Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Utube: Obama says "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws"

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Obama: Obama says "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-4jq...led-carry-2138

  2. #2
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313

    Post imported post

    See? He is a firm believer that there should be no law against concealed carry!

    That way, anybody could carry concealed or openly.
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  3. #3
    Regular Member ADulay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Punta Gorda, Florida, USA
    Posts
    466

    Post imported post

    MIke,

    I"m thinking that might be a "faked" video audio short of some type. It is well done, but probably just a clever edit.

    If he really said that, I'm sure it would be all over NRA.org and it's not.

    Also, as a Life Member of the NRA, Obama is not on my list of people to vote for.

    AD


    NRA Life - AMA Life - ABATE Life
    Viet-Nam Helicopters Pilots Assn - Life
    IDPA, ICORE and USPSA carry gun shooter - Glock Armorer
    NRA Certified Instructor

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    I don't think this would make the NRA site. That interview is from 1994 and at that time he was still saying in IL that he was in favor of a national concealed carry ban so this is not new news by any means, but rather a voice confirmation of numerous printed sources stating that was his opinion at the time.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1

    Post imported post

    "Obama says he supports a federal ban on concealed carry laws"

    But somehow on the Internet, this translates to:

    "Obama wants to ban concealed carry weapons".

    Sheesh.

    Almost all 50 states have concealed carry laws on the books.

    At current, there is no federal law regarding concealed carry.

    Obama, McCain, Bush, Clinton, etc. all support a federal ban on conceal carry laws, they feel as I and probably every gun carrying American that it is not something that should ever be legislated at the federal level and hence a ban on these laws is in order.

    A ban on federals laws would assure that every loony left gun grabbing senator or congressperson can never bring a CCW law to the floor for debate.

    So the people that disagree with what they are hearing Obama say, would rather there NOT be a federal ban on conceal carry laws?

    They want the federal government deciding what you can and can't do with your guns? Or would you rather leave it up to the State you live in and ban any attempts at the Federal level to pass legislation affecting handguns laws?

    Seems a no brainer to me.

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    User8 wrote:
    "At current, there is no federal law regarding concealed carry.
    Federal law generally bans gun carry on most federal property - these bans need to be re-looked with an eye toward rolling repealing most of them.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    Numerous times Obama has stated that he wanted to BAN all civilian ownership of firearms especially handguns.He has even stated it recently on channel #73 the OBAMA channel down here-if you have sattelite the adds run continusly "Obama's Plan for AMERICA" (PAID ADD), is the name of it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member LovesHisXD45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    580

    Post imported post

    Do local law enforcement know and enforce federal law? Do you think congress would actually pass such legislation through the house? I think not. At least not in my lifetime they won't.

    Kevin
    If it isn't broke, then don't fix it, or you'll fix it until it's broke.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    "NOW" Obama is saying "Let 'em keep their guns!" Sorry but I just don't trust him since there is so much "FLIP FLOP!"

    Makes me wonder if this is an example of "Anything for a vote!" Just don't trust him at all.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    460

    Post imported post

    He can say whatever he wants.

    His voting record however, speaks volumes. He has NEVER made a single vote either for gun-rights, or against gun control.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Schertz, Texas, USA
    Posts
    66

    Post imported post

    Kevin,

    Yes, local law enforcement do know and enfoce federal laws. This happens all the time? Ever heard of bank robbery? What about kidnapping across state lines? This is investigated every day by local law enforcement. Now, local law enforcement doesn't enforce all federal crimes because some are specifically mandated to the federal government such as military crimes under the UCMJ, crimes against treaties, crimes against federal banking statutes, and crimes against imigration status.

    David

  12. #12
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    Obama's prob'ly never seen anyone OC. Doubtful such practice has ever entered his mind.... such as it is. Not uncommon with metro-centric types. Obama ain't no country boy... never was. He equates 'concealed carry' with ALL civilian handgun matters.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    I don't think this would make the NRA site. That interview is from 1994 and at that time he was still saying in IL that he was in favor of a national concealed carry ban so this is not new news by any means, but rather a voice confirmation of numerous printed sources stating that was his opinion at the time.




    The one the NRA sent me is on the NRA site from 2004.

  14. #14
    Regular Member LovesHisXD45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    580

    Post imported post

    dlofton wrote:
    Kevin,

    Yes, local law enforcement do know and enfoce federal laws. This happens all the time? Ever heard of bank robbery? What about kidnapping across state lines? This is investigated every day by local law enforcement. Now, local law enforcement doesn't enforce all federal crimes because some are specifically mandated to the federal government such as military crimes under the UCMJ, crimes against treaties, crimes against federal banking statutes, and crimes against imigration status.

    David
    Thanks. That's good to know. Have many people been charged in the gun free school zone act for OC within 1000 feet of a school without a CWP after being questioned during a terry stop or MWAG call when no other crime was committed? That is not a loaded question either. I'm actually really curious as to the arrest and charge rate for this particular situation is here in Utah.

