Home › Main Category › Second Amendment/Politics
Buffco
Senior MemberPosts: 6,244 Senior Member
People, obama is not coming for your guns
Buffco
Senior MemberPosts: 6,244 Senior Member
Geez Louise....
Gun sales surge after Boston Bombing:
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
Gun sales surge after Boston Bombing:
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
0
Replies
You sound just like my youngest daughter, but then she is a Lawyer in Boston so I would expect it from her. But You, who I have believed to be a level headed country boy gun owning conservative, surprised me with this.
I don't trust any of these libtards. Guns have been confiscated all over the world because people believed politicians when theyb claimed all they wanted to do was use common sense measures to tighten control over who can buy a gun. However, I'm not going to break my bank to stock up on stuff I may never use. The key to this is buy a little at a time and stock up over time. It's a good idea to have a supply of ammo and it's always fun to buy a new gun, if it's something you want.
However, the worst of all this is the Obama administration has figured out that if they buy up a lot of ammo, then we will not be able to get what we want. If they can't outlaw our guns then they'll give us gun control by default. If there's no ammo or components available, then they don't need to confiscate our guns.
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
The Senate doesn't have the appetite for it, the House doesn't have the votes. Obama is a powerless gelding. He can't do anything.
But the perpetual fear is getting annoying. I want to buy some 22 ammo, ****. And I want to do so without getting a 2nd mortgage.
I know there are some who would say it's my fault for not preparing. I guess... But that attitude is partially what is driving this demand and subsequent scarcity. I just think that it's a sad state of affairs that I MUST hoard if I want to shoot.
I'm not saying I trust Obama. I know he has no use for someone like me and even less use for guns. (unless it's for his Secret Service) But he's a joke. And has much bigger fish to fry.
What we are suffering with is fear because "he COULD" or, gasp, the U.N. is coming for my guns. This is all a false panic. And I'm sick of it.
/rant
But ain't nobody in Kennesaw GA coming for your guns, Elmer, so put down that third brick of 22 and buy beer instead.
So yeah, I agree that gun seizure isn't likely to occur, but it's not due to the wishes of liberals to not do so, but rather to our activism to protect our rights. We need to be vigilant always.
Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
Trust the government . Believe the government. The government and its representatives are your friends. Trust them. They won't hurt you. They have your best interests at heart.
If I can just get them to believe this then maybe prices will come down so I can afford the 1911 I want.
Proceed with caution if you decide to click on it!
Jerry
ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
Not surprising something from Breitbart would be malicious...
It's actually only a minority faction of liberals who actually care about gun control and push it (mainly the nanny state soccer moms). Unfortunately they still have a good bit of influence in the base of the party and liberal politicians feel pressure to pander to them. They're sortof like the Christian Theocrats in the Republican base that drive a lot of the least popular conservative policy positions.
Done. Sorry. Never had a problem with breitbart, not that it's a site I frequent, it just was a link from the Drudge Report.
Something like that....
But it is pretty good!
2) A big liberal complaint is that firearm manufacturers are responsible for influencing politicians.
3) People (in this case) are responsible for influencing politicians.
4) Phil Hartman did a skit of Heston doing Soylent Green.
5) Heston was president of the NRA.
6) Soylent Green was people.
7) The NRA is people (not corporate interests).
I was wrong... Seven levels of funny!
Yeah I got it, it was pretty funny, I was just making fun of you for being so impressed with yourself about your own joke :tooth:
The Government is not coming for our guns today, but they exist to control us, by our own permission. It is up to us and the Constitution to limit their reach for more control. I wish that they would focus on enforcing existing laws rather than attempt to create new laws.
D
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
Preach it, brother!
-Mikhail Kalashnikov
Sure, he can. The question is, "Will he?"
I say no. First, he's not that stupid. Second, it's just not that high on his agenda. Look at the ball-less executive orders he cranked out after Sandy Hook. They accomplished nothing other than enabling him to say he'd "done something". And that was mere WEEKS after children were shot dead!!
Now that we've moved even further away from SH, he's less inclined to rile that sleeping dragon.
My thoughts, anyway. It's open to debate, sure. And like I said, I'm not suggesting we become less vigilante. Just that we tamp down the fear just a wee bit.
I definitely could be wrong, but while I agree that most non-gun owning liberals and as you suggest some conservatives would be at least weakly in favor of some level of increased gun control, it's very low on the priority list for most. The number of people who drive the issue are a small but vocal minority. Unfortunately that minority still has a lot of power within the party establishment.
Exactly. Hoarding ammo does NOTHING to limit that reach. All the other actions we take DO.
Just tired of the current situation, is all.