previous post next post  

I'm not a single-issue voter, but it shouldn't shock anyone...

By The Armorer on June 17, 2008 | | Comments (9)

...that issues of guns and gun-ownership are a *big* issue with me.

Arms Room of Argghhh!

D-uh.

Senator McCain is marginally okay on the issue. And he is *much* better than Senator Obama, whose actions belie most of his words on the subject as he realized he's going to have to get some gun-owners to vote for him.

Pretty much, in his voting history, he hasn't found an anti-gun proposal he didn't like. Some examples, with cites. Yes, I know, from the NRA. Heh. It's not like *I'm* not partisan on this issue... though for my friends who swear by GOA and JFPO, I'm a weak-willed squish on the subject... ;^ )

From the NRA-ILA:

The presidential primary season is finally over, and it is now time for gun owners to take a careful look at just where apparent nominee Barack Obama stands on issues related to the Second Amendment. During the primaries, Obama tried to hide behind vague statements of support for “sportsmen” or unfounded claims of general support for the right to keep and bear arms.

But his real record, based on votes taken, political associations, and long standing positions, shows that Barack Obama is a serious threat to Second Amendment liberties. Don’t listen to his campaign rhetoric! Look instead to what he has said and done during his entire political career.

For the rest - click the Flash Traffic/Extended Entry. There are a lot of links in there, too - so it would actually be easier if you clicked the "permalink" button. It's easier to deal with a lot of links that way.

The numbers refer to the cites at the end of the article. My comments in [brackets]

FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.1

FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.2 [Not entirely true - he wants to impose a *more* sweeping version of it, because, after all, if a liberal shibboleth fails, it's only because we didn't do it big enough or spend enough money on it - not that it was ever a bad idea or anything. Come to think of it - that sometimes applies to conservative shibboleths, too.]

FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.3 [Actually, expecting a loss with the Supreme Court in the Heller case, this is the new tack the antis are taking - going after ammunition, in many different ways, with California leading the charge.]

FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.2

FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and other cities.4

FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.5

FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.6

FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.

FACT: Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.7 [And we've all seen the bloodbaths resulting from the passage of those laws, haven't we?]

FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and “research.”8 [You have to be careful here - I was on the Board of Catholic Community Services, an organization that doesn't advocate in this field, but is oft-times supportive of anti-gun issues. It wasn't a core piece of their efforts - which is helping the poor and disadvantaged - so I didn't have any problem serving on their board - nor did that have a problem with me serving... The company I work for gives money to anti-gun causes, but I don't think I've seen 'em give a dime (directly - all us employees who are NRA members just launder the dollars, right?) to the NRA. I still work for them. But the Joyce Foundation makes a point of it's anti-gun stance, so I left this one in there.]

FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.9 [Yeah, this was really well-thought-out proposal. Heh. Not too mention that the next wave of anti-gun activism would have been disguised as high-civic-mindedness - about establishing many, many, many more small parks in neighborhoods. Got a vacant lot? Mow it and designate it a park - and oh, btw, make that overlapping Venn diagram of 5 mile circles that much larger.... Heh. We'd probably also see a sudden interest in decentralizing rural schools and designating home schooling homes... schools. No, they'd never think like that...]

FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.10

FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to assist young people in the military.11

FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.12

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.13 [Even though it's pretty much shown to not work. But who cares, you feel good for having done it, and it makes guns more expensive, so only the well-to-do can afford 'em. Which, well, that's okay. Heh. One of the reasons Governor Sebelius signed the law that allows we non-governmentally-employed peons to own automatic weapons was the knowledge that only rich people could afford the hobby. And I'm sure she'd sign any bill on her desk like California's proposed controls on ammunition - which will make it much more expensive to shoot. But that's a rant for a different time.]

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.2

FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.14

FACT: Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month sales restrictions.9

FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.9

FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.9

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.9 [Heh. I'm all for training requirements. Just like driver's ed. And provide it just like driver's ed. You can pay for private tutoring, or get it from school...]


1. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 219, July 2, 2005. (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00219)

2. Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire, Sept. 9, 1996. The responses on this survey were described in “Obama had greater role on liberal survey,” Politico, March 31, 20087. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html)

3. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 217, Kennedy amendment July 2, 2005. (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00217)

4. David Wright, Ursula Fahy and Sunlen Miller, "Obama: 'Common Sense Regulation' On Gun Owners' Rights," ABC News' "Political Radar" Blog. (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/02/obama-common-se.html)

5. Illinois Senate, March 25, 2004 SB 2165, vote 20.

6. “Fact Check: No News In Obama's Consistent Record.” Obama ’08, December 11, 2007. (http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/12/11/fact_check_no_news_in_obamas_c.php)

7. “Candidates' gun control positions may figure in Pa. vote,” Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Wednesday, April 2, 2008, and "Keyes, Obama Are Far Apart On Guns," Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04. (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_560181.html)

8. 1998 Joyce Foundation Annual Report, p. 7. (http://www.joycefdn.org/pdf/98_AnnualReport.pdf)

9. “Obama and Gun Control,” The Volokh Conspiracy, taken from the Chicago Defender, Dec. 13, 1999. (http://www.volokh.com/posts/1203389334.shtml)

10. Illinois Senate, May 5, 2002, SB 1936 Con., vote 26.

11. Illinois Senate, March 25, 2003, SB 2163, vote 18.

12. “Clinton, Edwards, Obama on gun control,” Radio Iowa, Sunday, April 22, 2007. (http://learfield.typepad.com/radioiowa/2007/04/clinton_edwards.html)

13. Chicago Tribune blogs, “Barack Obama: NIU Shootings call for action,” February 15, 2008, (http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/barack_obama_comments_on_shoot.html)

14. Barack Obama campaign website: “As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment . . .” (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/urbanpolicy/#crime-and-law-enforcement.)

Share This Article:

Categories:

9 Comments

By fdcol63 on June 17, 2008 8:32 AM
But it's ok, John. Obama and his cohorts on the Left just want to protect us from accidental shootings, road rage, and domestic violence. They're benevolent, and when they have a monopoly on power, we'll never need to protect ourselves - from criminals OR a despotic government. /end sarcasm
 
By Jason on June 17, 2008 10:03 AM
Hear ye, hear ye! NRA supports Republican candidate! In other unsurprising news, NRA supports laws that allow terrorists and disgruntled mental cases in the United States to have complete access to all conventional weapons short of tanks, MANPADs, and nuclear devices. Tomorrow, Republican positions on big government and monopolies on power - hypocritical or just disingenuous?
 
By John of Argghhh! on June 17, 2008 10:22 AM
Hi Jason. I figured this would bring you out. You miss the point of the post, in your doctrinaire defense of your guy. Do you contest any of the points? Do you think that I should just vote for your guy, though if he were to do what he votes on, it would potentially cost me tens of thousands of dollars? On this issue alone, leave aside others? And yet, to my eye, accomplish nothing but abuse the law-abiding? Your response is just pointless snark. C'mon, you can do better. I don't pretend that everything I post is "fair and balanced" nor does it have to be, that's just a strawman and beneath you. Hear ye, hear ye! NRA supports Republican candidate! In other unsurprising news, NRA supports laws that allow terrorists and disgruntled mental cases in the United States to have complete access to all conventional weapons short of tanks, MANPADs, and nuclear devices. Heh. The NRA supported the recent update to the Brady Bill that is fully intended to allow the Brady Check system to do a better job of sifting out the "disgruntled mental cases" - a bill I supported as well, and worked with my Congressperson on. I dont' recall the NRA advocating the government surplus out TOWs and AT4's, either. And do me a favor, big fella, name all the times legally-held machine guns have been used for criminal activity since 1934. Or the last time a privately owned tank went on a rampage, owner at the levers. Oh, tanks have gone on rampages... usually with disgruntled government employees at the wheel. So, aside from a Clint Eastwood movie, when's the last time a bank robber opened up a vault with a legally-held 20mm cannon? How 'bout all the times conservatives with legally-held artillery have shelled gatherings of liberals? Or those warbirds, strafing communes and dropping napalm in the forest... C'mon, Jason. You can do better than this. Really. Come back with *why* people should vote for your guy on this issue... people like me. Remember - we're only talking the one issue - so keep focused, eh?
 
