I find it incomprehensible that we, as humans, would allow a healthy baby to die based on whether its birth was intentional. This should be troubling to any rational, thinking person, but Obama supporters will rationalize and ignore the issue. CHANGE! VOTE OBAMA! CHANGE!

What's the world coming to when Hillary Clinton and the NRA appear to agree on something? What's next? Colin Powell and MoveOn.org endorsing the same candidate?

Quoteth the Obama "Urban Policy":

quote:

They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

Better get those AR-15s out of police patrol cars, MP-5s out of the New York subway cops, and HK-53s out of the hands of his Secret Service guards. All weapons covered by the AWB, and all weapons used by American law enforcement. On our streets. But, but, but, they belong on foreign battlefields, right?

And another thing, we also need to get the Austrian-made STEYR AUG re-banned as soon as possible. Cuz as a $5,000+ rare collector's item, it is surely the weapon of choice among inner-city street thugs.

Oh yeah, and be sure not to leave out that ban on bayonet lugs on newly-manufactured rifles, because the number of bayonet-related murders has sky-rocketed since the Clinton AWB (which so wisely banned such cosmetic features) expired.

And while we're resurrecting the old ban, make sure AR-15 rifle stocks can't telescope down 3 inches (a feature for troops wearing bulky body-armor). THAT, and that alone, will stem the tide of gangsters who cruise our streets wearing military-grade flak jackets. Can't fold the shoulder-stock down, can't shoot your rifle. Check and Mate, scumbags!



Possibly the most poorly thought-out piece of gun legislation to come from the desk of a Democrat.

Maybe if the bad guys didn't have access to assault weapons, the cops wouldn't need them.

I support the 2nd Amendment but why do people insist that it is the only right in the Bill of Rights that cannot be abridged or restrained? We have the Right to Free Speech but certain speech is against the law. You can't yell fire into a crowded movie theater, and all that.

If I want to buy benedryl at wal-mart, I have to give them my license. They keep that information in a large database so that I don't cause "harm" by making meth. We need to have a drivers license to operate a motor vehicle. We need to get background checks to work with children and the elderly. Drug tests if we posses a CDL. All these things and we can't get put someones name and the guns serial number together for future reference? I think there is some common sense legislation that would stop the flow of guns into poor areas, where they often wind up being used (yes, by criminals, I know)on innocent people, like children and bystanders or people sleeping in their homes.

If you have a gun serial number attached to a purchaser, and that gun winds up being used in a crime by someone who shouldn't have a gun, the person who owned it last had better have a good reason for why it would be in the hands of the criminal. If it was stolen and you reported it so, no problem.

I have a healthy distrust of government but I don't really fear any US government would be capable of seeking out and confiscating the hundred million or so weapons out there. They would have to start somewhere and, by the time they got started, word would get out and the rest of us would have something to say. I also find it hard to believe the government that fouled up relief efforts in Katrina and can't seem to get much right these days would have the wherewithal to NOT screw that assignment up as well.

Since I don't own a gun, have never owned a gun and have never even fired a gun there are a few things I might be misinformed of. Don't we already have laws in effect that require guns to be registered to the owner of said gun? Isn't there a waiting period before you can take ownership of a gun?

I had a statement sent to me once before discussing the increase in crimes in countries that banned gun ownership. While the people didn't own guns, it didn't stop the criminals from having them. I think the same would be true here if guns were banned. Why would a criminal give up his illegal gun since he is doing something illegal to begin with? And wouldn't a criminal think twice before carrying out an act of violence if he was stating down the barrel of a gun rather than a guy holding a 9 iron? Just a thought.

Anyone who knows the rules, regulations and laws concerning gun ownership and registering it please clue me and the rest in.

quote:

Originally posted by Jawbone:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_alive_baloney.html

JB I clicked your link and read it but it discussed campaign commercials and one case of someone claiming to have missed being an abortion statistic. But the initial statement of this thread was about Sen. Obama's stance on abortion and past voting record, not a statement made in a campaign ad. I'm trying to but I don't see this link as a way of defending his position. Did I miss something?

quote:

Originally posted by kirbylee:
I'm trying to but I don't see this link as a way of defending his position. Did I miss something?

I thought the same thing. I don't get it.

Why does the discussion we go from having a registry to banning guns? It is not one or the other but having common sense rules and regulations that would enable law enforcement to track guns back to the bad guys that are dumping crates of weapons onto the streets.
I said it before that anyone who has a gun that shouldn't, or uses a gun in the commission of a crime, should go to jail for a good long time. If we accept the fact that I need to "register" to buy benedryl for the safety of the general public, I think it makes sense to do the same for a gun, which can kill you a lot faster than meth.

Maybe if we adopted the punishments for the misuse of guns like Florida has the problem will take care of itself.

I edited this because the original link didn't work. Google 10-20-Life and you will see.

quote:

Originally posted by simpleman:
If I want to buy benedryl at wal-mart, I have to give them my license. They keep that information in a large database so that I don't cause "harm" by making meth. We need to have a drivers license to operate a motor vehicle. We need to get background checks to work with children and the elderly. Drug tests if we posses a CDL. All these things and we can't get put someones name and the guns serial number together for future reference?

All these things and we can't get put someones name and ID number together for future reference?

I think you just made a good argument for voting reform. But, that would be racist, right?

Sorry to interject.

I think you misunderstood my post Simpleman. I'm not criticizing reasonable gun legislation - I'm criticizing poorly thought-out, ineffective, knee-jerk laws like the Assault Weapons Ban which Obama wants to renew.

It's the worst kind of "pandering to an ill-informed public to get votes" law you can imagine. That to me, shows that Obama is not "candidate of change" - he's just (as Salt would say) another dishonest politician who'll do anything to get votes.

To illustrate, here are examples of "Assault Weapons" that were banned and allowed under the ban:

BANNED

ALLOWED

Can you spot the differences?