Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

U.S. Citizens scramble for guns

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

http://www.sltrib.com/Utah/ci_10912220?source=rv

Apparently this is not only going on in Utah but all over the country. Frankly I'm kinda glad, and somewhat inspired that so many people fear the Obama machine as they should, rather than embracing it.

There's a pair of Romanian WASR's at the pawn shop down the street, I'd be all over them if it was legal for me to buy one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put together quite a selection of likely to be banned stuff before the election.

I got one 20" AR-15, and three stripped lower receivers. They are the part that legally is the gun, and you can probably find one for $100-$125. You can complete the rifle at your leisure, but the important part is you own it now.

I got a Winchester SX2 shotgun, and bought a +5 magazine extension for it.

I also bought 40 AR-15 magazines, and 4 Glock 20 magazines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During the 1994 AWB, items made before the bill passed were still legal to own and sell. The bill simply prohibited production of new "scary" weapons and magazines.

This artificial cap on supply made prices skyrocket, sometimes to 10x or more what the item cost previously. The government saying "you can't own this" is a powerful marketing tool on the American psyche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he has campaigned against firearms. Two specific issues that he mentioned during the campaign were re-instating the "assault weapons" ban, and banning concealed carry nation-wide.

Prior to the campaign, he also worked extensively to outlaw guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

banning concealed carry nation-wide.

Do you have any specific quotes on him regarding this? That seems quite ridiculous!

Found some quotes here.

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons," Obama told the Pittsburgh Tribune. "I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."

While campaigning in Idaho in February, Obama promised, "I have no intention of taking away folks’ guns."

"I think it's important for us to recognize that we've got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respects the Second Amendment and people's traditions."

Notice how scatterbrained and pragmatic his statements are. This shows he has no interest in upholding a right to bear arms. It's not a right to him. It's a "tradition" - sort of like a dying religion.

Edited by brian0918
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have any specific quotes on him regarding this? That seems quite ridiculous!

I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.

From Promise to Power, by David Mendell, p.250-251 Aug 14, 2007

Let's be honest. Mr. Keyes does not believe in common gun control measures like the assault weapons bill. Mr. Keyes does not believe in any limits from what I can tell with respect to the possession of guns, including assault weapons that have only one purpose, to kill people. I think it is a scandal that this president did not authorize a renewal of the assault weapons ban.

Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes Oct 21, 2004

Not surprisingly, Obama supports the gun ban in the nation's capital, saying the "DC handgun law is constitutional."

James Oliphant and Michael J. Higgins, "Court to hear gun case," Chicago Tribune, November 20, 2007.

bama has also taken a strong position in favor of the Clinton semi-auto ban which sunset in 2004. "I believe we need to renew -- not roll back -- this common sense gun law," Obama said.

John Chase, "Keyes, Obama are far apart on guns; Views on assault weapons at odds," Chicago Tribune, September 15, 2004

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080419/pl_politico/9722

I can find lots more if anyone isn't persuaded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found one more that was too good to pass up:

"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban as soon as I take office. Within 90 days, we will go back after kitchen table dealers, and work to end the gun show and internet sales loopholes. In the first year, I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."

--Barack Obama, VPC Fund Raiser 2007

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found one more that was too good to pass up:

"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban as soon as I take office. Within 90 days, we will go back after kitchen table dealers, and work to end the gun show and internet sales loopholes. In the first year, I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."

--Barack Obama, VPC Fund Raiser 2007

My friend just went and got his license with the thinking that he could buy a gun anytime after that. In NY, I guess once you have it you have it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think that is the motivation for the majority of people. In fact, I would guess that it is a tiny majority that have consciously thought about purchasing guns for the purpose of shooting at government agents.

However, it probably is a higher number than any time in recent history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think that is the motivation for the majority of people. In fact, I would guess that it is a tiny majority that have consciously thought about purchasing guns for the purpose of shooting at government agents.

However, it probably is a higher number than any time in recent history.

I'm not even talking about that. I'm talking about when hyperinflation reaches absurd levels and people can't afford food anymore. After the initial riots, the national guard or even army/navy might be deployed for a time. But even then, these are individuals who want to protect their own families and will not serve the corrupt federal government out of "duty" when the dollars they are paid are worth squat.

