Author Topic: Bolton says gun control top priority for the obaminations 2nd term. (Read 5663 times)

powderman · « **on:** May 06, 2011, 05:43:26 AM »

Quote

Former United States Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton suggested last Friday that President Obama is laying the foundation for an ambitious gun-control agenda if he wins a second term, Politico reports. "We can understand that, as he likes to say, he's playing the long game, and that 'leading from behind' means waiting until he's elected to a second term when he faces no further political constraints and his true agenda can come to the floor," Bolton said. "And I believe right at the top of it is [to] increase gun control at the federal level and at the international level."

Boy, am I shocked. POWDERMAN.

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 06, 2011, 07:36:50 AM »

Quote from: powderman on May 06, 2011, 05:43:26 AM

"We can understand that, as he likes to say, he's playing the long game, and that 'leading from behind' means waiting until he's elected to a second term when he faces no further political constraints and his true agenda can come to the floor," Bolton said.

I hope not.

lakota · « **Reply #2 on:** May 06, 2011, 07:53:48 AM »

Is there really a suprise here? He is a democrat. If anyone ever doubted that gun control wasnt one of his top priorities then that person isnt very bright.

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 06, 2011, 07:59:11 AM »

Quote from: lakota on May 06, 2011, 07:53:48 AM

Is there really a suprise here? He is a democrat. If anyone ever doubted that gun control wasnt one of his top priorities then that person isnt very bright.

Though it seems otherwise, you're wrong on that. I KNOW a couple Dems who hunt and are good guys.

On the other hand... the Party is full of gun-grabbers. And you're right - unrestrained, I think Obama's instinct would be to go gun-grabbin' - but he's got other things on his plate. If he rides high and wins election, though, he may not be so.... constrained.

Junior1942 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:00:16 AM »

Bolton is a Republican. Do you expect him to say good things about Obama?

lakota · « **Reply #5 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:04:01 AM »

I've also known big gun guys and hunters who voted democrat and then complained when the guy they hepled to elect began infringing on their gun rights. I could never understand that type of mindset.

And remember. Clinton had a lot on his plate as well but he still managed to jam gun restrictions down our throats.

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #6 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:05:00 AM »

Quote from: Junior1942 on May 06, 2011, 08:00:16 AM

Bolton is a Republican. Do you expect him to say good things about Obama?

No, but he may well be right. I think there's a fair risk that Obama will go gun-grabbin' if he thinks he doesn't need broad support - what do you think?

I'll be glad to be wrong on this...

To me, 2nd Amendment rights are something that ought to be outside of partisan politics... soon as it gets identified with party, the number of folks you have as allies is shrunk.

lakota · « **Reply #7 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:06:38 AM »

Quote from: Junior1942 on May 06, 2011, 08:00:16 AM

Bolton is a Republican. Do you expect him to say good things about Obama?

We are talking about gun control. Not about democrat vs. republican(remember good ole' G.W. said he would sign a new AWB if one came accross his desk). Do you propose to debate whether or not Obama would impose draconian gun restrictions if given even half a chance?

subdjoe · « **Reply #8 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:08:51 AM »

No big shock. Here in the big anti-civil rights testing ground known as California, we have a bunch of new things being tried out: NRA/ILA on CA anti-civil rights legislation

All this garbage gets tried out here first, then it spreads to other states.

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:11:59 AM »

Quote from: lakota on May 06, 2011, 08:06:38 AM

..whether or not Obama would impose draconian gun restrictions if given even half a chance?

Probably not draconian... gun grabbers prefer the incremental approach, dressed up as crime control and reasonable. What was it that girl senator from CA said? "If I get everyone to hand 'em over - I would, the votes weren't there" or somesuch?

the approach will continue to be incremental, and portray those that disagree as unreasonable. Unfortunately, they're helped by dingbats yammering about godless ones and other inanities...

powderman · « **Reply #10 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:12:52 AM »

I too know dems who shoot and hunt, yet they support the party that is dedicated to disarming us all. POWDERMAN.

lakota · « **Reply #11 on:** May 06, 2011, 08:16:43 AM »

Is this the one you are thinking about?

