.
    Since I’m about as average as one can be, guess I was wrong to be concerned.

  19. avatarMatt in FL says:

    The rest of the quote, in context:

    Amerson, a Democrat like the president, said he told the president that average folks aren’t buying the idea that Obama’s not trying to take away people’s guns.

    “The president said to us he wasn’t there to take any firearms from an average person who needs them for self-protection or sporting purposes,” Amerson said.

    “If you ask the average guy on the street, he won’t agree,” Amerson said.

    • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

      I’m way past the point where I believe that our President is actually listening to a Sheriff from the Deep South. Another act in the play.

  20. avatarDisThunder says:

    Well, if he and his cronies would quit saying stuff like “confiscation, turn ‘em in, Mr. and Mrs. America,” maybe I’d be more inclined to listen.
    But then I’d still have to ignore all the stuff he’s said about closing Gitmo, not expanding the roles of military contractors, ending the war in Iraq, improving transparency in government, and making responsible health care reforms.
    Barry, I don’t want to dislike you, but I don’t feel like you’ve left me a lot of options.

  21. avatarMy Name Is Bob says:

    I believe the sentiment of “come and take them” still applies. Whether the gun grabbers do or don’t want to start confiscating stuff, many people will be far from willing to just hand them over…

  22. avatarDyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    Every statement by this man comes with an a footnote and an expiration date, to be announced and explained later by a supine DC press corpse.

    Anyone who, at this late date, takes this man at his word is a gullible fool.

    • avatarJohn in AK says:

      I don’t know if you meant to say ‘corpse,’ but it’s funny, true, and sad in any case. I know that’s the way We Do Not Speak His Name pronounces it, having an Ivy League education and all, but the fawning sycophants of the ‘press corpse’ do indeed perform like the walking dead. I think you’ve invented a new tag–’White House Press Corpse.’

  23. avatarTR says:

    Just like Obamacare won’t affect anyone’s private insurance policy. Just like tax increases won’t affect the middle class. Just like everything else, he’s full of crap. And the media calls us extremists.

  24. avatarWilliam says:

    He’s asking for a towel to wipe the blood off his hands, and they’re just sitting there, staring.

  25. avatarLance says:

    Obama Bin Lying ….. Again.

  26. avatarAharon says:

    my toothbrush is an assault brush

  27. avatarMrbadnews says:

    I need them for self-protection or sporting purposes. I am covered. Right?

  28. avatarDerek says:

    Seemingly unaware that the 2nd has nothing to do with shooting burglars or ducks…

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.