That's when the real war begins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree that this is a possibility, I just don't think it is the conscious motivator for anything other than a slim minority.

That is only partially true. See, most people don't understand inflation, the economy, etc. But they do understand that things are getting worse, and the guy promising to make them better isn't looking too promising. Kind of like when a dog runs into the basement when a storm's about to hit: it doesn't understand how or why a storm is coming, but it senses that the shit is about to hit the fan and it wants to be prepared and feel safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a native Texan, I am a gun owner, although more into the collector's aspect of it than marksmanship(my last purchase was a Mosin-Nagant), but I am not worried about Obama pushing through any type of gun control legislation, partially because most of the Dem's gains have been in states that value the second amendments and these guys remember what happened last time in 1994(the repubs took their seats), plus the recent supreme court ruling, called by one conservative columnist as "the Roe V Wade of Gun Rights". I think I live in the only state in the union where you get your voting rights and some(albiet limited) of your second amendment rights back if you've been in trouble with the law once you "pay your debt to society"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Roe v, Wade of Gun Rights"? Bullshit. Only if the Supreme court had overturned all anti-gun laws (as they overturned all anti-abortion laws in Roe v. Wade) would it merit that. In point of fact the Supremes *affirmed* that there is such a thing as a reasonable restriction on KBA. (They are wrong.)

Mosin Nagant, eh? Interesting weapons. I wouldn't mind owning one, but it would basically be a collectible curiosity for me. (The round, though available today, is "funky" and if ammo ever got restricted for whatever reason such as being taxed into oblivion, I think the manufacturers would drop that (and probably about 95% of all other) rounds.)

I hope you are right about the legislation, Paul. I really do. (Even though it would mean I "wasted" money buying an AR-15 at inflated panic prices.) But I doubt it. The congressional leadership will be pushing--hard--for this one; they've been frustrated for the last 8 years and the Feinstein (magazine and scary gun ban) amendment was (horrors!) allowed to expire, which absolutely has got to have gotten their goat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Roe v, Wade of Gun Rights"? Bullshit. Only if the Supreme court had overturned all anti-gun laws (as they overturned all anti-abortion laws in Roe v. Wade) would it merit that. In point of fact the Supremes *affirmed* that there is such a thing as a reasonable restriction on KBA. (They are wrong.)

Mosin Nagant, eh? Interesting weapons. I wouldn't mind owning one, but it would basically be a collectible curiosity for me. (The round, though available today, is "funky" and if ammo ever got restricted for whatever reason such as being taxed into oblivion, I think the manufacturers would drop that (and probably about 95% of all other) rounds.)

I hope you are right about the legislation, Paul. I really do. (Even though it would mean I "wasted" money buying an AR-15 at inflated panic prices.) But I doubt it. The congressional leadership will be pushing--hard--for this one; they've been frustrated for the last 8 years and the Feinstein (magazine and scary gun ban) amendment was (horrors!) allowed to expire, which absolutely has got to have gotten their goat.

so you think they are going to be able to get away with gun grabbing eh? I doubt it, if for no other reason than the dems want to hold on to congress. 1994 wasn't that long ago and the brady bill was a factor in the Dems losing seats. On another note, I bought my Mosin as a collectors gun, I very rarely fire a weapon, but do like to purchase historically significant weapons occasionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't just the Brady Bill--which we are still stuck with--but also the high-cap magazine and "assault weapon" ban, the Feinstein Amendment, which sunset in 2004. Even though the Republicans got elected due to those, neither measure actually got repealed. (We have the NRA to thank for the Brady Bill, they *approve* of it and wouldn't lobby for its repeal. But the Rs were too spineless, even in 1995, and even when they had a Republican president in 2001, to get rid of the Feinstein baloney.)

If the Dems *do* pass something--and many of them hate guns too much to care if they take a fall for it (see Bill Clinton's quote, he thought it was worth losing Congress)--they will make it permanent this time, no ten year sunset, and the Republicans will never have the testicular fortitude to repeal it. A ratchet effect.

Any gun control proposed MUST be fought vigorously. Unfortunately due to the ratchet, we have to win every time, they only have to win once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...