Author Topic: Holder spills the beans, obama wants your guns. Finally admits the truth. (Read 807 times)

powderman · « **on:** February 09, 2012, 06:08:47 AM »

Holder tells Congress the Obama administration wants to ban guns By Chris Cox Published: 9:29 AM 02/08/2012 | Updated: 9:56 AM 02/09/2012

By Chris Cox Executive Director, National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action Bio | Archive Get Chris Cox Feed Chris W. Cox is executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and serves as the organization’s chief lobbyist. Check out TheDC’s new Guns and Gear section for Second Amendment news, gun policy and reviews of the latest guns and gear. Last Thursday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to answer questions about his role in the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal. However, instead of answers, Congress got more defiance, more arrogance, and more wasted time with an attorney general who clearly feels no sense of obligation to the American people or our rule of law.
But for all the stonewalling, there was at least one telling moment at this hearing, and it should concern law-abiding gun owners and all Americans who expect accountability from our government.
In a rash attempt to deflect attention away from himself and his own irresponsibility, Holder let Congress know that the Obama administration is still working toward the day when it can reinstate former President Bill Clinton’s so-called “assault weapons” ban. According to Holder:

This administration has consistently favored the reinstitution of the assault weapons ban. It is something that we think was useful in the past with regard to the reduction that we’ve seen in crime, and certainly would have a positive impact on our relationship and the crime situation in Mexico. It’s difficult to follow Holder’s logic here, but it goes something like this …
The Obama administration — particularly Eric Holder’s Justice Department — oversaw an epic scandal whereby our own federal government illegally funneled thousands of firearms into the hands of Mexican drug lords. This contributed to the death of one U.S. Border Patrol agent and hundreds of Mexicans.
Despite being head of the Justice Department and our nation’s chief law enforcement officer, Eric Holder claims he doesn’t know how or why this scandal occurred, or even who under his charge may have authorized it. He also refuses to turn over critical documents to congressional investigators that could help prevent something this tragic and corrupt from ever happening again.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/08/holder-tells-congress-the-obama-administration-wants-to-ban-guns/#ixzz1luBS0bob

lakota · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2012, 06:28:18 AM »

Oh no there must be some mistake! Obama doesnt want your guns! We have been reapeatedly assured of that fact by more than a few poster on this very forum.

guzzijohn · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2012, 06:28:44 AM »

Powderman:
Although I do not want to see any further restrictions put on firearms your subject line is "drama Queen" stuff. Why could your subject line not said " Holder says the administrations supports bring back the assault gun ban", that is what he said. Now, I don't want that to happen either and time will tell. Just don't discredit what you post by being a drama queen about it.
GuzziJohn

powderman · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:05:32 AM »

guzzi. Knowing the truth from day one you'll still vote for obama, won't you?? I guess you are saying that holder is lying and didn't say that?? POWDERMAN.

guzzijohn · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:16:54 AM »

Quote from Powderman:
"guzzi. Knowing the truth from day one you'll still vote for obama, won't you?? I guess you are saying that holder is lying and didn't say that?? POWDERMAN.

Holder didn't say what? I put in exact quotes what Holder said from what you posted, how is that lying?
GuzziJohn

BUGEYE · « **Reply #5 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:23:44 AM »

all you have to do is check his voting record in the Illinois and US senates to see that he wants them ALL!!!!!

nomosendero · « **Reply #6 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:16:59 PM »

Quote from: BUGEYE on February 09, 2012, 11:23:44 AM

all you have to do is check his voting record in the Illinois and US senates to see that he wants them ALL!!!!!

Bugeye, I think they all know that, just won't admit it.

powderman · « **Reply #7 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:22:53 PM »

Quote

Holder tells Congress the Obama administration wants to ban guns By Chris Cox Published: 9:29 AM 02/08/2012 | Updated: 9:56 AM 02/09/2012 By Chris Cox Executive Director, National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action Bio | Archive Get Chris Cox Feed Chris W. Cox is executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and serves as the organization’s chief lobbyist.

guzzi. That was the authors statement. I hope Americans wake up soon and see obama for what he is. His agenda, and that of the dnc, was, is, always will be, to disarm the law abiding citizens in America. POWDERMAN.

SwampThing762 · « **Reply #8 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:30:15 PM »

And it is likely the only time Holder has told anything remotely resembling the truth.

twoshooter · « **Reply #9 on:** February 12, 2012, 02:32:22 PM »

