Obama and the Second Amendment
The good Senator Obama and Democratic hopeful is on record as a lawmaker who has restricted gun rights with the intent to allow only to those firearms pertaining to hunting and target shooting. Nowhere does he mention any support for handguns or semi-automatic weapons for any other purpose. In fact, the Democratic senator is involved in several organizations to disarm America. His position statement is filed under "Sportsmen" (click on link and find it in the linked PDF) and it is telling (emphasis mine):
But is that all? Even if we were to grant that types of firearms could be classified as "state approved" or "state disapproved", it makes no logical sense to suggest state approval would lesson any category of crime or make the public safer. A gun is a gun is a gun.
What the anti-gun lobby pushes for in such seemingly conciliatory words is a slow war of attrition. Win by slowly eroding the enemy's position. I suggest should the law of the land restrict ownership to hunting longarms and target pistols, the next logical step for the anti-gun lobby would be to remove even these rights as well towards the ultimate goal of zero firearms altogether. After all, how can you restrict the use of a shotgun to skeet shooting? It's the operator; not the instrument. It's a slippery slope, my friends, and the government cannot legislate intent as much as it thinks that it can.
Senator Obama's mealy mouthed "position" is a thinly guised attempt to fool some into thinking he supports the Second Amendment and thus garner their support for his election. True, all candidates will attempt to posture, but only Obama would take away our guns.
(H/T: Bob Owens at Pajamas)
Millions of hunters own and use guns each year. Millions more participate in a variety of shooting sports such as sporting clays, skeet, target, and trap shooting that may not necessarily involve hunting. As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama understands and believes in the constitutional right of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting.If we remember correctly, the Second Amendment was the right of the citizenry to bear arms for the purposes of defense, not just hunting and target shooting. Obama himself notes that he "did not grow up hunting and fishing", so his familiarity with guns may be only academic, and not practical.
But is that all? Even if we were to grant that types of firearms could be classified as "state approved" or "state disapproved", it makes no logical sense to suggest state approval would lesson any category of crime or make the public safer. A gun is a gun is a gun.
What the anti-gun lobby pushes for in such seemingly conciliatory words is a slow war of attrition. Win by slowly eroding the enemy's position. I suggest should the law of the land restrict ownership to hunting longarms and target pistols, the next logical step for the anti-gun lobby would be to remove even these rights as well towards the ultimate goal of zero firearms altogether. After all, how can you restrict the use of a shotgun to skeet shooting? It's the operator; not the instrument. It's a slippery slope, my friends, and the government cannot legislate intent as much as it thinks that it can.
Senator Obama's mealy mouthed "position" is a thinly guised attempt to fool some into thinking he supports the Second Amendment and thus garner their support for his election. True, all candidates will attempt to posture, but only Obama would take away our guns.
(H/T: Bob Owens at Pajamas)
No comments:
Post a Comment