Obama may push for ban on assault wea...

Obama may push for ban on assault weapons

There are 667 comments on the The Indian Express story from Oct 17, 2012, titled Obama may push for ban on assault weapons. In it, The Indian Express reports that:

Democratic President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney engaged in a rare tussle over gun control on Tuesday, and Obama opened the door to pushing for a ban on assault weapons if he wins a second term.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Indian Express.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#432 Nov 17, 2012
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
So, the buyer has no responsibility if they canít afford the mortgage?
This is something corporations do all the time.

There is no doubt that some went overboard but many were simply people taking a chance on an opportunity for a better day and gambled and lost.

The lender has the responsibility to police his lend but greed was thick in their eyes and I feel no pain for big bankers who have the ability to make mistakes and earn outrageous salaries and foreclose on families but when the same trouble befalls them they turn to the government and use other peoples money to bail them out so on anther day they can do the same thing all over again.

Since: Jan 08

Grants Pass, OR

#433 Nov 17, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your story illustrates the need for a comprehensive system.
Which Police Dept and what guns? Serial numbers will help. I bet I can get some police fired.
Been there done that. I already said I spent 4 years trying to file a theft report with the local POlice.

As to the letter from the atf, as I said some of the weapons the claim were traced to me I have never owned. 2 possibles came to me with no paperwork and I traded them in to a dealer and the final the HK I may have owned but they did not provide enough specifics. If it is the one I had owned I traded it in to a dealer better then 10 years ago.

This actually shows how you cant trust the government including the POlice.

Since: Jul 12

Baltimore, MD

#434 Nov 17, 2012
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
So, the buyer has no responsibility if they canít afford the mortgage?
Sure they do. They lose their downpayment and anything else they have put into the house (closing fee's,improvements, etc...) for which the sale resulting from the foreclosure can not recover. Further, they take the hit on their credit worthiness rating.

This points to the reason the LENDER is responsible for due dilligence, particularly on loans where they have stupidly agreed to no down payment.

Since: Jul 12

Baltimore, MD

#435 Nov 17, 2012
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
Post 359
That was neither to you nor was an explanation of reality. However, had you referenced that post in your request I would have honored your request.
acknowledge that

Rochester, MN

#436 Nov 17, 2012
Obama opened the door to pushing for Marxism in the USA

Since: Jul 12

Baltimore, MD

#437 Nov 17, 2012
talon7351 wrote:
<quoted text>
Been there done that. I already said I spent 4 years trying to file a theft report with the local POlice.
As to the letter from the atf, as I said some of the weapons the claim were traced to me I have never owned. 2 possibles came to me with no paperwork and I traded them in to a dealer and the final the HK I may have owned but they did not provide enough specifics. If it is the one I had owned I traded it in to a dealer better then 10 years ago.
This actually shows how you cant trust the government including the POlice.
It actually shows you are not willing to receive help in finding resolution.
Dr Freud

UK

#438 Nov 17, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
It actually shows you are not willing to receive help in finding resolution.
Got yo 'bama pho' yet?
acknowledge that

Rochester, MN

#440 Nov 17, 2012
36 Obama Aides Owe $833,970 In Back Taxes Ė Media Silent
Saturday, November 17, 2012

Read more: http://patriotupdate.com/32916/36-obama-aides...

“Why call 911? 1911 is faster”

Since: Feb 08

Wesley Chapel, FL

#441 Nov 18, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure they do. They lose their downpayment and anything else they have put into the house (closing fee's,improvements, etc...) for which the sale resulting from the foreclosure can not recover. Further, they take the hit on their credit worthiness rating.
This points to the reason the LENDER is responsible for due dilligence, particularly on loans where they have stupidly agreed to no down payment.
So, the buy making the decision to buy beyond his/her means isnít culpable for that decision. How can one possibly conclude that?

“Why call 911? 1911 is faster”

Since: Feb 08

Wesley Chapel, FL

#442 Nov 18, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
That was neither to you nor was an explanation of reality. However, had you referenced that post in your request I would have honored your request.
I needed to go beyond quoting your entire post?

Since: Jul 12

Baltimore, MD

#443 Nov 18, 2012
Dr Freud wrote:
<quoted text>
Got yo 'bama pho' yet?
Got yo 'bama beer' yet?

Since: Jul 12

Baltimore, MD

#444 Nov 18, 2012
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
I needed to go beyond quoting your entire post?
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
BS. You know as little about this as you do the financial crisis. Corporations "speak" when they advertise their products. If the advertisement is false, it is the corporation that pays the fine.
BP just pleaded guilty to two counts of negligent homicide. Why would BP do that if BP could not kill someone?
They speak just like they own property.
Do you understand the difference between a CEO speaking for the Corporation and a CEO speaking on his own in the form of personal speech?

eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
Is your head permanently implanted in your ass?
Again, who is we? You and your liberal wanker kin?

And I reply
In most things of this nature "we" would mean the American people in general. If you will note, the Constitution says "We the People" and does not include corporations. Corporate rights are based on state law for the most part, federal regulation regarding interstate commerce and SCOTUS interpretation of those. But they are not founded in the Constitution.

“Why call 911? 1911 is faster”

Since: Feb 08

Wesley Chapel, FL

#446 Nov 18, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
BS. You know as little about this as you do the financial crisis. Corporations "speak" when they advertise their products. If the advertisement is false, it is the corporation that pays the fine.
BP just pleaded guilty to two counts of negligent homicide. Why would BP do that if BP could not kill someone?
They speak just like they own property.
Do you understand the difference between a CEO speaking for the Corporation and a CEO speaking on his own in the form of personal speech?
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
Is your head permanently implanted in your ass?
Again, who is we? You and your liberal wanker kin?
And I reply
In most things of this nature "we" would mean the American people in general. If you will note, the Constitution says "We the People" and does not include corporations. Corporate rights are based on state law for the most part, federal regulation regarding interstate commerce and SCOTUS interpretation of those. But they are not founded in the Constitution.
A lie by omission. You left out this
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
Corporations donít speak, their agents and representatives do speak. Are you suggesting because of their association with corporations they should be denied equal protection under the law?
Who is we?