Obama has wanted a number of things, almost none of them did he get. He did not even get things that would have been a good idea, things the republicans were all for right up until he said he would go for them. I am not worried about my guns at this point. Some people just get frothing at the mouth over everything, it has nothing to do with policy, it has to do with the fact it is Obama. I dont know if you have that level of rage over all democrats, or just because he is black, but unless you show me something concrete this is getting to the point of tinfoil hats and black and white TV's. You can make arguments against policy issues with logical , fact based alternatives. Just hyperventilating does not do anyone any good. I heard the same arguments in '68, and at that time they actually passed the GC Act of 68. That was the second thing that really got me PO'd, because you then had to be 21 years old to buy 22LR ammo. I could buy 30-06 then, but although I was eligible to be DRAFTED I had to have my MOTHER go by wally world and buy my 22 ammo. ( the price then was 2.49 a brick) You had to show ID proving your age ans SIGN a receipt. That was federal, nation wide, not just state. We had some legitimate fears at that time. Now, 44 years later I dont have to show ID for anything except a gun purchase. Then I had to get a permit from the county sheriff to purchase a handgun, if he said NO, I was just out of luck. There were no CCW permits for anyone. There was no castle doctrine, if someone came into my house and said get out, I was the one that had to leave, and then call the cops. Today, I do not need to get a permit to purchase anything except class 4 stuff. I have a CCW permit, as does the rest of my family. If someone does not get out of my home and attempts to harm me he is toast, no problem. I can also carry my gun in national Parks, and who signed that??? I have no illusions that Obama has any love lost for the shooting fraternity, but I think he is smart, and he has big agenda items on his itinerary , and there is no point in stirring up a hornets nest when you dont have to. It would be an unnecessary blunder and gain him nothing. If he did not get it when all the shooting went down in Arizona , including a US congresswoman, IT AINT HAPPENIN DUDE.
The SCOTUS finally went so far as to say that the second amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right. End of story. That is another reason that as long as Roe vs Wade stands we are all safer. If what has already been decided starts being overturned, we are all screwed. We won. Learn to accept victory and move on. We will keep an eye on it no doubt, it just is not DEFCON 5.

nomosendero · « **Reply #10 on:** February 12, 2012, 02:50:37 PM »

spitpatch · « **Reply #11 on:** February 12, 2012, 03:16:19 PM »

Quote from: powderman on February 09, 2012, 01:22:53 PM

I think it would be foolish to think "it ain't gonna' happen", And he HAS gotten most of what he wanted of his radical left wing agenda. I have no doubt what so ever he is out to destroy this Nation internally, look at the piven plan for radicals....he's following it to a tee

The three things needed to destroy a Country 1- destroy it economically, 2- destroy it socially, 3- destroy it militarally. Which one of these three things do we NOT see happening right now?

If this guy gets re-elected, you will then see all hades break loose. I would also comment that anyone who cannot see what is happening right now, is what the Bible calls "willingly ignorant"

We all need to be "pro-active" instead of "re-active"...... Great post POWDERMAN,

spitpatch · « **Reply #12 on:** February 12, 2012, 03:19:52 PM »

Sorry POWDERMAN, I goofed up the quote thing above.....that post IS MINE. I was trying to catch only part of your quote and some how managed to goof it up....sorry! Need some help learning how the quote thing works

BUGEYE · « **Reply #13 on:** February 12, 2012, 03:32:07 PM »

I'm curious, we have these democrats working hard to relieve us of our guns.
we have this 2nd amendment that says "shall not be infringed"
he can declare martial law and come get the guns.
so who's the constitution police? don't say the court because the guns would be gone before the scotus considered the case. we've seen how hussein has skirted congress. we've seen how congress started wearing skirts.
I hear how the constitution protects our rights. but it don't. look at the 1st. the courts have gutted that one. you can't pray before a football game on school property even though the majority want it.
if I decide to wear my six-gun instead of my normal carry gun over to walmart, I'll find myself in the back of a police car and may never see my gun again. where is the constitution police.
the police in atlanta have killed innocent people because a dopehead informant sent them to the wrong house. the police settled with money, but why doesn't the constitution put the cops away forever. not everyone has the cash for lawyers to fight for those rights guaranteed to us.
it seems to me that the constitution is nothing more than a guideline for moral people.
immoral people wipe their butts with it and nothing happens. why?
what good can the constitution do. hussein mocks it. it's worth no more than the grocery list that I crumpled and tossed.
when congress passes a law that actually seeks to protect a right, a certain group says it's not constitutional and their man votes against it.
so if congress can't pass a law to protect a right and there is nobody to enforce the constitution in any way, what good is it. how many years did it take for D.C.s case to reach the SCOTUS.
D.C. just turned around and passed more restrictive gun laws while thumbing their nose at the SCOTUS. there's only one answer but people would have to grow a set for it to work.

powderman · « **Reply #14 on:** February 12, 2012, 05:06:03 PM »

SPITPATCH. Left click and drag over what you want to quote. Then go to edit and click on copy. POWDERMAN.

twoshooter · « **Reply #15 on:** February 12, 2012, 05:25:06 PM »

I have no argument their either. If you do not have a set you will never be free anyway, nor do you deserve rights. Ben Franklin (I think) was quoted as saying that he "who trades liberty for safety has neither", or something to that effect. As long as fear drives you, you will always depend on the actions of others, you will be reactive, The same can be said for anger. You need to decide what YOU want, YOU support, YOU can tolerate, base your actions on that. That is not to say ignore reality, just do not let it drive you. I think the Apostle Paul wrote from prison that I have determined in whatever state I find myself to be content (paraphrase)He was free. I wish I had the pair on that man, but I will never come remotely close. I am however much freer than in my youth. The strongest chains, the highest walls are built by yourself. People today are far more imprisoned by their desires than anything else.

lakota · « **Reply #16 on:** February 13, 2012, 07:56:01 AM »

Quote from: twoshooter on February 12, 2012, 02:32:22 PM

The SCOTUS finally went so far as to say that the second amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right. End of story...