Senator Dianne Feinstein: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out-right ban, picking up every one of them... 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here." CBS-TV's "60 Minutes", February 5, 1995

ironglow · « **Reply #12 on:** May 06, 2011, 09:11:58 AM »

History tells us that it is entirely natural for those with socialist/marxist/communist agenda to do their best to disarm the people. Sooner or later the people grow weary of their clamping down on civil rights and instituting their "control-freak" laws..it is then 'the people' get dangerous to tyrannical leaders.
A disarmed poplace is a "sitting duck" which must comply to the Boss-Hawg dictators..

45-70.gov · « **Reply #13 on:** May 06, 2011, 09:17:07 AM »

he is a democrat
thats what they do

he is just waiting / hoping for a second term
then he will have nothing to loose

a man with nothing to loose is dangerous

Casull · « **Reply #14 on:** May 06, 2011, 09:22:07 AM »

Quote

Probably not draconian... gun grabbers prefer the incremental approach, dressed up as crime control and reasonable.

No, they don't PREFER the incremental approach, but they will settle for it (remember the '68 GCA?).

Quote

Unfortunately, they're helped by dingbats yammering about godless ones and other inanities...

Not nearly so much as they are aided by dingbats who vote democrat and expect them not to assault the 2nd Amendment.

TheCoachZed · « **Reply #15 on:** May 06, 2011, 10:26:30 AM »

Looks like all you guys will have to move up north to Canada when Prime Minister Harper scraps our gun registry.

guzzijohn · « **Reply #16 on:** May 06, 2011, 10:37:53 AM »

Guess a better stock up on my gun stuff before hysteria buying drives prices out of sight again.
GuzziJohn

lakota · « **Reply #17 on:** May 06, 2011, 10:53:14 AM »

How is fear of gun control hysteria when a party with a proven track record of disarmament is in power. Why should I believe that Obama will not follow the path of his democrat predecessors on gun control?

What makes Obama different from Clinton or Dukakis or Feinstein or Boxer or Schumer or Metzenbaum or any other liberal who has had a burning desire to relieve me of the right to keep and bear arms?

ironglow · « **Reply #18 on:** May 06, 2011, 11:09:37 AM »

From YT;
"Unfortunately, they're helped by dingbats yammering about godless ones and other inanities..."

I know you don't like PM's descriptions...but the liberal-progressives don't need that to attempt to disarm America..they have been trying disarm us in earnest since the 1960s. ...And not quite so much in earnest before that..

PM is telling the truth..wnether one appreciates it or not..in reality, there are "godless people".. although not everybody sees the same ones as the subject of the title.

Has no bearing on the "gun control" freakouts..

wreckhog · « **Reply #19 on:** May 06, 2011, 11:10:38 AM »

Obama mania part 1 (11/08-2/09) when 8lbs of Varget was $400 on Gunbroker. Anyone recall the ad with 50+ jugs in the pic? I do.

This time, I'm a seller. If you believe this is going to happen, stock up and make some money.

jimster · « **Reply #20 on:** May 06, 2011, 11:43:19 AM »

I wouldn't get all worried about it, the federal government doesn't have the power to disarm anyone, felons, drug cartel, illegals, or anyone else. They certainly don't have the power to disarm us. Seems like some or most of the states would control most the gun laws anyway.
If the U.S had no gun laws, Massachusetts still would...so there ya go.

Before it was legal to carry in Michigan, I carried for many years. Now I am legal, but if it changes, I'll still carry like I always did.
I totally agree any laws passed against guns or us having them is a huge pain, but the bottom line is, a free person will carry or have them
anyway, regardless of any laws. God gave us our basic rights, not any government. I don't pay much attention to laws I feel are unjust.
I don't recommend that to anyone...just sayin that's me, and there is not much they can do about it. I lived through many years of concealing a gun when the state would not cooperate with me.

I am sure that Obama is not worried about your rights, especially guns, and neither is the majority of people in congress, so we are kind of on our own, and will be for a long time.

DDZ · « **Reply #21 on:** May 06, 2011, 12:26:01 PM »

There are a lot of citizens also that obviously don't care about gun rights either, because they continue to vote in people, that are all for disarming America. So I assume since these people are getting elected, it is representative of how the voters feel. I know the Second Amendment is just one issue, but I bet if a politician don't care about your right to own a gun, they don't give a rats a#$ about any of your other Constitutional or God given rights.

Then you have the group of people that think as long as they can have their shotgun and bolt action rifle for hunting everything is fine. Like their gun rights have anything at all to do with hunting. I work with a couple guys that felt that way. They are avid hunters, but would make comments like "I don't care if they ban AR type rifles or semi auto handguns, what do people need them for". I have since changed their minds on Constitutional gun rights, but I wonder how many other hunters out there feel this way. I'm sure since I encountered two out of maybe 20 hunters, there are many more with the same ignorance.
Its the voters ignorance on gun rights that need to be changed, not the politicians after they are voted in service. Kind of like letting the fox in the hen house, Then saying "look what they did".

powderman · « **Reply #22 on:** May 06, 2011, 12:35:58 PM »

Quote

This time, I'm a seller. If you believe this is going to happen, stock up and make some money.

HEH. Spoken like a true liberal. Instead of helpin your fellow man in an emergency situation, gouge em, cheat em, make big bucks. Why am I not surprised?? POWDERMAN.

jimster · « **Reply #23 on:** May 06, 2011, 02:09:42 PM »

Quote

Then you have the group of people that think as long as they can have their shotgun and bolt action rifle for hunting everything is fine. Like their gun rights have anything at all to do with hunting. I work with a couple guys that felt that way.

Yep, they are fools for sure. Can't get through to the people that think like this. It's odd, they actually think they are free Americans when their state says they can't have any more than 10 rounds, or some semi auto weapon. They don't even try to fight unjust laws.

There was a time when laws were passed against black people too, who were free Americans, kudos to all of them that fought it openly, and took a drink out of the public fountain, or sat in the front of the bus....they had a much better idea of what you needed to do to be free than than people who willingly give up their semi auto's and high cap mags and just say nobody needs them. Seems there are lots of people that associate hunting with gun rights, the two have nothing to do with each other.

Bottom line is, a lot of socialist democrats hunt I guess. They must have mixed those things up like they mix up everything else in this country.

garbhead · « **Reply #24 on:** May 06, 2011, 02:29:01 PM »

Obama won't try it...if he does even try our streets will look like Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc...except much much worse as well as this country is already armed....

Mohawk · « **Reply #25 on:** May 06, 2011, 02:36:03 PM »

No shocker there. Can anyone name any pro gun legislation that Obama voted as Senator or signed for as Prez? Anyone?

Pat/Rick · « **Reply #26 on:** May 06, 2011, 06:02:26 PM »

Guns?? Sorry, don't remember where they're buried.

The Hermit · « **Reply #27 on:** May 06, 2011, 06:33:52 PM »

Supply and demand. If the demand for "guns" is there, then there will be a supply delivered, even if it has to come from Mexico and South America. Remember prohibition? The "assualt rifle ban? Didn't work. It created a huge black market, tax free to boot.
Have you ever tried to contact a senator or congressman to let your view be known? It's damn near impossible. Lies and broken promises is all you get.
The key thing is the military. Will they shoot US citizens or not? Time will tell the true patriots from the hangers on.
"From my cold dead hands"

The Hermit

sidewinder319 · « **Reply #28 on:** May 06, 2011, 07:37:03 PM »

Democrats thrist for gun control goes back to the 1860s in the post civil war south. The Pro-Slavery party was afraid the exslaves would arm and atttack whites. The laws enacted in the south were used in the NE states to control the Irish and other poor imagrants. The Democrats have continued to use the these laws to protect themselves thru the early 20th century. The first big victory was the 1935 firearms act. The crime wave of the depression gave them the excuse they needed. LBJ a wanta be dictator passed the 1968 laws and added the Nazi like BATF to enforce it. Clinton banned the terrible ASWs and big clips. Obama will move to carry on the 140 years of Democratic assaults on the American people.

wreckhog · « **Reply #29 on:** May 07, 2011, 04:30:47 AM »

What gun control laws were there in the 1860's (or shortly after). Serious question.