• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gun sales boom in expectation of Obama re-election

Its fun watching hard core Obama supporters arguing that ROmney is the anti gun candidate

Crazy! Why would anyone think that?!

Governor Mitt Romney has signed into law a permanent assault weapons ban that he says will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on these guns.

"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."


Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban / iBerkshires.com - The Berkshires online guide to events, news and Berkshire County community information.

When he supported the Brady Bill in 1994, Romney said, "That's not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don't line up with the NRA."
 
Last edited:
Trying to apply logic to insanity is probably insane anyway, but even assuming that the SC changes during President Obama's second term and they enact some sort of gun-related law, what are these paranoiacs going to do with all their hardware?
 
Trying to apply logic to insanity is probably insane anyway, but even assuming that the SC changes during President Obama's second term and they enact some sort of gun-related law, what are these paranoiacs going to do with all their hardware?

Form a well armed militia and take our country back by force if necessary. Then we will reinstate our constitution and bill of rights.
 
Last edited:
Form a well armed militia and take our country back by force if necessary. Then we will reinstate our contitution and bill of rights.

Hmm, I think beating them into ploughshares might be a better use.
 
Hmm, I think beating them into ploughshares might be a better use.

Right because we all know politicians prefer unarmed peasants.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if people with firearms are buying more and more or if it's new buyers trying to get a gun before they are (possibly but unlikely) banned. I'm not sure that I personally see the value in owning more than one or two guns unless you're planning to go to war against Congress (possible, but not likely).

A more likely scenario would be to protect yourself and your property in times of chaos, if and when the economy tanks beyond the government's ability to prop it up, or massive government expenditure cuts, which cut into social welfare benefits.

I don't believe one can have *too many* guns. If nothing else, they would be a valuable commodity in a time of need. :)
 
Hmm, I think beating them into ploughshares might be a better use.



The flaw in that thought is that alot of people don't believe in working for their food. They prefer to steal it.
 
... Here we go with that "take our country back" bull****. From whom are y'all going to take it back from? Say for one second we ignore all the factors that wouldn't allow it to happen and we degenerated into a dictatorship. Dictatorships are 10/10 times supported by a strong military force. I wish you all the best of luck against the United States Military. 66% of all those gun owners are overweight fat ass hill billies with no training in modern warfare, zero air support and zero heavy artillery, and not a single boat to save them in a naval battle. Who are they going to take the country back from alright? Lol. Hahahaha. Yeah alright. Keep stroking those egos.
 
Last edited:
Right because we all know politicians prefer unarmed peasants.

Damn, I guess this really ISN'T a Christian country!

They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.

— Isaiah 2:4 & Micah 4:3
 
... Here we go with that "take our country back" bull****. From whom are y'all going to take it back from? Say for one second we ignore all the factors that wouldn't allow it to happen and we degenerated into a dictatorship. Dictatorships are 10/10 times supported by a strong military force. I wish you all the best of luck against the United States Military. 66% of all those gun owners are overweight fat ass hill billies with no training in modern warfare, zero air support and zero heavy artillery, and not a single boat to save them in a naval battle. Who are they going to take the country back from alright? Lol. Hahahaha. Yeah alright. Keep stroking those egos.

It is not exactly certain which side of the battle the military would be on in the event of an uprising. Obama has pissed off a lot of the military, including more than one general.

Somehow I doubt that 66% of gun owners are fat assed hillbillys, but even so, a fat assed hilbilly with a 30 caliber rifle can probably out shoot a college professor without a gun.
 
It is not exactly certain which side of the battle the military would be on in the event of an uprising.

Lol. You're living a dream.

First and foremost, we don't live in the mid 1800s: We simply do not have any issues that warrant "an uprising".

Second of all, even if we did, the bureaucratic and military infrastructure in place is so convoluted most people would be more involved in trying to figure out a political solution rather than a violent one. Case and point: pretty much any issue that divides the nation in 2 today: call it. Abortion, gay marriage, gun rights etc.

Finally - if by some miracle any of these issues managed to become divisive to the point of "an uprising" - the military would most certainly be on the side that signs its paycheck. Without a government, no soldier gets a paycheck or some of those perks we see on the commercials. You know, free education, housing, etc. The military isn't going to simply turn against that in order to support some half assed "uprising".

Think I'm wrong?

Try starting an uprising yourself. The conditions simply aren't there for the military to support an uprising of any kind. :)
 
Last edited:
Form a well armed militia and take our country back by force if necessary. Then we will reinstate our constitution and bill of rights.

This may have worked back in the 1700's, but do you honestly think a "well armed" milita can take on the United States Military? That's a bit insane.
 
I have a question... for the Obama critics: how is it that you can claim he is anti-gun when that pleases you and then criticize him for "affiliating" with Bill Ayers (who was part of a group that blew stuff up) when that pleases you.

Anyway......................................
Here is why gun sales go up near an election:
People are crazy. They fear that their rights will be taken away. Apparently right-leaning folks are more likely to own guns than left-leaning folks, therefore when the government becomes more left-leaning the righties buy more guns. Same thing happened with Clinton. What has Obama done to show that he will take away gun rights?

