Close
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    Varmiteer exxonv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    640

    Thumbs down Response from the president RE: 2nd Amendment Petition

    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"?
    "Lead, follow, or get out of the way"

  2. #2
    Amateur meat smoker blacklabel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Greeley
    Posts
    6,557

    Default

    Ok, I'm lost. What's his point about the first amendment?

  3. #3
    Varmiteer exxonv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    640

    Default

    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.
    "Lead, follow, or get out of the way"

  4. #4
    Gong Shooter
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Commerce City, CO
    Posts
    471

    Default

    Yeah when I got the email I was confused as well.

  5. #5
    Sig Fantastic Ronin13's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Arvada, CO
    Posts
    10,268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by exxonv View Post
    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:
    "There is no news in the truth, and no truth in the news."
    "The revolution will not be televised... Instead it will be filmed from multiple angles via cell phone cameras, promptly uploaded to YouTube, Tweeted about, and then shared on Facebook, pending a Wi-Fi connection."

  6. #6
    Varmiteer exxonv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    640

    Default

    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...
    "Lead, follow, or get out of the way"

  7. #7
    Varmiteer hammer03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    512

    Default

    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?

  8. #8
    Amateur meat smoker blacklabel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Greeley
    Posts
    6,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hammer03 View Post
    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.

  9. #9
    Machine Gunner Fmedges's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Plymouth, MN
    Posts
    1,062

    Default

    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.

    USMC 2000-2004, OIF

  10. #10
    High Power Shooter flan7211's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    893

    Default

    Lexington and Concord.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •