Obama in favor of a Ban on concealed Carry

[winnar111]

http://www.chicagopublicradio....ibrary/848_rasep04.asp

In Sep. 2004 interview with NPR, in response to question if he still supports earlier statements about a Federal Ban on concealed carry laws. His direct quote (minus some stuttering): "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws."


Or a shorter Youtube version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-4jqZSEo0Q



This is the same Obama who said the DC gun ban was constitutional. Of course, the media and the left will gloss over this.

At least the Brady campaign and company have the guts to admit their position.

 

[jpeyton]

Issue that matters to independent voters:

1) Economy
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
63) Obama's stance on gun rights

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Issue that matters to independent voters:

1) Economy
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
63) Obama's stance on gun rights

Well, at least you didnt try to deny it.

 

[Blackjack200]

Wait, if you ban concealed carry laws, doesn't that mean you're allowing concealed carry? Maybe I'm just not understanding this right...

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Issue that matters to independent voters:

1) Economy
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
63) Obama's stance on gun rights

Well, at least you didnt try to deny it.

Nope, that issue doesn't even register with me.

 

[deftron]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Issue that matters to independent voters:

1) Economy
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
63) Obama's stance on gun rights

Well, at least you didnt try to deny it.

I don't think any one candidate can be on your side on every issue.
It always has and always will be about priorities and quantity of agreement.

As an Obama supporter, I do not support a ban on concealed weapons.

However, there are many more issues I disagree with McCain on, as well as more
important ones.

I imagine it would be easier to get the candidate you do agree with on the majority of issues to reconsider the one or two issues you dissagree with them on,
than to get the candidate you do not agree with on the majority of issues to change his mind on all of those.

 

[frostedflakes]

I don't agree with it, but I have to admit, CC is pretty low on my list of important issues.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: deftron
I don't think any one candidate can be on your side on every issue.
It always has and always will be about priorities and quantity of agreement.

As an Obama supporter, I do not support a ban on concealed weapons.

However, there are many more issues I disagree with McCain on, as well as more
important ones.

I imagine it would be easier to get the candidate you do agree with on the majority of issues to reconsider the one or two issues you dissagree with them on,
than to get the candidate you do not agree with on the majority of issues to change his mind on all of those.

I can respect your stance on the issues, but no issue is more important to me the upholding the bill of rights, specifically the 2nd most important one listed on those.

A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, Obama cannot do that nor will he.

 

[Darwin333]

I highly doubt that Obama, even with a Dem congress, will be able to even remotely ban CC. If CC is an issue to you, you should be focusing on your state politicians.

 

[BarneyFife]

This country is falling apart and the gun nuts are coming out. What a bunch of clowns.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: winnar111
http://www.chicagopublicradio....ibrary/848_rasep04.asp

In Sep. 2004 interview with NPR, in response to question if he still supports earlier statements about a Federal Ban on concealed carry laws. His direct quote (minus some stuttering): "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws."


Or a shorter Youtube version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-4jqZSEo0Q



This is the same Obama who said the DC gun ban was constitutional. Of course, the media and the left will gloss over this.

At least the Brady campaign and company have the guts to admit their position.

Uh, huh... Where's that thread accusing the Obama campaign of paying supporters to promote/deflect in political forums?

winnar111
Posts: 1255
Joined: 03/10/2008

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: deftron
I don't think any one candidate can be on your side on every issue.
It always has and always will be about priorities and quantity of agreement.

As an Obama supporter, I do not support a ban on concealed weapons.

However, there are many more issues I disagree with McCain on, as well as more
important ones.

I imagine it would be easier to get the candidate you do agree with on the majority of issues to reconsider the one or two issues you dissagree with them on,
than to get the candidate you do not agree with on the majority of issues to change his mind on all of those.

I can respect your stance on the issues, but no issue is more important to me the upholding the bill of rights, specifically the 2nd most important one listed on those.

A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, Obama cannot do that nor will he.

Does the Constitution guarantee you the right for "concealed carry" or the right to bear arms?

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: spidey07
I can respect your stance on the issues, but no issue is more important to me the upholding the bill of rights, specifically the 2nd most important one listed on those.

A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, Obama cannot do that nor will he.

Proof?

 

[Vic]

Heller v. DC says this one is a non-issue now, and that there is no way such a federal ban is gonna happen.

Plus, I have long argued that getting worked up over gun rights to the exclusion of your other rights is counter-productive. Why? Because your guns right are usually the last to go. And when they do go, that's when you pick up your guns and join the revolution. That's what your guns right are for.

<- gun owner for Obama

BTW, the DC ban was Constitutional until the SCOTUS ruled against it by applying the 14th to the 2nd. You guys really need at least pretend to be intellectual. Kneejerking doesn't win legal and political battles.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: spidey07
I can respect your stance on the issues, but no issue is more important to me the upholding the bill of rights, specifically the 2nd most important one listed on those.

A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, Obama cannot do that nor will he.

Proof?

Of course he doesn't have any. The Constitution is, unfortunately, kind of like the Bible in that people can pick and choose their own interpretations of it, and then claim that those who don't follow their personal interpretations are heretics, corrupter of the true faith, etc.

Historically speaking, the 2nd amendment applied ONLY to the federal govt. So a federal ban on CC would be un-Constitutional. Local bans have been common throughout US history (how many old Westerns have you seen where guns were banned in town?)

 

[brencat]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Does the Constitution guarantee you the right for "concealed carry" or the right to bear arms?

