Australian gun confidscation (courtesy prisonplanet.com)

“In citing Australia and Great Britain as examples, does Obama envision their gun laws as right for America? If so, he should put it on the table. He should have the courage to tell America exactly how Australia and Britain control guns, and make the case for emulating them. Draft those bills and send them to Congress.” – Nolan Finley, Obama just jawboning on guns [via detroitnews.com]

Recommended For You

34 Responses to Quote of the Day: Put Up Or Shut Up Edition

  1. I normally would say they don’t have the balls, but look at Hillary doubling down on tge AWB and removing gun manufacture lawsuit protection. I think he’s really going to try something in his last year, dang the consequences to the Dems.

    • If it’s his last year. I hears a fairly plausible conspiracy theory about him. The reason why the Democrats aren’t charging Hillary for her crimes and are pushing her as the candidate is so that right before the election next year, they can have her arrested and use it as justification to postpone the election for at least a year.

      • A more realistic scenario is them picking somebody to the far far far left to run as her VP, then charge her and have that VP become the new president.

      • A democrat AG arresting Hillary? After Bill backed Obama? Backstabbing is a political art, but this is a bridge too far. Further, it is questionable a to whether she committed any crime with respect to her private server, nor is there any evidence that her e-mail security was breached. If anything, the party will put up Biden. Delaying the election is not among the enumerated powers of the executive branch, and would be considered a coup

      • They didn’t charge or arrest anyone after Fast & Furious, even after folks in the administration were held in contempt of court. That was a bunch of relative nobodies responsible for domestic Americans’ deaths. Why would they arrest her? Her crimes only resulted in the deaths of citizens half a world away, and she’s a big name to boot.

    • He can’t do anything that matters. The House is majority (R). The Senate is majority (R). All he can do is whine.

  2. Um and for this to happen he would have get a constitutional committee and get it passed through the process. This can not be done by a presidential order, like he did obama care.

    • Yeah… So long as he has half the SCotUS riding his crotch, he can get away with anything he feels like. I think it’s about time that we started impeaching supreme court justices. Did you vote against Heller? Ok, you’re guilty of Treason. NEXT.

  3. Had an Aussie friend explain why 2 countries with so much in common have such a huge difference in the way they and we in the US think about firearms. He said you in the US fought for your freedom from British rule, we were given it when they saw we were about to follow your example. It’s in your history to fight for your freedoms it’s not in either of those two nation’s history to fight for their freedoms.

    We were talking about how the police had called and set up a time frame they would stop by to inspect his bolt action .22, he explained how the ammo had to be behind one lock, rifle in another and the bolt another. Wait let me get this right, 3 locks and they come by and inspect it ever so often?!?!?! Yes. LOL, yea that would go over like flatulence in church here. Where’s your warrant? Sorry go away, I’m busy, good bye.

    • In Canada, a firearm registration became all the warrant they needed to enter your home for inspection, I believe when long gun registration was implemented.

      I’m thinking that’s a recipe for a few dead cops in the USA.
      I know it’s enough to make me answer the door with a shotgun in my hand, but I wouldn’t shoot anybody who didn’t draw on me or attempt to enter without reasonable justification.

      • It’s not ideal freedom-wise, but it only applies to restricted firearms or collections of 10 or more, and they have to call ahead to schedule a reasonable time. Otherwise they need a warrant. Really, now that C-42 has passed, it’s another bit of the law that needs change.

        • A bolt-action .22 is a “restricted firearm”? I think that pretty much would say it all.

        • Another Robert,

          Not in Canada, if for no other reason than it would look ridiculous for the TNW MG34 and the PTRD to be Non-restricted category while a bolt action .22 was restricted.

    • I’m thinking he may–may– be one of those folks who actually think Obama isn’t liberal enough.

      • Nolan Finley is a conservative. He is a quasi-libertarian. He isjust daring Barry Soetoro to have the balls to do it.

        Looks like Hillary has a bigger pair. Not surprising given Bill’s insistence on creeping with skanks with big hair and big ta-ta’s (and without pantsuits to hide her cankles)

        • I dunno if Hillary! has a bigger pair or if she is just getting pre-emptively desperate to get the nomination. She’s also gone full-bore on “gay rights” lately, and surely she has genuflected at the PP-dead baby altar already…But then, we are talking about Barack Obama after all, so maybe Hillary! does have a bigger pair at that…

      • No, I think the author makes a good point. Full disclosure I only read the snippet RF posted above, the whole article may give better context, but from the snippet the author is 100% right. Obama and the radical left love to talk and grandstand and then blame everyone else for doing nothing. He needs to put up or shut up.