By kat-missouri on June 17, 2008 11:28 AM
Yeah, it's always about the criminals and nut cases. We should just give up all our rights because a few don't know how to behave. Maybe we should give up voting, too. I mean, Jason, wouldn't you agree that a bunch of criminals and nutcases seem to be involved in that process as well? Not to mention, you know, end up in political office?
 
By Jason on June 17, 2008 12:20 PM
No need really to defend my guy on this issue. Ain't gonna convince you, and as your title suggests, it's not the sole issue that will motivate you to go vote for or against. So what's the big deal? There is no story here. There will never be a Democratic politician who, despite being a hunter and gun collector, will get the NRA stamp of approval. And despite the Dems numerous efforts on the record to assure the continued rights of hunters, gun collectors, and those people afraid of the next VA TECH shoot-out, the NRA will never believe them. Let's be honest. No politician in office will ever vote against 2d amendment rights as you see them - the right to own and shoot licensed firearms. The challenge is, what degree of oversight ought to be levied? If it were up to the NRA, there would be no oversight for purchases at gun shows and no holding records of purchases at a gun store for more than 30 days. That's unsat, and given this administration's penchant for monitoring citizen activities and modern technology, there ought to be a national firearms database for state and federal law enforcement use. But I don't see that ever happening, thanks to the NRA. Obama's not going to win based on the votes of gun owners, and you know, I don't think that's going to be his strategy. I would suggest that he's counting more on the recognition that our country's in a s***hole as far as economics and that McCain's got no plans to improve the situation in Iraq/Afghanistan. And in the end, it's not you or I that have to be convinced, it's that damnable 25% of the populace that sits on the fence every four years, holding themselves and shaking, saying "oh my, I just can't figger it all out..."
 
By fdcol63 on June 17, 2008 12:34 PM
"... given this administration's penchant for monitoring citizen activities and modern technology, there ought to be a national firearms database for state and federal law enforcement use. ..."
Can anyone say "cognitive dissonance"? Here Jason fears a government that abuses its power to snoop and control its populace, but in the same breath argues for a centralized database that will make it easier for the government to do just that.
 
By Dawnsblood on June 17, 2008 1:04 PM
Jason it isn't really fair to say that the NRA never backs Democrats in elections. It does happen.
 
By Yu-Ain Gonnano on June 17, 2008 3:14 PM
Money quote from the second linked article:
That means the NRA, which sits on a campaign war chest of $20 million, is expecting to endorse as many as 60 Democrats in House and Senate elections, about the same number it endorsed in every national election since 2002 and three times the 20 or so Democrats it supported in races during the early 1990s.
So of the 535 Senators and Representatives about 60, or a little over 10%, of it's potential endoresments go to Democrats. That's something fairly substantially north of "Never" If it were up to the NRA, there would be no oversight for purchases at gun shows... The NRA has actually favored Brady Checks on numberous occasions, even at gun shows. Background checks happen at gun shows the exact same as they happen not at gun shows. The "Gun Show Loophole" isn't. Businesses at gunshows have to do the same background check they have to do back at the store. Private parties don't do background checks just like they don't have to do back in their living room. What you are really talking about wanting to regulate the sale of personal private property. and finally... NRA supports laws that allow terrorists and disgruntled mental cases in the United States to have complete access to all conventional weapons short of tanks, MANPADs, and nuclear devices. Because we all know terrorists and disgruntled mental cases will obey laws banning guns even though they are OK with disobeying bans against murder. The fact is those people will obtain guns just as easily with or without a ban. Don't believe me? How's the gun crime in D.C. and Chicago doing?
 
By darkriders on June 18, 2008 11:13 AM
I think there is a quote from our friend Nicolo Macchiavelli out there about it not being wise for a new Prince to disarm his new subjects (unless of course they were foreigners that he had just conquered), something to do with gaining Trust of said subjects. Then again perhaps most of us subjects are just disgruntled mental cases (bitter, clinging, still listening to the Pope...) and foreign invader types. In a related unhappy memory, here in the wonderful Federal Republic of Germany, where "Kriegs Waffen" (weapons of war) are proscribed it is now easier to get such illegal weapons. Though it was never impossible to get such weapons even after the law was passed. In fact, if I recall, about forty years ago there was even a Atrocity by a real Disgrunted Mental Case who made his own Flame Thrower and used it on Children in a Kindergarden (this being another reason I do not watch German TV during dinner anymore).