Obama Backs Gun Rights

[spin]

Posted: December 9, 2010

Gun owners rejoice: President Obama backs the Second Amendment. Period. And he does it in writing.

A very rare Obama note, handwritten on White House stationary, has surfaced on the auction market in which the target of the National Rifle Association pledges his support for gun owners.

"I believe in the Second Amendment, and the rights of sportsmen like you. Period. Sincerely, Barack Obama," is clearly and firmly written on the note up for auction December 16 by our friends at Alexander Autographs.



While his words never mention gun rights specifically and aren't likely to satisfy everyone concerned about some of Obama's policies, the February 18, 2009 note was a direct answer to a hunter concerned about rumors that the administration was planning to impose policies that would boost the price of ammunition and guns and possibly ban weapons altogether. The rumors have become so widespread that even the NRA has issued a statement shooting many down.

***snip***

Alexander Autograph's Bill Panagopulos tells us that very few Obama notes on White House stationary have surfaced, and of those hardly any on such a controversial issue. He estimates that the note could sell for at $8,000-$10,000.
http://politics.usnews.com/news/washington-whispers/articles/2010/12/09/obama-backs-gun-rights.html

[onehandle]

1. Somebody needs to tell this Republican lobbyist group:

http://www.gunbanobama.com

[Glassunion]

13. I went to the site... I found nothing right-wing or Republican about it.

Also nothing about them being a lobbyist group. I also failed to find them on "open secrets" at all as a lobbying group.

Maybe it is all going over my head?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

2. this is one thread that I would love to see how many Recs vs Unrecs.

:rofl:

[spin]

4. Any pro-RKBA post in the Gungeon usually attracts Unrecs like flies on sugar ...

just the nature of the forum.

[armueller2001]

3. While that is an interesting find,

the Second Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with "sportsmen" or hunting. Many politicians say they support the 2A while pushing for legislation to ban firearms that they determine are too scary for people to own, and that they have "no hunting value".

[elocs]

5. Doesn't it say something about a well regulated militia? Funny how you never hear much about that.

It may be the best half quoted amendment there is.

[spin]

7. "Well regulated" had a different meaning back then ...

The meaning of the phrase "well-regulated" in the 2nd amendment

The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.emphasis added
http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

[PavePusher]

8. It is neither grammatically, nor contextualy, a limiting condition.

Unless, of course, you have actual evidence that demonstrates otherwise.

[Kennah]

9. "Well-regulated" does not mean what you believe it means

Federalist Paper #29
Alexander Hamilton
1788

A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice.
...
To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss.

Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

[GreenStormCloud]

11. The collectivist interpretation of the 2nd is dead.

You don't have to be a member of a miltia or pf the National Guard to own a gun. You can stop beating that dead horse.

[lawodevolution]

12. and it only existed in the first place because of our failure of an education system

"A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state" is a dependent clause because by itself it does not make a complete idea.

A dependent clause cannot control or govern an independent clause like "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

This means the first clause can be ignored or removed from the 2nd amendment without a change in the meaning.

[GreenStormCloud]

25. Also true. N/T

[rrneck]

24. If you get assaulted

why don't you see if the well regulated militia can get there before the cops.

[spin]

6. Remember the comment by Obama on Michelle and guns ...

Michelle Obama on Guns
5:27 PM, Mar 25, 2008 • By BRIAN FAUGHNAN

National Journal looks at the candidates' views on gun control:

In New Hampshire last November, Obama told a gathering of rural voters that his wife worries about urban handgun violence but realized while driving in Iowa that she might want a gun for protection if she lived in a rural area. Insists the NRA's Cox: "They know gun control is a political loser."

Michelle worries about violent urban crime, but doesn't feel the need to own a handgun in the city. Rather, she'd want one if she lived in a rural area. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, violent crimes are 50 percent more likely in urban areas than in suburban or rural communities. You're clearly much safer--all things being equal--out in the country than you are in Chicago.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/03/more_obama_condescension.asp

[shadowrider]

10. I agree

Sounds like he's only backing for "sportsmen", not the general public.

