Testing Obama's Theory

[KDS]

In a recent news article, they quoted Obama as saying this:
"I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms," Obama said. "But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets of our cities."

So I thought I'd make a poll. What say you gun owners? Please refrain from political attacks. I want to know what percentage of gun owners agree with Obama.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-use-in-wake-colorado-massacre/#ixzz21h3XTjI3

 

[Deus Machina]

I wasn't aware they were wandering around on the streets. I thought there was something like a leash law.

 

[Tommygunn]

More Clintonian pablum for the masses.
"Yes you can own your Elmer Fudd hunting rifles but no evil black rifles because they are too efficient ..."

 

[Andy-Y]

Ridiculous, yet not surprising at the least.

 

[Trent]

I can't comment on this without breaking THR rules.

Will pass, thank you very much. You all know how I feel anyway.

 

[Deus Machina]

Overall, I can accept and respect the opinion for what it is. It doesn't matter what anyone's opinion is, as long as they keep it out of our rights.

 

[KDS]

What frustrates me is polititians spout "data" like this without any proof. So I thought I would help the president out and conduct a poll. If it turns out he is correct, he will have some data to back it up.

 

[beatledog7]

Correct me if I err, but hasn't it usually been the soldiers we were fighting against that carried AKs? Isn't it still that way, mostly?

If so, why would our president want to make sure that's where the AKs are?

 

[MrDig]

While I will concede that the Second Amendment allows for regulations, it does not limit ownership to "Hunting" or "Sporting" purposes.

 

[OARNGESI]

no the soldiers need ar15s

 

[stevelyn]

Well he can start breathing again since he no longer has to pretend to be pro-gun.

 

[hnk45acp]

I'm going to write some checks to the NRA, SAF and a few local gun rights groups in the amount of $47. Since money is speech we should make ourselves heard.

 

[spotch]

I'd prefer an ak47 in a safe or a range bag, rather than out on the street.


is that an option?

 

[hogshead]

I wonder if he even knows the difference between semiauto and full auto. I honestly think that most of the gun grabbers dont.
I think we should be allowed to own whatever the military owns. Because the second amd is to overthrow a tryanny. "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” (Thomas Jefferson Papers p. 334, 1950)"
Either way I think Obama just lost the election.

 

[Eric M]

I didn't know there were many AK-47s floating around, legally, in the hands of citizens.

 

[hogshead]

Have you ever been to a gun show?

 

[SilentStalker]

That is ludicrous. I have seen cops, around the world in multiple different cities in countries that have some of the strictest gun laws in the world, patrolling with fully automatic weapons and armored vehicles. IMO, if they are allowed to have them then so should the people, otherwise there is nothing to stop oppression of the people. Aside from that, if these places are so safe with their gun bans and junk then why the need for fully automatic weapons and armored vehicles and junk? it seems to me if these places were so crime free then they could patrol just fine with batons and riot shields.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I didn't know there were many AK-47s floating around, legally, in the hands of citizens.

There aren't. Lots of semi-auto Kalashnikov-pattern rifles, but very few actual AK-47s.

 

[hogshead]

If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

It doesn't quack like one and most don't look like one. AK47s are full auto and have milled receivers.

 

[awgrizzly]

His entire statement is bogus in so many ways, the first of which I have no idea what he means by AK47. I have to assume full auto because he thinks they belong in the hands of soldiers. But of course full auto weapons are already highly controlled. If he means the semi-auto civilian version, it's not suited for soldiers and the thing isn't significantly different than any other semi-auto rifle, at least from the standpoint of danger. But over all it doesn't matter which he meant because neither of these are commonly found on our streets. Thus it's all meaningless rhetoric meant to inflame for the pending election... nothing new to see here folks, move along.

 

[stumpers]

Oops. Real post to follow ASAP.

 

[hogshead]

Oh Im sorry I thought that an ak clone looked just like an ak. Thus the use of the word clone.

 

[Rollis R. Karvellis]

I, disagree with our president, but if he was to say that water is wet I, would most likely disagree.

 

[stumpers]

Current era, military grade weapons certainly do belong in the hands of anyone that wants to own one and can do so without harming others or having already harmed others. This is just as applicable today as it was in the 1790s - just as the rest of the Bill of Rights is equally applicable today.

I think I know the reason the Second Amendment exists and what it means. It means arms in private hands to defend one's life, liberty and property against on another in the absence of a legitimate government or an invading entity. Perhaps a little Hobbesian, but true nonetheless.