    I think I was trying to convey that if the federal government passed a law that made all semiautomatic handguns illegal, would local LEOs actually enforce it? Don't you guys/gals pick and choose what to charge somebody with based on the situation?

    Example:

    #1. Bad guy goes on school property and sells drugs and has a gun. He gets busted, so you throw the book at him and charge him with everything you have in the arsenal, both state and federal.

    #2. Civilian is walking down the sidewalk on some street within 1000 feet of a school and doesn't know it. He has no CWP and is open carrying a sidearm in a serpa L2 holster. Somebody reports him and the fuzz show up to check it out. LEO determines that the person has no previous felonies and/or is not wanted and is within the law, other than the school zone violation, but this is trivial in the situation, so you let the guy off the hook by issueing a warning, or not saying anything about it at all because of the ridiculousness of the law that you are not even obligated to enforce in the first place. (hows that for a run-on sentence?)

    I'm also getting to the notion that banning all semiautomatic handguns, or similar legislation, would be likened unto the prohibition era. It didn't work then, and it won't work now. All it would do is create a black market such as the world has never known here in the USA. This stuff is in our culture. They would have better luck enforcing an all-out ban on tobacco products. Good luck on that one.

    Kevin

    If it isn't broke, then don't fix it, or you'll fix it until it's broke.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Post imported post

    LovesHisXD45 wrote:
    dlofton wrote:
    Kevin,

    Yes, local law enforcement do know and enfoce federal laws. This happens all the time? Ever heard of bank robbery? What about kidnapping across state lines? This is investigated every day by local law enforcement. Now, local law enforcement doesn't enforce all federal crimes because some are specifically mandated to the federal government such as military crimes under the UCMJ, crimes against treaties, crimes against federal banking statutes, and crimes against imigration status.

    David
    Thanks. That's good to know. Have many people been charged in the gun free school zone act for OC within 1000 feet of a school without a CWP after being questioned during a terry stop or MWAG call when no other crime was committed?
    . . . .
    Think that the US Supreme Court overturned the national gun free school zones law on federalism grounds.




  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Washington, DC USA
    Posts
    175

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    Think that the US Supreme Court overturned the national gun free school zones law on federalism grounds.
    The original 1990 GFSZ act was overturned by a Rhenquist led US Supreme Court in 1995 in United States v. Lopez on the grounds that Congress overstepped it's bounds.The commerce clause of the Constitution did not support the act.

    Congress quickly reenacted a second GFSZ act immediately following that decision in 1995 requiring thata prosecutor prove as part of each prosecution that the gun moved in or affected interstate or foreign commerce.

    http://www.fau.edu/~tunick/courses/conlaw/gunlaw.html

  17. #17
    Regular Member LovesHisXD45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    580

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    LovesHisXD45 wrote:
    dlofton wrote:
    Kevin,

    Yes, local law enforcement do know and enfoce federal laws. This happens all the time? Ever heard of bank robbery? What about kidnapping across state lines? This is investigated every day by local law enforcement. Now, local law enforcement doesn't enforce all federal crimes because some are specifically mandated to the federal government such as military crimes under the UCMJ, crimes against treaties, crimes against federal banking statutes, and crimes against imigration status.

    David
    Thanks. That's good to know. Have many people been charged in the gun free school zone act for OC within 1000 feet of a school without a CWP after being questioned during a terry stop or MWAG call when no other crime was committed?
    . . . .
    Think that the US Supreme Court overturned the national gun free school zones law on federalism grounds.


    I don't think so. It's still on the books.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/se...2----000-.html

    search the page for "school zone" a few times and you will find the part under section (2)a farther down the page that talks about not being allowed to posses a firearm in a school zone without being licensed by the state in which you reside.

    Kevin
    If it isn't broke, then don't fix it, or you'll fix it until it's broke.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Post imported post

    Toymaker wrote:
    The Donkey wrote:
    Think that the US Supreme Court overturned the national gun free school zones law on federalism grounds.
    The original 1990 GFSZ act was overturned by a Rhenquist led US Supreme Court in 1995 in United States v. Lopez on the grounds that Congress overstepped it's bounds.The commerce clause of the Constitution did not support the act.

    Congress quickly reenacted a second GFSZ act immediately following that decision in 1995 requiring thata prosecutor prove as part of each prosecution that the gun moved in or affected interstate or foreign commerce.

    http://www.fau.edu/~tunick/courses/conlaw/gunlaw.html
    I wonder whether there have been any prosecutions at all under the 'new' law?


  19. #19
    Regular Member LovesHisXD45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    580

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    Toymaker wrote:
    The Donkey wrote:
    Think that the US Supreme Court overturned the national gun free school zones law on federalism grounds.
    The original 1990 GFSZ act was overturned by a Rhenquist led US Supreme Court in 1995 in United States v. Lopez on the grounds that Congress overstepped it's bounds.The commerce clause of the Constitution did not support the act.

