• 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!

Is Obama pro or anti gun rights?

Is Obama pro or anti gun rights?


  • Total voters
    38

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,389
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Some have claimed that because President Obama has not signed any LEGISLATION restricting gun owners' rights, he is not "anti gun". Others have correctly noted that Mr. Obama was never given a CHANCE to sign such laws but his other actions suggest he is militantly opposed to the rights of gun owners

Vote
 
Of course he is, just look at any of his speeches following a mass shooting. He, and many other leftists, always attempt to use these events to rally enough support to crack down on gun rights.
 
Some have claimed that because President Obama has not signed any LEGISLATION restricting gun owners' rights, he is not "anti gun". Others have correctly noted that Mr. Obama was never given a CHANCE to sign such laws but his other actions suggest he is militantly opposed to the rights of gun owners

Vote

Every real indicator (not including what he says because that cannot be relied upon) that I have seen from him demonstrates a real and palpable intent on his part to restrict gun possession to the government alone, stripping every citizen from their right to keep and bear arms.
 
Some have claimed that because President Obama has not signed any LEGISLATION restricting gun owners' rights, he is not "anti gun". Others have correctly noted that Mr. Obama was never given a CHANCE to sign such laws but his other actions suggest he is militantly opposed to the rights of gun owners

Vote

Anyone who supports assault weapons.semi-automatic weapons bans, magazine limits, hand gun bans, enacted anti-2nd amendment executive orders, appoints people who share his views on guns to various positions in government and supreme court and praises draconian gun laws in the UK and Australia is heavily anti-2nd amendment.
 
Last edited:
Just wait till Hillary gets in. Obama is a saint when it comes to our rights compared to her. Obama will be just the opening act to the greatest loss of our rights since FDR when she gets in.
 
He's pro-gun, just not your kind of pro-gun.

Obama isn't trying to snatch all the guns.
 
He's pro-gun, just not your kind of pro-gun.

Obama isn't trying to snatch all the guns.

that's sort of like saying that the person or persons who shot that family in Ohio really didn't hate the family since he/they didn't kill the three infants.

if you want to ban some guns you are virulently anti gun. He's pro gun only in the sense he wants those who protect him to be well armed
 
Just wait till Hillary gets in. Obama is a saint when it comes to our rights compared to her. Obama will be just the opening act to the greatest loss of our rights since FDR when she gets in.

They are both the same as are all gun control advocates. Their desire to remove guns is not based on any logical decision it is based ob fear. Fear cannot be appeased.
 
He used examples of what our gun laws should be like. Those examples being the UK and Australia. He is most definitely Anti-Gun Rights.
 
that's sort of like saying that the person or persons who shot that family in Ohio really didn't hate the family since he/they didn't kill the three infants.

if you want to ban some guns you are virulently anti gun. He's pro gun only in the sense he wants those who protect him to be well armed

It's claiming to be a little bit pregnant.
 
He used examples of what our gun laws should be like. Those examples being the UK and Australia. He is most definitely Anti-Gun Rights.

Any politician that wants your gun rights wants a heck of a lot more than that.
 
He's pro-gun, just not your kind of pro-gun.

Obama isn't trying to snatch all the guns.

If a politian tried to enact elective abortion bans and laws that make it harder and more expensive to have an elective abortion, appointed pro-lifers (actual pro-lifers, not the liars who say they are personally pro-life but support elective abortion being legal)to various positions in government and to the supreme court, signed various pro-life executive orders and has praised the anti-abortion laws in countries where elective abortions are banned. I don't think anyone would say that politician pro-choice, just not your kind of pro-choice.
 
if you want to ban some guns you are virulently anti gun. He's pro gun only in the sense he wants those who protect him to be well armed

That's a jump if I've seen one.

So, you either allow all guns without restraint or you're anti-gun entirely? I feel like there's a phrase for this, it kind of rhymes with false lobotomy.
 
He's anti-gun, but he's not as anti-liberty as many other Democrats or else he would have tried harder when he had both Houses under Democratic control.

He's only posturing now when he knows he can't do anything about it. It's pure theater.
 
Some have claimed that because President Obama has not signed any LEGISLATION restricting gun owners' rights, he is not "anti gun". Others have correctly noted that Mr. Obama was never given a CHANCE to sign such laws but his other actions suggest he is militantly opposed to the rights of gun owners

Vote


Yes........someone did say that................


I must confess it was me...........


and I had documented citations affirming what I said/did ...............


I was not sharing my feelings.........

...but citations where the President acted or said so.........

Now some dismiss the citations as not true because they KNOW its not true...............H


But how sound or convincing is that..........

To take a personal opinion on blind faith as so............


Or it is so because it's commonly repeated rumor.......

Or would you giggle?


Would you take his/her word as fact?
 
Yes........someone did say that................


I must confess it was me...........


and I had documented citations affirming what I said/did ...............


I was not sharing my feelings.........

...but citations where the President acted or said so.........

Now some dismiss the citations as not true because they KNOW its not true...............H


But how sound or convincing is that..........

To take a personal opinion on blind faith as so............


Or it is so because it's commonly repeated rumor.......

Or would you giggle?


Would you take his/her word as fact?

Comment............made .................by you


not.............make sense..............


to me...........

nor the......................civilized world
 
That's a jump if I've seen one.

So, you either allow all guns without restraint or you're anti-gun entirely? I feel like there's a phrase for this, it kind of rhymes with false lobotomy.

how does the second amendment allow some firearms bans and not others? How can you justify supporting australian (all semi rifles) and English (all handguns) gun bans and pretend someone who does that is not anti gun

the second amendment is properly a ban on government action. and that action is not somehow ok because the guns in question cause liberals to wet themselves over them. anything cops are issued is well within the second amendment concept of arms that citizens can keep and bear
 
how does the second amendment allow some firearms bans and not others? How can you justify supporting australian (all semi rifles) and English (all handguns) gun bans and pretend someone who does that is not anti gun

the second amendment is properly a ban on government action. and that action is not somehow ok because the guns in question cause liberals to wet themselves over them. anything cops are issued is well within the second amendment concept of arms that citizens can keep and bear

Wait, so you think we should be allowed to have any gun?
 
Wait, so you think we should be allowed to have any gun?

any firearm-yes-guns can include 105 mm smoothbore tank guns or 16 inch cannon on battleships

any firearm-yes a firearm being a weapon that is normally hand held firing an inert projectile of limited diameter. can you tell me a firearm honest citizens shouldn't be able to even OWN
 
Wait, so you think we should be allowed to have any gun?

Not what the constitution says is it. Arms is the word your should use. And yes. Are you saying the founders were stupid and out of touch with reality?
 
That's a jump if I've seen one.

So, you either allow all guns without restraint or you're anti-gun entirely? I feel like there's a phrase for this, it kind of rhymes with false lobotomy.

Are you trying to say a gun ban is logical and not insanity at work? What is logical about it, perhaps that will get you to the insanity part.
 
Gun regulations are insanity?

Jesus.

restrictions on how people use guns-many make sense

crap like the Hughes amendment, magazine limits, how many guns you can buy a month, etc-those are all crap.
 
Gun regulations are insanity?

Jesus.

Well there is a well thought out rebuttal if ever i saw one. Should by chance you have anything sensible to contribute go right ahead. Do explain what is not insane in removing the best means of defence from the victims of crime.

How would you describe it, because insane seems fitting to me.

What is the purpose of any gun regulation and give a working example that can be shown to work by repetition. Can you do that or do you just propose junk laws
 
Back
Top Bottom