        By laying out exactly what he thinks we should do about guns, and putting those plans on paper and sending it to congress two things will happen 1) people will see what they are really after, universal background checks sounds cute and it is a great way to make your opponents look crazy when they oppose it, having his plan out on paper will show people just how far it goes and just how little it has to do with actual background checks and what the end goal really is.
        2) it will force all his “supporters” to play their hand, Obama is out of the office in a little over a year, some of these people have to defend their seats, if Obama really sends a bill that makes our gun laws like Australia you can bet the legislators who stand behind him will have a real problem on their hands with angry constituents.

        So Obama will continue to grandstand until he gets an opportunity to slip something through in the dark of night like they did in CT and NY. I honestly wish he would push harder and put his ideas down on paper, because there will be loads of pressure for the true believers in his party to stand behind him and that can only end poorly for them. Americans may in fact think they want more “gun control”, but I would bet only a very small minority would agree to enact something similar to what happened to gun laws in Australia if they knew that’s what they were voting for.

        • Yeah, that will never happen. This is the party that would not submit a budget when they controlled congress and the white house because they did not want the public to see their plans for our money.

  4. Play the argument out to the end in your head.

    Let them chuck this little bit of the constitution, and then you can chuck the rest. But you’ll be late, you should’ve done it pre-emptively, and again, I BLAME ALL OF YOU POS (D)’s FOR THIS CR_P.

  5. Obama is using the vague reference “Gun Safety Laws”, and not specifying what he has in mind because he knows the only way to stop the mass-shootings carried out by deranged persons, who have bought their Arms legally, is to try to pass some sort of law that would put every person in the United States under Government scrutiny that would never work or be upheld by the Courts.
    To expand Background Checks Nationally, for example, would require forcing the States to send data to the FED, report mental issues, and aggressively monitor all individuals for “mental health”. With all that done there would still be no guarantee that any individual, who legally owned Arms and had a spotless mental health history, would not “snap” and go on a mass-shooting/killing rampage. In short, nothing would actually work.
    Whatever Hilary Clinton proposes today will not work either.
    What will work is enabling National Right to Carry in all Public Places.
    Don’t hold your breath on any of these possibilities.
    Obama and Clinton only want to “appear” as if they are “doing something proactive” and our gutless COTUS and tyrant POTUS will never pass National Right to Carry in any event.

  6. The Grabbers must state HOW the Brits and Aussies achieved their dream condition vis-a-vis guns, by confiscation.
    Then, they must think that that if their ultimate goal is only to reduce gun deaths, how that will be achieved when 20-plus million gun owners rise in armed revolt?

    • I think there are a many on the left hoping for an armed confrontation. They see an armed uprising as being a adequate pretense to disarm the population. Had any fighting erupted at the Bundy stand-off, the left would have been using that as a rallying cry for crack-downs.

    • People are sheep and that’s what Dems are counting on. Small pockets of resistant mopped up by professionals. 2A will no longer exist.

      • And what group of professionals is going to do the mopping up? Every “professional” I know swears they won’t do it on principle.

        • Those professionals had absolutely no problem doing it after Katrina. Just saying, good men can be coerced into doing bad things… it happens all the damn time.

  7. A line you hear over and over is “no one is coming for your guns.” Well they’d love to, but they don’t have the political strength to do it. That’s all that’s stopping them. There’s no reason they’d be mooning over the UK and Australia if that wasn’t the goal.

  8. All I got out of this is the profoundly sad photo-anything similar and it’s “game on”…I got nothing to lose so bring it on dumbocrats.

  9. Some of the disarmed people murdered by the governments of the world, Christians Rome, Jews Nazi Germany, Aztecs Spanish, Maori of NZ and Aboriginals Australia, Scottish William Wallace, the Irish, Welsh by English and the Native America by the US government. THIS is why we need guns to protect ourselves from those who would subject us to their whim and if this is not enough just google dictators.
    There are over 400 gun laws on the books and they have done nothing to stop the violence. Because of the winey few we are chastised for wanting to protect ourselves. We NEED guns to protect ourselves from criminals in and out of the government. I deserve the right to protect myself and if you don’t like it tough $hit.
    The 2nd Amendment was put into the Constitution so the people could protect themselves from a corrupt government. That is why it says “shall not infringe” so we can have what the government has to prevent a Holocaust. I believe the people should have what the government has including machine guns. The only gun control law there should be is that criminals can’t have any firearms. Thanks for your vote, pass the word. mrpresident2016.com

Leave a Reply

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