This report explains why people get their panties in a bunch by exploring why the radical right is expanding.
The Second Wave | Southern Poverty Law Center

We have a minority president which has made some people crazy.
One big difference from the militia movement of the 1990s is that the face of the federal government — the enemy that almost all parts of the extreme right see as the primary threat to freedom — is now black. And the fact that the president is an African American has injected a strong racial element into even those parts of the radical right, like the militias, that in the past were not primarily motivated by race hate. Contributing to the racial animus have been fears on the far right about the consequences of Latino immigration.

Speaks for itself:
"This frequently happens when elections favor the political left and the society is seen as moving toward greater social equality or away from traditional societal hierarchies," Chip Berlet, a long-time analyst of the radical right at Political Research Associates, said in a June newsletter. "In this scenario, it is easier for right-wing demagogues to successfully demonize liberals," immigrants and others.

The other people who have power have lost their minds:
In Texas, Gov. Rick Perry raised the prospect of secession several months after Obama's inauguration — a notion first brought up there in the '90s by the militia-like Republic of Texas. U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she feared that the president was planning "reeducation camps for young people," while U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), evoking memories of the discredited communist-hunter Sen. Joseph McCarthy, warned of 17 "socialists" in Congress. Fox News host Glenn Beck, who has called Obama a fascist, a Nazi and a Marxist, even re-floated militia conspiracy theories of the 1990s alleging a secret network of government-run concentration camps.

The original movement also had its mainstream backers, but they were largely confined to talk radio; today, Beck is just one of the well-known cable TV news personalities to air fictitious conspiracies and other unlikely Patriot ideas. CNN's Lou Dobbs has treated the so-called Aztlan conspiracy as a bona fide concern and questioned the validity of Obama's birth certificate despite his own network's definitive debunking of that claim. On MSNBC, commentator Pat Buchanan suggested recently that white Americans are now suffering "exactly what was done to black folks." On FOX News, regular contributor Dick Morris said, "Those crazies in Montana who say, 'We're going to kill ATF agents because the U.N.'s going to take over' — well, they're beginning to have a case."

Now, I support being paranoid about your government, and I am justified because of events like Ruby Ridge, Waco, several incidents during the 60's, Red Hysteria, the Whiskey Rebellion, etc... as I listed in the recent Gun thread, but I do not support making baseless claims against Obama as Bachman and counterparts have done. I also do not support the media stirring the pot for the sake of stirring the pot.

No, I am not an Obama lover, nor am I a hater.

I am pro gun and I am a goddamn dirty hippie.
 

Your story is from a year ago. A quick search of the internet will show that Obama has remained quiet (you will argue "under the radar") regarding guns. Maybe, that is because he does not have any plans. Every gun crazy nut bag out there has a web site that claims Obama is going to ban guns. They claimed he would do it when he was first elected, now their argument, including the NRA, is that Obama has been working on this covertly and is planning on taking your guns rights and any hopes of obtaining guns in the future away.

Calm down people.

As for the source above: Doesn't seem like the Brady's and Obama agree so much: The Obama Administration just sent Ben Kingsley from the DOJ to defend the PLCAA, which they were not required to do.

Justices hear appeal of dismissed civil suit stemming from Juneau murder | KTOO News

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Media
 
Form a well armed militia and take our country back by force if necessary. Then we will reinstate our constitution and bill of rights.

Back from the federal government? Good luck with that! You're going to need more than 2,000 rounds.
 
Put simply, it's raging paranoia. The NRA and conservative talking heads have brainwashed people into believing that Obama is out to get their guns, notwithstanding the fact that he couldn't take them even if he wanted to.

I see this whole issue as just another desperate attempt to find something...ANYTHING, they can to fire people up against the President of the United States. The GOP has very little to cry about so....they need to make stuff up.
 
If stupid, reatarded, idiotic conservatives want to go out and buy guns en mass due to a fear that Obama will get re-elected I'm all for it. It helps the economy and those selling guns.

Good on the conservatives for their paranoid, delusional behavior. The dumb asses are helping the economy, so I say we need more snake oil and really convince them that Obama's gonna take away their guns so they buy more.

My uncle owns a gun shop that he inherited from my grandfather, so more sales for him the better.
 
I have a question... for the Obama critics: how is it that you can claim he is anti-gun when that pleases you and then criticize him for "affiliating" with Bill Ayers (who was part of a group that blew stuff up) when that pleases you.

Supporting a terrorist organization =/= supporting the right of every free citizen to own a gun. In the former, that would be supporting an ideology and the means necessary to achieve a goal. The latter would be supporting individual rights of all Americans.
 
be afraid
be very afraid

worked for the neocons
is now working for the small arms industry

very effective marketing campaign
 
tecoyah said:
Flashback to four years ago:..........
Exactly what popped into my mind when I saw the article the other day...:roll:


Round 'n' Round we go


Cons are funny
Funny cons
 
I can't believe anyone would reside in a state that does not alow gun ownership.
 
Back
Top Bottom