[Katya Mullethov]

14. Does he hunt too?

That would be super .

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. Hell. I'm beginning to see the necessity in owning one.

[spin]

19. I'm not positive that there is a "necessity" to own a firearm ...

I believe if you are a responsible and honest person who has an interest in shooting it can prove to be a rewarding hobby. Many people enjoy hunting and supplement their diet with deer, hog, moose rabbit and squirrel etc. Some shooters find target shooting challenging and many enjoy sports such as Cowboy Action Shooting, IPSC or NRA Bullseye competitions.

I also believe that a firearm may be a good idea for self defense if you are willing to take the time to learn firearm safety and the basics of shooting. Before you consider buying one for self defense it's necessary to ask yourself one question, "Could I use a firearm to injure or possibly kill a person who was attacking me or someone else in a manner that could cause serious injury or death?" If you can't give an affirmative answer, then do not own a firearm for self defense. If you seriously believe that you couldn't shoot another person no matter what the reason, you are not a coward or abnormal. Not being able to shoot another person is in no way unnatural. Soldiers in combat often find it difficult to kill.

A look at history might help illustrate what I am talking about. In World War Two, it is a fact that only 15-20 percent of the soldiers fired at the enemy. That is one in five soldiers actually shooting at a Nazi when he sees one. While this rate may have increased in desperate situations, in most combat situations soldiers were reluctant to kill each other. The Civil War was not dramatically different or any previous wars.

In Korea, the rate of soldiers unwilling to fire on the enemy decreased and fifty five percent of the soldiers fired at the enemy. In Vietnam, this rate increased to about ninety five percent but this doesn't mean they were trying to hit the target. In fact it usually took around fifty-two thousand bullets to score one kill in regular infantry units! It may be interesting to not that when Special Forces kills are recorded and monitored this often includes kills scored by calling in artillery or close air support. In this way SF type units could score very high kill ratios like fifty to a hundred for every SF trooper killed. This is not to say these elite troops didn't score a large number of bullet type kills. It is interesting to note that most kills in war are from artillery or other mass destruction type weapons.

If one studies history and is able to cut through the hype, one will find that man is often unwilling to kill his fellow man and the fighter finds it very traumatic when he has to do so. On the battlefield the stress of being killed and injured is not always the main fear.
http://www.military-sf.com/Killing.htm

Of course, there are many factors to consider before you buy a firearm. If you abuse alcohol or drugs, if you live in a volatile relationship with a significant other, if you have young children and are unwilling to properly store your firearms or if you have anger management problems - then firearms are not for you.

I'm not trying to discourage you, just pointing out that owning a firearm is a serious responsibility.

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. I was a junior NRA member and in the JROTC.

I'm crap with a pistol, but give me a .22 or M16 and I can give you some competition.

Could I use weapons for hunting? Nope. Not unless I found myself on some rugged mountain which required that I shoot to find food.

Could I use it in self-defense. Absolutely. The problem is that I would hesitate, trying to figure out the situation, giving the intruder every possible benefit of the doubt. By that time, I would be toast.

[spin]

28. If your attacker has a firearm and shoots you ...

that doesn't mean that you have to fall over and die. Chances are that you will survive a gunshot unless the bullet hits a vital organ such as the heart or disrupts the central nervous system by hitting the spin or penetrating the brain.

People can still continue to fight for a short time even after being shot in the heart. Your initial hesitation might lead to your being shot, but you can possibly shoot back and survive the attack.

[The Backlash Cometh]

29. Um. Thank you.

I'll keep that in mind.

[spin]

30. No problem ...

Real life isn't always like the movies and often is far from pretty.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

16. "Sportsmen like you"...

This does not really give his opinion or 2A stance regarding most firearm owners.

The truth is MOST firearm owners DO NOT HUNT. They are not "Sporotsmen".
In fact, the most popular rifle in the US is the AR15 rifle. (A semi-auto clone of the M16 assault rifle). WASR AK-47 clones are also extremely popular and many states are making progress on concealed carrying of handguns.