Yep the SCOTUS ruled I have and individual right to keep and bear arms in a 5-4 blow out ruling. Now thats what you call a "land slide" victory in favor of the 2nd Amendment! Nothing to worry about there.

BUGEYE · « **Reply #17 on:** February 13, 2012, 08:18:04 AM »

Quote from: lakota on February 13, 2012, 07:56:01 AM

Quote from: twoshooter on February 12, 2012, 02:32:22 PM
The SCOTUS finally went so far as to say that the second amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right. End of story...

Yep the SCOTUS ruled I have and individual right to keep and bear arms in a 5-4 blow out ruling. Now thats what you call a "land slide" victory in favor of the 2nd Amendment! Nothing to worry about there.

yep, it's definitely NOT the end of the story. as soon as DCs and chicago laws were struck down,
they just got busy and passed different ones. so now the people have to wait another 20 years to see if they're criminals.

twoshooter · « **Reply #18 on:** February 13, 2012, 08:28:27 AM »

Can you tell me right off the top of your head how many supreme court rulings have ever been reversed? Like I said, the day Roe vs Wade is overturned I will worry. I have been vigilantly, personally and energetically involved since the day John Kennedy was shot, my birthday.I would guess that is longer than many here have been alive. I was all set to order a 7.65 Argentine Mauser from Sears, my first real rifle. At 25 cents a week it took awhile to get 11.95$ together. Then they started with the gun control crap. The first thing they did was stop the mail order sale of all guns. I had done not one thing wrong, but I was being punished, my rights were being "infringed". I learned that day about the status of "justice" and "liberty" in America. Just like on "24', there are always people willing to do "whatever it takes" to protect that power structure, even when it is trampling ordinary peoples rights. If what all of the nervous Nellies fear comes to pass, the only action that you will have time for, or will have meaning, will be you kissing where you set goodbye.

OldSchoolRanger · « **Reply #19 on:** February 14, 2012, 11:17:15 AM »

Quote from: twoshooter on February 12, 2012, 02:32:22 PM

Obama has wanted a number of things, ... I am not worried about my guns at this point. ... I heard the same arguments in '68, and at that time they actually passed the GC Act of 68. That was the second thing that really got me PO'd, because you then had to be 21 years old to buy 22LR ammo. I could buy 30-06 then, but although I was eligible to be DRAFTED ... That was federal, nation wide, not just state. We had some legitimate fears at that time. Now, 44 years later I dont have to show ID for anything except a gun purchase. Then I had to get a permit from the county sheriff to purchase a handgun, if he said NO, I was just out of luck. There were no CCW permits for anyone. There was no castle doctrine, if someone came into my house and said get out, I was the one that had to leave, and then call the cops. Today, I do not need to get a permit to purchase anything except class 4 stuff. I have a CCW permit, as does the rest of my family. If someone does not get out of my home and attempts to harm me he is toast, no problem. I can also carry my gun in national Parks, and who signed that??? I have no illusions that Obama has any love lost for the shooting fraternity, but I think he is smart, and he has big agenda items on his itinerary , and there is no point in stirring up a hornets nest when you dont have to. It would be an unnecessary blunder and gain him nothing. If he did not get it when all the shooting went down in Arizona , including a US congresswoman, IT AINT HAPPENIN DUDE.
The SCOTUS finally went so far as to say that the second amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right. End of story. That is another reason that as long as Roe vs Wade stands we are all safer. If what has already been decided starts being overturned, we are all screwed. We won. Learn to accept victory and move on. We will keep an eye on it no doubt, it just is not DEFCON 5.

Apparently you heard the same arguments in 68, and you thought it couldn't happen back then, but it did didn't it?

So your saying we don't have any legitimate fears at the present time?

Your correct, Barry has made a lot of unnecessary blunders, and gained nothing, but he still did it didn't he? Mistakes never stopped him from making more mistakes. The latest was forcing Catholic institutions to supply contraceptives, it was an unnecessary blunder, and it gained him nothing but grief. But he still did it didn't he? Just think, what would he do, if he didn't have to worry about being reelected?

I don't understand your rationale about comparing "Roe vs Wade" with the 2nd Amendment rights. They aren't even related, and are backed by very different constituencies. The "Roe vs Wade" constituencies don't give 2 cents about your gun rights, as long as they have the right to abortion on demand.

We as gun owners have to be vigilant, and be proactive instead of just reactive to anti-gun ownership threats. Your way of looking at things was the reason that the GCA of 68 was passed. No one back then believed that it could happen. But, it did. If it wasn't for the NRA pushing thru reforms of the GCA of 68, you wouldn't even have what rights you have now.

I think you should actually be thinking, "IT ALREADY HAPPENED DUDE!"