That's not the point. Winnar is 100% right to be concerned with Obama's stances on gun rights, especially when the country is about to put every branch of govt completely in the hands of a historically gun-restricting party. States with concealed carry have a lower incidence of crime than those without -- fact. The day the peoples republic of NJ ever allows concealed carry, my wife and I will be the first in line (but hell will freeze over before that ever happens; more likely I'll move first). Surest way to get their asses thrown out of Congress in 2010 is to mess with the guns so I hope the Dems have learned their lesson from last time.

 

[frostedflakes]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but DC v. Heller didn't really address concealed carry did it? The case was more about the use of handguns for household self defense, although they did touch a bit on concealed carry.

(from Wikipedia)

However, "[l]ike most rights, the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." The Court's opinion, although refraining from an exhaustive analysis of the full scope of the right, "should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

My understanding is that they mainly addressed the individual vs. collective right to bear arms, and confirmed the individual right. I think we still have a long way to go to solidify Second Amendment rights in the US, as issues like assault weapons, concealed carry, etc. haven't been fully addressed.

Like I said, that's how I understand it at least. I admit, I didn't really keep up much with the Heller case, so somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Thump553]

Doesn't the NRA still own Congress? With all the really important issues today, do you really think a President Obama is going to waste time and political capital to abolish concealed carry? This is just another example of your fear mongering about Obama.

 

[deftron]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: deftron
I don't think any one candidate can be on your side on every issue.
It always has and always will be about priorities and quantity of agreement.

As an Obama supporter, I do not support a ban on concealed weapons.

However, there are many more issues I disagree with McCain on, as well as more
important ones.

I imagine it would be easier to get the candidate you do agree with on the majority of issues to reconsider the one or two issues you dissagree with them on,
than to get the candidate you do not agree with on the majority of issues to change his mind on all of those.

I can respect your stance on the issues, but no issue is more important to me the upholding the bill of rights, specifically the 2nd most important one listed on those.

A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, Obama cannot do that nor will he.

I can respect your stance on the issues.

However, I do consider the 1st Amendment more important than the 2nd.
It is, after all, the First one.

McCain has supported or introduced many peices of legislation that endanger that right,
including:

Filtering software on Library computers

Increased fines for TV obsenities, in response to the Janet Jackson Super Bowl thing

A Constitutional amendmet banning flag burning and desecration

Considering reversing source confidentiality for journalists.



A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, McCain cannot do that nor will he.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
This country is falling apart and the gun nuts are coming out. What a bunch of clowns.

clowns with GUNS :shocked:

 

[brencat]

Originally posted by: Thump553
Doesn't the NRA still own Congress? With all the really important issues today, do you really think a President Obama is going to waste time and political capital to abolish concealed carry? This is just another example of your fear mongering about Obama.

It has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with putting the govt in the hands of one party -- the party that historically has placed the most restrictions on gun rights. Remember the stupid and discredited AWB (10 shot pistol clip limit, no "machine gun lookalikes" or pistol-grip civilian AR-15 types)? lawsuits against gun makers designed to bankrupt them via litigation costs? FFLs put out of business for arbitrary and capricious paperwork violations? etc, etc, etc.

I remember the Clinton years and I don't want to see a return to that. So it's not Obama per se, just like it wasn't Clinton. Rather it's everyone else that comes along working behind the scenes with the anti-gun organizations like Brady that will gain enormous clout and influence again with the govt in Dem hands. Unfortunately you don't just marry the person (Obama), you marry the family too (in this case, the anti-gunners).

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: deftron

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: deftron
I don't think any one candidate can be on your side on every issue.
It always has and always will be about priorities and quantity of agreement.

As an Obama supporter, I do not support a ban on concealed weapons.

However, there are many more issues I disagree with McCain on, as well as more
important ones.

I imagine it would be easier to get the candidate you do agree with on the majority of issues to reconsider the one or two issues you dissagree with them on,
than to get the candidate you do not agree with on the majority of issues to change his mind on all of those.

I can respect your stance on the issues, but no issue is more important to me the upholding the bill of rights, specifically the 2nd most important one listed on those.

A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, Obama cannot do that nor will he.

I can respect your stance on the issues.

However, I do consider the 1st Amendment more important than the 2nd.
It is, after all, the First one.

McCain has supported or introduced many peices of legislation that endanger that right,
including:

Filtering software on Library computers
not against the 1st

Increased fines for TV obsenities, in response to the Janet Jackson Super Bowl thing
not against the 1st
A Constitutional amendmet banning flag burning and desecration
most likely against the 1st

Considering reversing source confidentiality for journalists.
1st doesn't apply here, but confidentaility for sources must be maintained



A president is sworn to uphold The Constitution, McCain cannot do that nor will he.

See bolded. MY rights are mine, the only instance you listed that goes against the first is flag burning which I hate the concept I can support the right. Of the points you listed only the flag one impacts my god given rights.

 

[deftron]

How can you say those are not in violation of First Amendment rights, but
call a ban on "concealed" arms a direct violation of 2nd amendment?


They are all in conflict with implied rights.


BTW, God did not give you the Bill of Rights.

 

[aphex]

God given rights? lol

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
This country is falling apart and the gun nuts are coming out. What a bunch of clowns.

Now settle down Barney or we will have to take your bullet away again.

I would rather we quit letting Wall Street and the banks blackmail us then give up ANY of our rights and it doesn't matter to me which rights were talking about. We need to defend them all and the best way to do that is to have the option available for all law abiding citizens to be armed and dangerous.