• 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!

Obama Administration Reverses Course, Forbids Sale of 850,000 Antique Rifles

Deserves demonization?

From what I can tell this same crap has been peddled for five or more years according to the most educated person I can find on the subject. They're having problems negotiating the deal cause of factors other than "Obama hates guns."

This is a bull**** article that pops up at a convenient time right before elections and conservatives go all chicken little all over the place. It's getting to be pathetic.


the libs never do that before an election? They have already started running against Bush again
 
you need to look at Obama and Biden's records over their political careers versus clinton and gore

they won't pass a gun ban because they saw what happened in 1994. If they thought they would pick up seats by banning all guns they would. Their Attorney General said he wanted to reinstitute and extend the clinton gun ban and he filed an amicus brief against gun rights in Heller v DC

You're such a blind bigot! You just said, "Well, he hasn't done what I accused him of doing YET, but, I'll bet that he would, hah!"
 
Here's the fact, no anti gun law has been passed by Obama. But yes there is a conspiracy, ok sure. They want to ban all guns, right...

Past history is the best indicator of future performance. Obama and Biden's past history on guns is anything but stellar.

You're logic is like throwing a piece of steak into a lion's cage and arguing that since the lion didn't yet devour the steak, lion's don't eat meat. :roll:
 
Past history is the best indicator of future performance. Obama and Biden's past history on guns is anything but stellar.

You're logic is like throwing a piece of steak into a lion's cage and arguing that since the lion didn't yet devour the steak, lion's don't eat meat. :roll:

"Keep your thoughts here and now where they belong" - Qui Gon Jinn

With the trouble they've had from Republicans passing every ****ing bill through congress, do you honestly think they'll risk the political fallout from a guns bill...

Obama isn't AS stupid as you think he is.
 
It looks like Obama is showing his anti-2nd amendment side.

FOXNews.com - Obama Administration Reverses Course, Forbids Sale of 850,000 Antique Rifles

The South Korean government, in an effort to raise money for its military, wants to sell nearly a million antique M1 rifles that were used by U.S. soldiers in the Korean War to gun collectors in America.

The Obama administration approved the sale of the American-made rifles last year. But it reversed course and banned the sale in March – a decision that went largely unnoticed at the time but that is now sparking opposition from gun rights advocates.

A State Department spokesman said the administration's decision was based on concerns that the guns could fall into the wrong hands.

"The transfer of such a large number of weapons -- 87,310 M1 Garands and 770,160 M1 Carbines -- could potentially be exploited by individuals seeking firearms for illicit purposes," the spokesman told FoxNews.com.

"We are working closely with our Korean allies and the U.S. Army in exploring alternative options to dispose of these firearms."

That bull**** man, I just got my license to buy stuff like that.

It's like the retarded restrictions on Russian and Chinese weapons.
Like someone is really going to run around and commit crimes with antique M1's.

For ****s sake, what the hell do these idiots think.
 
As opposed to the millions of guns made in America each year that could potentially fall into the wrong hands?

I don't understand this.

These guns will be cheaper than domestic made new guns.
With such a large surplus, it would allow more people to own something that is usually high priced because of the collectors market.
 
"Keep your thoughts here and now where they belong" - Qui Gon Jinn

With the trouble they've had from Republicans passing every ****ing bill through congress, do you honestly think they'll risk the political fallout from a guns bill...

Obama isn't AS stupid as you think he is.

Its because he is not stupid why he try to pass little pieces of it here through incrementation, have someone sneak into various bills or wait until the 2nd of half of his next term in office where he would not have to worry about political fallout.
 
Its because he is not stupid why he try to pass little pieces of it here through incrementation, have someone sneak into various bills or wait until the 2nd of half of his next term in office where he would not have to worry about political fallout.

I suppose. But by that point there would be an even stronger Republican presence in both houses so I seriously doubt you have anything to worry about.
 
Its because he is not stupid why he try to pass little pieces of it here through incrementation, have someone sneak into various bills or wait until the 2nd of half of his next term in office where he would not have to worry about political fallout.

With this restriction, they don't have to pass a law.
It's an import ban, which can be controlled by the executive.
 
yes because garands and m1's are gangsta's 1st choice of weapons. Idiots.

I don't think they are idiots. They think that he majority of Americans idiotic enough to buy their "gangs might get their hands on them" excuse.





This should be a crime. What an asshole.
I agree
 
I suppose. But by that point there would be an even stronger Republican presence in both houses so I seriously doubt you have anything to worry about.
A stronger republican presence doesn't mean anything seeing how a republican in Massachusetts or some other liberal state is not the same as a republican in Oklahoma.
 
A stronger republican presence doesn't mean anything seeing how a republican in Massachusetts or some other liberal state is not the same as a republican in Oklahoma.

Ummmm still dude. Couple of factors here:

1. Democrats will not have filibuster proof majorities in both houses.

2. Blue Dogs.

3. There's no national mood even among liberals for gun control atm.
 
The last thimg American politicians of the totalitarian/socialist/collectivist bent want at this time is 800,000 pissed Americans with long guns.

Mexico is opposed to the idea, too.

I wonder what the Constitution has to say about the topic? Oh, yeah, the Constitution say the government can't infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Logically, that means the government can't stop the people from buying them, either, because that's how they get them to keep them.
 
Here's the fact, no anti gun law has been passed by Obama. But yes there is a conspiracy, ok sure. They want to ban all guns, right...

Obama is appointing anti-Constitution lying women with talking vaginas to the US Supreme Court, who testify that they support the individuals right to keep and bear arms, but who then vote the wrong way on the Heller Decision.

Socialists absolutely do not want private citizens, their pee-ons, to have the means to fight back.

Only governments that aren't trying to pull a fast one on the people can afford to trust those same people with the means to shoot back.
 
BTW clinton admitted that the gun ban probably cost the dems control of both houses and Gore noted that the NRA attack on him is why he lost his home state in 2000 (and thus the election) so you can argue with those two if you think you know more about issues than they do

HillaryCare cost the Dems the House, plus all the scandals surrounding the House Democrats at that time, of which I'll mention the House Check Bouncing scandal was only one. Also, to top all that off, Noot promoted the Contract With America and succeeded in making the 1994 Congressional elections a national referundum instead of 435 local races.
 
A stronger republican presence doesn't mean anything seeing how a republican in Massachusetts or some other liberal state is not the same as a republican in Oklahoma.

True enough. The facts are this:

Democrats will not do anything to fix what they've done wrong with America. They need to be replaced.

Practically speaking, there's no alternative to kicking Democrats out of office unless they're replaced by a Republican.

The Republicans had control of the House and partial control of the Senate at some times in the recent past, and they became "progressive", ie, moving away from their constituent roots and becoming corrupted by Washington.

The people elected Republicans in 1994, and then stopped paying attention, again. Americans have been doing that far too much.

So. The solution.

The Democrats get replaced by Republicans this election. Has to be done in a last gasp effort to save the tottering republic. These Republicans have to promise to restore the republic before they get votes. (Restoring the republic is what others call "getting back to the Constitution".)

The PEOPLE who are the bulwark of the republic have a job to do, and that job is to prop their eyelids up with toothpicks and WATCH what their congressthings are doing. When their congressthing starts falling off the wagon, he needs to be KICKED, not prodded, back into line, or he needs to be KICKED off the wagon and replaced.

This is why the Congress has a two-year election cycle. So the bad'uns can be pruned quickly. Under no circumstances should the electorate accept lifetime careers for their law makers.

The best way to ensure lawmakers do not become career politicians is to eliminate the perks that make being a congressthing so enticing. No pensions, no special privileges, including health coverage and travel perks, no extra pay for seniority, NOTHING that sets one elected official in the House above another simply because of length of tenure. Term limits areconstitutionally mandated for the Presidency. The Constitution should be amended to limit Congressional and Senatorial terms as well.

But THE PEOPLE have to wake up, stay awake, and make the effort to punish their representatives when they fail to uphold the Constitution.
 
HillaryCare cost the Dems the House, plus all the scandals surrounding the House Democrats at that time, of which I'll mention the House Check Bouncing scandal was only one. Also, to top all that off, Noot promoted the Contract With America and succeeded in making the 1994 Congressional elections a national referundum instead of 435 local races.

Interestingly enough, "Obamacare" is essentially what the GOP proposed during that time.
 
Back
Top Bottom