    Congress quickly reenacted a second GFSZ act immediately following that decision in 1995 requiring thata prosecutor prove as part of each prosecution that the gun moved in or affected interstate or foreign commerce.

    http://www.fau.edu/~tunick/courses/conlaw/gunlaw.html
    I wonder whether there have been any prosecutions at all under the 'new' law?
    Thanks for that link. The information contained there was very revealing, and I am very appreciative that you have dug this up. It would seem that the burden of proof lies with the prosecutor to show that possession of the gun in the "school zone" must have interfered with interstate commerce in order for a charge to stick.

    The wording in the text is also very disturbing to me because it comes across that the mentality of its crafting authors is such that they believe that making a federal law prohibiting guns on school property, or "zones", will deter criminals and juvenile offenders from bringing firearms there.

    This mentality among law makers has infuriated me for as long as I can remember. These "leaders" whom we have elected to represent our interests are ignorant and lack even the slightest hint of common sense and intellect when it comes to the issue of gun control.

    The gun free zone act is the perfect example of a biased and flawed mentality. Before the law was even put into effect, there were already laws in place that would allow prosecutors to imprison and fine individuals who brought guns to school. Most students in the K-12 fall into the age range from 5 to 17. As far as we can tell, the gun free school zone act only covers K-12. Higher education facilities are not included in the law. In almost every single state in the union, it is illegal to purchase or own a handgun if you are under the age of 18. In some states, the age is 21 or higher. A violation of these statutes is almost always a class B misdemeanor or worse and usually carries hefty fines, a 6 month jail sentence or more, and in some cases, community service and probation on top of all of that. You can also bet the person will be permanently expelled from that school.

    The point I'm getting at is obvious. If you are in K-12, and you have a gun, and you get caught with it, you are already in violation of the law and may be charged with illegal possession of a firearm if you are under age. This would be the case 99% of the time. Now for the second obvious thing on the list: The issue of concealment. How many states in the union allow a person to conceal a handgun without a permit. Also, once again addressing the age issue, most states will not even allow you to apply for a permit until you are at least 18-21 years of age. You can bet your bottom dollar that students in K-12 will not be licensed to carry a concealed handgun.

    So, thus far, we have two charges that almost any state entity can throw at a student caught with a gun on school grounds. The first charge is illegal possession of a handgun, and the second is carrying a concealed dangerous weapon without a license. Now I'm no genius, but with those two charges alone, the guy or gal is looking at a possibility of at least 1 year in jail, hefty fines, being expelled, the possibility of community service and probation. The only catch on all of this is that the people in this age range are all minors. A common sense approach to actually help solve this problem is to craft a common sense law that punishes these child offenders as adults. A little jail time just might straighten them out before it's too late. Of course, there would have to be special concessions in place during their sentences as to rehabilitation and things of that nature so that their entire lives are not lost on a gun charge that they had on them when "they were just a kid", as society so politely puts it.

    My conclusion: What in the hell are these idiots thinking when they draft more stupid freaking laws to "get the guns out of our school grounds", when all of the laws to prosecute and imprison people carrying guns to school are already in place and on the books nationwide? I mean, honestly, what is wrong with these people? Do they think everybody else in this country has "STUPID" stamped on their foreheads?

    I would like for those legislators to show me one case before this stupid law was implemented where a student bought a gun to school and no corrective action was taken. They don't just slap you on the wrist or send you to the corner and say, "Naughty! Don't bring a gun to school again or your in big trouble". There was no doubt that the gun was confiscated, the parents and local law enforcement were notified, and the student was most likely expelled. How does a new law help solve the problem of guns in schools? It doesn't. Besides, they are all minors, remember? Unless you are planning on charging the children as adults, the stupid law has no effect anyhow. Also, how many K-12 students do you know that are aware of the firearms laws in your area? Hell, even local law enforcement are sometimes not entirely aware or comprehend their own firearms law.

    This law only hurts law abiding citizens open carrying without a permit caught off guard in a school zone they most likely did not know they were in!

    Stupid law makers!!! Idiots I tell ya... Idiots!!!

    Kevin
    If it isn't broke, then don't fix it, or you'll fix it until it's broke.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    Legislators are reacting to the 'do something' mantra of the electorate sheep. I doubt much that Legislators know which end of the barrel the bullet comes out of in most cases... or understand the dynamic of the event. You cannot legislate against criminal 'intent' or simple stupidity by posting signs 'n drafting more'laws'.

  21. #21
    Regular Member LovesHisXD45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    580

    Post imported post

    Sonora Rebel wrote:
    Legislators are reacting to the 'do something' mantra of the electorate sheep. I doubt much that Legislators know which end of the barrel the bullet comes out of in most cases... or understand the dynamic of the event. You cannot legislate against criminal 'intent' or simple stupidity by posting signs 'n drafting more'laws'.
    Amen!

    Kevin
    If it isn't broke, then don't fix it, or you'll fix it until it's broke.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •