Obama’s statement claimed that Congress couldn’t put restrictions on how he wanted to spend to fund lobbying for gun control and the National Institute of Health studies of gun control.
But why should the federal government use taxpayer dollars to pay for lobbying?
Obama has had numerous false starts on gun control. Just in November, his administration moved to ban target practice on public lands, but the opposition was so swift and strong they immediately backtracked.
__________________
Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these.-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
Things ain't what they used to be and probably never was. ~Will Rogers
Tomorrow hopes we have learned something from yesterday.
"Shouldn't someone tag Mr. Kennedy's 'bold new imaginative program' with its proper age?" "Under the tousled boyish haircut it is still old Karl Marx—first launched a century ago.
There is nothing new in the idea of a government being Big Brother to us all. R.Reagan-1960
Obama the Dictator hates the 2nd Amendment....The Constitution....Hell he hates everything that's good about America.....he must be voted out in November before we become The United Socialist States of Amerika...
Obama reminds me of my new Red Healer pup "Maggie", I ask her to sit and stay away from a certain thing; she sits for a while then she inches her way to what she wanted. He's much the same way, thinking we're not watching him. We need to do him like I do her when she's not acting right, I put a leash on her in the house, it's time we put that leash on him.
We must be protected from ourselves. Additionally, the system provides for everything. Guns for self-defense? What need? The system provides defense for all (actually, it doesn't profide for defense, only follow-up after the fact -- and that perhaps very unmotivated follow-up). The progressives think deeply in their offices, with the best brains from the best of the Ivy League schools they conceptualize a system, and the system is made incorporate and baptized with august words extolling its greatness and high mission. The details of implementing and tuning and optimizing this system is left to the work of graduate students or low-level government employees who met the quotas for diversity in employment. Does this make you feel comfortable? Also, forget about a feedback loop -- measuring the results obtained by the system, comparing results to expectations, adjusting the system based on the divergence between expectations and results -- that is TOTALLY unncessary!!! The progressives thought it up so why submit their perfect notion to the test of real-world observations?
I'm sure you have all heard about the young woman in Oklahoma whose husband died of cancer on Christmas Day, a man broke into her house with a knife, she hid in her bedroom, called 911, she had her baby, gave it a bottle to keep it quiet so the criminal would stay away. He broke in the bedroom door and she retired him with a 12 gauge shotgun. This has been on national news and in various on-line sources.
I like to read Le Figaro, a major French newspaper, in French. They had a summary of this incident. It was very accurate, almost a translation of the ABC News on-line story I saw a couple of days ago. They added some further background for their French readers about the "Castle Doctrine" that is in play in several US states. All of this was pretty accurate, though not perfect (the ABC News story was not perfect either). What was interesting, as is often the case for stories in Le Figaro, was reading the readers' comments. I read about 10 of these. Overwhelmingly they were very positive towards the young woman and towards the right to defend yourself with lethal force. They lamented the miscarriage of justice in France where the rights of perpetrators are placed before rights of victims frequently. They extolled the presence of mind of the young woman and her strength and courage in being ready to shoot to kill to defend her baby. I found those comments very revealing. Ordinary people don't favor criminals and do favor having the right to snuff out the criminal to protect oneself. I'm sure this is also the read on this in the US on an overwhelming basis. Sure, some of Obama's buddies, some Ivy League professors, the ACLU probably lament this and think it should not be possible for this conduct to be legal.
What have you guys heard about this story? Have any news sources cast this in a negative light? The girl was wrong to shoot to kill? The law is wrong to explicitly permit shooting to kill?
I will say that any scumbag who seeks to disarm the public knows he is objectionable, and that his behavior may engender an armed response. It's funny...because literally all assassins who have not be documented as insane have been identified as radical leftists. So they seek to protect themselves from each other. Hence, Gun Control is a tool of the fascist left. As far as the rest....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alsatian
RE gun control stuff. This is off topic, sort of.
I'm sure you have all heard about the young woman in Oklahoma whose husband died of cancer on Christmas Day, a man broke into her house with a knife, she hid in her bedroom, called 911, she had her baby, gave it a bottle to keep it quiet so the criminal would stay away. He broke in the bedroom door and she retired him with a 12 gauge shotgun. This has been on national news and in various on-line sources.
it's been a sensation on the conservative talk shows here on the east coast.....
Quote:
I like to read Le Figaro, a major French newspaper, in French. They had a summary of this incident. It was very accurate, almost a translation of the ABC News on-line story I saw a couple of days ago. They added some further background for their French readers about the "Castle Doctrine" that is in play in several US states. All of this was pretty accurate, though not perfect (the ABC News story was not perfect either). What was interesting, as is often the case for stories in Le Figaro, was reading the readers' comments. I read about 10 of these. Overwhelmingly they were very positive towards the young woman and towards the right to defend yourself with lethal force.
just because they don't speak English don't mean they're dim ! There is no human being living on this planet who cannot agree with the right to self-defense, and especially, a mother defending her child in her own home.
Quote:
They lamented the miscarriage of justice in France where the rights of perpetrators are placed before rights of victims frequently. They extolled the presence of mind of the young woman and her strength and courage in being ready to shoot to kill to defend her baby. I found those comments very revealing. Ordinary people don't favor criminals and do favor having the right to snuff out the criminal to protect oneself. I'm sure this is also the read on this in the US on an overwhelming basis. Sure, some of Obama's buddies, some Ivy League professors, the ACLU probably lament this and think it should not be possible for this conduct to be legal.
What have you guys heard about this story? Have any news sources cast this in a negative light? The girl was wrong to shoot to kill? The law is wrong to explicitly permit shooting to kill?
There were a couple of stories that have been circulating....first is the one you speak about above, and the other is about the Illinois (?) tourist in NYC who turned his gun in to the cops and for his honesty and wish to comply with the law, was arrested. The story as you relate it, is 100% in compliance even with NY's LACK of a Castle Doctrine law...she did everything right. I do not agree that a person must retreat in his own home, but can kind of see the twisted logic behind it, reasoning that every measure must be taken to preserve human life and the taking of human life is done as an absolute last resort. I applaud this young widow in having the presence of mind to resist and defend herself, having the means and wherewithal to do so. THe difference here, is that she was not arrested, no charges filed, and no Gran Jury. In NYC, she would be arrested, her firearm would be confiscated (registered/licensed or not), and the case referred to a Grand Jury who would decide whether to prosecute or not. It's a sham in NYC.... As far as the tourist...I blame him. Anyone who owns a gun should be politically active, at least to the point where he can investigate the laws of states and municipalities he'll be travelling thru and to. This person had a full carry license from his state and did not educate himself on NYC gun laws. Ignorance is stupidity, in this case, as he now faces extended jail time and will be ruined in the process.
President Obama's Anti-Gun Agenda Shows No Sign of Stopping
_ _ _Death Comes Out the End of This Thing _ _ _
