Another Obama Attack on the Second Amendment!

Post Reply New Topic

http://news.yahoo.com/former-arms-deale ... 07753.html

Absolutely outrageous!

When arms-dealing is outlawed, then only outlaws will sell arms!

*cares*

I've never understood why a right to bear arms is so important. I guess I can understand someone wanting a hunting rifle or the like, but I really don't see why people need the right to own automatic weapons.

So obama did not try to outlaw guns in his first term, he is waiting until his second? yeah that makes a lot of sense

Geez. I'm been aware of the Viktor Bout case. It does seem like kind of a reach, another case in which the long arm of American law pursues someone who never set foot in the United States. My understanding is that Mr. Bout is facing a life sentence in the U.S. because he supplied arms to the Colombian FARC, which has been listed as a "terrorist" organization by the U.S. State Department. It isn't the first time, & surely won't be the last, in which the U.S. arrogantly imposes the principle of extraterritoriality - the notion that its laws apply anywhere in the world where the U.S. presumes to have an interest. It has similarities to an even more outrageous case: Marc Emery, a Canadian citizen & Marijuana Party activist who was extradited to the U.S. and sentenced to 5 years in prison for violating U.S. drug laws, even though he never set foot in the U.S. & never was charged with a crime in Canada.

If anyone is interested, check this link - Free Marc Emery.

That said, it's a bit of a stretch to use the Bout case to feed the meme that Obama is hostile to gun rights. Since taking office, he has done NOTHING to impinge on the rights of gun owners, yet all we ever hear is "Obama's gonna take away our guns, gonna take away our freedom" blah, blah. Even crazier, we see this run on ammunition as people stock up out of fear that the government is going to come & confiscate everyone's weaponry. If you don't have facts on your side, just make stuff up & people who are so inclined will believe anything. Yes, America's gun culture has become completely unhinged.

I don't see why people who live in metropolitan areas need to own a vehicle larger than a Smart or compact sedan, but you won't hear me clamoring for a ban or restriction on the ownership of big ugly trucks and SUVs.

I don't see why people need to dine out when it's cheaper to cook a healthy, nutritious meal at home, but you won't hear me advocating for a ban or restriction on lifestyle choices.

My point is, while I can criticize the choices of others, I don't find it fair or just to restrict those choices just because I have a pet peeve, nor do I try to justify my own conceits with righteous indignation. I'm not accusing you of such, but those two things are all too frequently what "you dont need [insert pet peeve here]" discussions almost always boil down to.

Another typically misleading thread title.

First, the individual in question has been convicted of a crime--a crime enacted by Congress, and of which the United States is responsible for the prosecution. The matter would be no different under a Republican administration, or a Democratic administration led by a different President.

Second, I'm not sure that surface to air missiles fall within the ambit of the Second Amendment.

Third, every nation on earth has extraterritorial legislation. It is the hallmark that distinguishes sovereign nations from subnational sovereignties. (The United States, the United Kingdom and Canada can all legislate extraterritorially, but Virginia, Québec and Scotland cannot).

This is not an Obama assault on the second amendment, it is an attempt by Congress to extend the reach of United States law into international trading relationships of which the United States is not a party. Has her reach extended too far? Well, the individual in question is within the United States and under the jurisdiction of a United States Court which has declined to invalidate the action of Congress--so I'd say the point is moot.

Something is a foot. All major mechanisms of domestic population control are being implemented. Very aggressive census, NDAA'12, outlawing protests, various priming campaigns that establish interventionalism in ever more "war" as well as justifying untried American murders in the name of the "War on Terror", attempting to control all aspects of the internet not needed to curb online piracy, DHS's order for 450.million rounds of expensive, precise, most deadly ammo available and on and on.

I don't know what, I have my theories, but nothing is for sure. All I know is that very similar patterns took place prior to the other world wars. Friend of mine that went to a Iraq was telling me about lasers on Humvees that could incapacitate entire crowds (burning sensation under skin, extreme pain) and various other weapons that kinda make owning a gun seem more like owning a stick.

Whatever is being set up, it's coordinated and moving quickly toward fruition. Eh, people still don't accet that power corrupts and that individual men will seek their self interest. Imagine giving a few thousand of them globally the largest mass of power/money/resources the world has ever seen and hoping they have your best interests at heart. That's some faith...greater than any faith in a god I have ever encountered....

The second amendment reads



Arresting someone for selling surface-to-air missiles would constitute an infringement.

Trust me all of you would like to have a gun if another nation attacked America and started killing us in the streets.

When has another nation been killing us in the streets?

and it says another when has there been an obama attack on the 2nd amendment?

It hasn't happened but it could another nation could invade us.

PS I know just giving my thoughts on why people own guns.

another nation could invade us... what was the first nation to invade? Immigrants? most people's ancestors invaded the us then

My ancestores where here first and was invaded by the pilgrims if that's what you mean then I agree with you.

I was just saying that what you said didn't really make sense

It did make sense you didn't understand the point I was making do you think no country would ever try to invade us by force if you do wow you are lying to yourself.