Clarifying his beliefs in the name of "sportsmen like you" really doesn't give a clear picture of where he stands in regard to most firearms in America and their owners.

[spin]

17. Is a target shooter a sportsman?

I never have tried hunting but I have destroyed a lot of paper targets at the range.

Of course, I could use the skills that I have obtained for self defense which is why I have a concealed weapons permit. Target shooting is not defensive shooting but it is a great foundation for this martial art.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

20. I think it all depends on why/what you are target shooting.

Is it a competition? are you shooting @ human silhouettes? Are you using a sporting firearm?
There's too many variables & exceptions to say a target shooter is sporting or non sporting.

I target shoot all the time and engage in USPSA handgun competitions.
I also only compete with my CCW firearm as a means of becoming more efficient with my tool.
I would not consider it sporting.

About the most "sporting" thing I do is shoot clays with buddies... I love shooting clays.
Even then it's with an 18.1" pistol-gripped adjustable-stock shotgun with electronic sight.
Hardly a sporting a firearm. Thinking about picking up a Tromix 12ga SBS to shoot clays too.

[spin]

31. I shoot for enjoyment ...

I have never shot in a competition.

I do shoot at human silhouettes but I also shoot at NRA bullseye targets.

I do use a sporting firearm, I have several target quality handguns including a Model 41 S&W .22 cal.



However I often practice with my S&W Model 642 Airweight .38 cal revolver that is my carry weapon.



Shooting is a martial art. It's sporting in the sense that martial arts are sporting.

[X_Digger]

18. To be fair, that seems to be the context that the person asked about.

Kind of hard to judge based on the article.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

21. No doubt. Obama was asked and Obama answered.

No fault of his part. But it would be untruthful to hold Obamas's response up as proof he backs the 2A and American firearms owners in general. That demographic is categorically outside of the context Obama's letter outlines.

[DissedByBush]

23. Backing it does not mean backing individual right

The ACLU takes the "collective right" view too.

IOW the ACLU says they support the Second Amendment, but they really don't.

[Francis Marion]

26. That is a troubling affirmation at best.

Because the Second Amendment has nothing to do with 'Sportsmen'.
An acknowledgement of Elmer Fudd's pastime has no bearing upon the language or intent of Amendment Two.

The rights of 'sportsmen' do not exist and don't merit any consideration.

The amendment acknowledges the Right of The People to keep and bear arms.

It remains to be seen how well this president respects our RKBA. That judgement needs to be made in light of his Supreme Court appointments, political allies, legislative agenda, and executive orders.

Our President, this supposed Second Amendment champion and friend of 'sportsmen', actively prevented the importation of US M1 rifles into the US from Korea for sale to The American People- whose property they are. Obama killed that deal. Why, if he supports gun rights? Does he, in fact, support the People's gun rights?

Weigh the evidence. We have:
-one sheet of paper expressing a lukewarm affirmation for Amendment Two and the rights of 'sportsmen',
-one million US M1 rifles in Korea which The American People, and some 'sportsmen', would want to buy. President Obama's DECISION on this gun question shouts to The American People that he does not, as we feared, understand the Second Amendment, and either does not respect the rights of the American People, or else does not trust them. Either accounting is unacceptable and deeply troubling coming from an executive who is highly educated and supposed to understand the US Constitution.

This action speaks 1,000,000 times louder than even a stack of strangely worded affirmations.

My conclusion is that he doesn't respect our gun rights, doesn't respect the Second Amendment as evidenced by actions, and doesn't trust us. Except for 'sportsmen' of course, and even that deal is off when meaningful action is called for.

Aside from these small flaws, he is an outstanding champion of our right to keep and bear arms, as evidenced by his several concrete and positive affirmations of gun rights, which must be very easy to identify, if in fact true.

[spin]

27. Some of Obama's actions such as decision on the M1 rifles in Korea ...

might be pandering to his liberal base.

I believe that the reason he has such a long history of being opposed to RKBA is that he is a politician from possibly the most anti-gun state and city in the United States. His chances of being elected dog catcher in Chicago had he been pro-RKBA would have been close to zero.