Log in

View Full Version : Response from the president RE: 2nd Amendment Petition



exxonv
01-08-2013, 19:40
A response from the president...

When Discussing the Second Amendment, Keep the First in Mind Too

By Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

Thank you for participating in We the People to speak out on an issue that matters to you.

Let’s not let arguments over the Constitution’s Second Amendment violate the spirit of its First. President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. However, the Constitution not only guarantees an individual right to bear arms, but also enshrines the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press -- fundamental principles that are essential to our democracy. Americans may disagree on matters of public policy and express those disagreements vigorously, but no one should be punished by the government simply because he or she expressed a view on the Second Amendment -- or any other matter of public concern.

We recognize that the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, sparked an intense, and at times emotional, national conversation about the steps we can take as a country to reduce gun violence. In fact, your petition is one of many on the issue, and President Obama personally responded by sharing his views on this important issue.

Watch the video

In a recent press conference, President Obama also addressed the Second Amendment and the important perspective that law-abiding gun owners bring to the public conversation on this issue:

Look, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. This country has a strong tradition of gun ownership that's been handed down from generation to generation. Obviously across the country there are regional differences. There are differences between how people feel in urban areas and rural areas. And the fact is the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible -- they buy their guns legally and they use them safely, whether for hunting or sport shooting, collection or protection.

But you know what, I am also betting that the majority -- the vast majority -- of responsible, law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war. I'm willing to bet that they don't think that using a gun and using common sense are incompatible ideas -- that an unbalanced man shouldn't be able to get his hands on a military-style assault rifle so easily; that in this age of technology, we should be able to check someone's criminal records before he or she can check out at a gun show; that if we work harder to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be fewer atrocities like the one in Newtown -- or any of the lesser-known tragedies that visit small towns and big cities all across America every day.

How long before our 1st Amendment rights are also violated "for the common good"?

blacklabel
01-08-2013, 19:43
Ok, I'm lost. What's his point about the first amendment?

exxonv
01-08-2013, 19:50
I think he's saying the first amendment gives him the right to take away the 2nd amendment? I too was confused...

Typical - turn it into another discussion to move people away from the issue.

strm_trpr
01-08-2013, 19:52
Yeah when I got the email I was confused as well.

Ronin13
01-08-2013, 19:59
law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war.
This quote grinds my gears! We do have a way to keep them from buying guns... It's called a background check! And "weapon of war" is just a leftist label they put on it... Like this guy says:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2riOiBaZrg

exxonv
01-08-2013, 20:05
Hey, the war on drugs worked, didn't it? We spent quite a few dollars to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying illegal drugs. I mean, it's not like we have heroin, cocaine, or meth coming across our boarders anymore, right? SARCASM...

None of the criminals buy on the black market for far less then we pay for guns, they all buy from Gander Mountain and the Firing Line like everybody else. Those irresponsible, law-breaking few! Dang them! MORE SARCASM

The Feds can't stop drugs, they can't stop cartels, they can't stop illegal immigrants, but they can stop illegal weapons by restricting law abiding citizens from buying them? Only in American with our liberal, socialist/communist loving media could that message float across the airwaves and STICK...

It's all depressing...

hammer03
01-08-2013, 20:20
What a fucking waste of air.

"Closing the gun show loophole" wouldn't have done anything to stop any of the recent tragedies. I'm sick and tired of hearing about all these new "reasonable" laws. Can we get *one* reporter to ask "how would that help" when this crap is proposed?

blacklabel
01-08-2013, 20:22
What a fucking waste of air.

"Closing the gun show loophole" wouldn't have done anything to stop any of the recent tragedies. I'm sick and tired of hearing about all these new "reasonable" laws. Can we get *one* reporter to ask "how would that help" when this crap is proposed?

It's not in their list of approved questions.

Fmedges
01-08-2013, 20:31
I'm a weapon of war, should I be outlawed as well? I know a guy who stabbed an Iraqi with a leatherman, is that also a "weapon of war"? Should we just ban everything that can be used in the battlefield? Such talk is foolish. Outlaw slinkeys because they were invented to be used in Navy ships that kill things.

flan7211
01-08-2013, 20:47
Lexington and Concord.

Tinelement
01-08-2013, 20:49
Jay Carney needs to lose his right to write letters.

5hfYJsQAhl0

Ronin13
01-08-2013, 20:50
I'm a weapon of war, should I be outlawed as well? I know a guy who stabbed an Iraqi with a leatherman, is that also a "weapon of war"? Should we just ban everything that can be used in the battlefield? Such talk is foolish. Outlaw slinkeys because they were invented to be used in Navy ships that kill things.
Don't forget all those shovels we need to ban too... we got a crash course in how to use our "entrenching tool" (can I just call a spade a spade?) as a weapon as well!

exxonv
01-08-2013, 21:02
Don't forget all those shovels we need to ban too... we got a crash course in how to use our "entrenching tool" (can I just call a spade a spade?) as a weapon as well!

This is my new Tactical "Assault" Hammer... Does this count?

http://i1058.photobucket.com/albums/t413/exxonv/V__9B69_zps0d520254.jpg

TEAMRICO
01-08-2013, 21:10
This is my new Tactical "Assault" Hammer... Does this count?

http://i1058.photobucket.com/albums/t413/exxonv/V__9B69_zps0d520254.jpg
Hehe , you got a WOOBIE!!!

Goodburbon
01-08-2013, 21:14
Using our First amdendment to protect our second before we have to use our second to protect our first...

UrbanWolf
01-08-2013, 21:18
They are already violating our first amendment rights. When we say something, then they turn around and say "No, that's politically incorrect!"

Goodburbon
01-08-2013, 21:25
Also this "weapon of war" bullshit is intolerable. An M24 is a weapon of war, a Remington 700 is functionally the exact same thing NOT ONE WORD ABOUT THAT! but something that LOOKS mean? Oh hell noes, teh peoples can't has them or we all dies.

md45krc
01-08-2013, 21:27
Watch out for a back door move on the issue of assault weapons. I hear that deals are being pushed in congress to get a yes vote on some types of bans. Remember Nelson from Nebraska and the health care buyoff?
Could the War Powers Act be triggered if there were another mass attack on US soil? It addresses the powers the president has to start an action without congressional approval. Although it states actions abroad, can the argument be made that an internal threat could trigger an immediate crackdown on gun owners? I put nothing past this government.
Just a thought.

ben4372
01-08-2013, 23:21
Hehe , you got a WOOBIE!!!
Do I have to wait seven days for that?

USAFGopherMike
01-08-2013, 23:47
How about we just take Carney somewhere and beat him senseless? I can't stand this fucking worm and everything that he stands for. He Pelosi, Reid, and Feinstein are more dangerous to our freedoms than any terrorist.