“Voters elect Big Bird”

Since: Jan 07

Dump American Eagle

#448 Nov 19, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
And then the original purchaser sells the gun because he has not used it in 20 years or s/he dies and the spouse sells it. Then it gets stolen and that guy sells it. What good did that NICS do again? What good did the record of sale do again?
Before 1934 citizens could by full auto .45 Thompsons from the local hardware store if it carried them. Prior to 1968 you could order firearms thru the mail,delivered to your home. These are no longer options because of changes in the law. Private citizen sales to other private citizens are still protected by current laws. Don't like that-change the law. But with over 20,000 + gun laws on the books just how many more do we need? Unless your true intent is to legislate private ownership out of existence live with the current laws we have. They are more that adequate for our purposes.

Since: Jul 12

Washington, DC

#449 Nov 19, 2012
okimar wrote:
<quoted text>Before 1934 citizens could by full auto .45 Thompsons from the local hardware store if it carried them. Prior to 1968 you could order firearms thru the mail,delivered to your home. These are no longer options because of changes in the law. Private citizen sales to other private citizens are still protected by current laws. Don't like that-change the law. But with over 20,000 + gun laws on the books just how many more do we need? Unless your true intent is to legislate private ownership out of existence live with the current laws we have. They are more that adequate for our purposes.
we only need 3, nationwide.

One to give you the limits on carrying, like to an elementary school.

One for the background check.

One for registration.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#450 Nov 19, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
we only need 3, nationwide.
One to give you the limits on carrying, like to an elementary school.
One for the background check.
One for registration.
We need one more for those who have contempt for the Constitution.

Since: Jan 08

Grants Pass, OR

#451 Nov 19, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
we only need 3, nationwide.
One to give you the limits on carrying, like to an elementary school.
One for the background check.
One for registration.
I have to respond even though you seem to think you are above most people.

What good is registration? It would bankrupt this country even faster then the way it is going now. Canada should show that.

However we do have registration in this country on certain firearms and firearm accessories. It has proven to be a fiacso, to much cost and no real help for actual law enforcement. Further it has been proven time and again to be the most inaccurate list ever. Matter of fact the atf has been caught training its agents to lie in court on the accuracy of the registration list. And this is with what,1.2 million registrations.

I would just love to see how accurate they are at keeping a list of what 300 to 500 million firearms. Not....
Village Mystery

Huntsville, AL

#452 Nov 19, 2012
Of course he will and probably much more. I already knew what would happen if he got reelected.

Suddenly "climate change" will become the most dire situation to human beings even though there was little discussion in the past 3 years. After carbon taxes and the rest of the take over of the US economy via "global warming" legislation/regulation then the next "emergency" will be firearms.

His followers will allow him to do anything as long as Republicans are against it. They have truly reached their most primal depths and no longer consider themselves Citizens with responsibility and they do not give a damn about the Constitution except being hostile to its' limits.

The Republicans and others claiming to oppose tyranny are responsible for this. It's simple - the leftists, statists, and big govt. types needed to be stopped, and still do. No one has stopped them and there is no evidence that anything is in place to stop them in the future.

People thought that Liberty could run on auto-pilot - now they see otherwise. Now they see that mortgages and the rat-race amount to shit. The leftists have the schools, media, entertainment industry, and now the government.

The People have failed to protect their freedoms via their laziness and dependence on the profound efforts of those who came before us. Quoting Jefferson means little in the face of an irrational juggernaut devouring everything in its' path.
Dr Freud

France

#453 Nov 19, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
we only need 3, nationwide.
One to give you the limits on carrying, like to an elementary school.
One for the background check.
One for registration.
Got yo 'bama pho' yet?

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Lake Charles, LA

#454 Nov 19, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>we only need 3, nationwide.

One to give you the limits on carrying, like to an elementary school.

One for the background check.

One for registration.
It's already illegal to carry at an elementary school. Unless you are a criminal.

There are already background checks required to purchase from a gun retailer. How do you suggest it be regulated for private sales? Retailers have an account number with BATF. What will individual citizens have? Retailers have to triple check applications for gun purchase, for any mistakes no matter how slight. For example, no abbreviations, no scratched out mistakes, no letters outside of allotted space, and no simple spelling errors. Then they call in the background check. How will the BATF hold individual citizens to those requirements? Threaten to shut down their gun business? Oh wait, they don't own or run one.

How is registration going to prevent crime? Vehicles are registered. We still have stolen vehicles, vehicular homicides, traffic violations, motor vehicle accidents, vehicular suicides, and a much easier , less expensive, and less restricted license requirement than a CCL.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Stop white on white crime 11 hr Truth and Facts 40
News BOOM: DC Forced to Issue Concealed Carry Permit... 14 hr Denny CranesPlace 2
News Concealed Carry Shot Down-- Supporters Will Giv... (Mar '06) May 29 Denny CranesPlace 4
News D.C. chief: 'We will arrest armed protesters' (May '13) May 27 Truth and Facts 639
News COD Offers Classes Promoting Firearm Safety thi... May 25 Dr David 1
News No wedding for Bristol Palin May 24 Tazo 9
News Concealed Carry Reduced Crime But NOT on Chicag... May 18 Truth and Facts 3
More from around the web