Friday, June 15, 2007

Senator Obama's Position on Gun Ownership Rights

Given the recent activity in Congress, it seemed an good time to ask Senator Barack Obama, the leading "unknown" Democratic presidential candidate, his position on 2nd Amendment rights. So I sent him an email on the subject yesterday. Posted here is his reply.

I recommend you write him on this issue.

Obama's response on the 2nd Amdendment:

"Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting me about gun laws and the Second Amendment. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue. Americans broadly agree that guns must be kept from those who may pose a threat, and that the rights of legitimate hunters and sportsmen should be protected.

We must work to ensure that guns do not fall into the hands of criminals or the mentally ill through an effective background check system. We also have to strike a reasonable balance between public safety and sportsmen's rights.

I will continue to work for effective gun laws, including reinstatement of the assault weapons ban that the last Congress allowed to expire, and effective law enforcement. I will also speak out against the culture of violence that traps so many of our young people.

Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama"

[end of letter]

Well. If you think the 2nd Amendment is about the right to bear sporting goods, I guess you just found your candidate.
-Z.

18 comments:

Orygunner said...

Thanks for bringing this up, and it's nice to see some life on this blog again.

Obama is clearly a radical gun prohibitionist. His letter reflects this, but his previous public statements make it even more obvious. For those interested in the truth about Obama's views of the 2A, see the following links:

Gun Law News

Chicago Tribune story about his position on guns during Senate run (may require registration)

'On the Issues' page about Obama's view of gun rights

According to 'On the Issues,' Obama is on record as supporting a ban on "the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons." BAN ALL SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPONS!

These excerpts from the Chicago Tribune story summarize his utter contempt for the Second Amendment:

But Obama said the end of the ["Assault Weapons"] ban--which means the gun industry will resume making and selling 19 types of military-style semiautomatic weapons--means America's streets will be more dangerous. Such weapons have accounted for a "disproportionate share of police fatalities," he said.

"I believe we need to renew--not roll back--this common sense gun law," Obama said....

Obama, meanwhile, proposes several gun-control laws, including restricting purchases of weapons and ammunition at gun shows, establishing a national database that would capture and record imprints left by bullets, and making gun locks mandatory.

On the issue of prohibiting citizens from carrying concealed weapons, Obama said he believes national legislation should be passed to "prevent other states' laws [allowing citizens to conceal their guns] from threatening the safety of Illinois residents."

Still, Obama said concealed weapons should be allowed for retired police officers and some military personnel. Obama, a state senator from Hyde Park, voted in favor of such legislation in March and, while the measure did not become law, his vote helped him to secure the endorsement of the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police....

Obama, however, said that while he supports allowing hunters and sportsmen to own rifles, shotguns and other firearms, "ordinary citizens should not be allowed to own military assault weapons, such as AK-47s and Uzis."

Obama was harshly critical of the National Rifle Association, the nation's largest interest group opposing gun-control legislation.

He said the NRA helped kill the assault-weapons ban, even though most law-enforcement officials favored the law.

"I have been willing to stand up to the gun lobby in Springfield and would continue to do so in Washington whenever its agenda diverges from the best interests of our communities and law-enforcement officials," Obama said.

Zak J. said...

Wow. "Ban all semiautomatic weapons." That's pretty out there all right.

I wish statements like "military-style semiautomatic weapons...have accounted for a "disproportionate share of police fatalities" were challenged at the time they were made. Nobody goes around with an AK-47 stuffed in their pants! What silliness.

Thanks, orygunner.

harrisonf64 said...

"But Obama said the end of the ["Assault Weapons"] ban--which means the gun industry will resume making and selling 19 types of military-style semiautomatic weapons--means America's streets will be more dangerous. Such weapons have accounted for a "disproportionate share of police fatalities," he said."

Actually, the majority of police fatalities are caused by traffic accidents, not weapons. Don't believe the myths.

Anonymous said...

My favorite sport is Football... I brought very nice sporting goods from Dick's Sporting Goods store through CouponAlbum site...

Michael said...

I can't believe you quote the man, then imply he said something else. He said "disproportionate share" -- not "majority of" police fatalities.

I'm sorry, but you guys from the sticks have no idea what life is like in the inner city. Guns are available, inexpensive and untracable and are used to commit crimes and end lives every single day. I think the big issue people from cities have is the level of population density. In Wyoming, or even eastern North Carolina where I grew up, there isn't much chance to take out innocent bystanders with stray gunfire. Once you live in the city, and day after day you see children die, it gets really hard to support unfettered access to guns as proscribed on the 2nd amendment.

Anyway, if you're a "gun nut" Obama clearly isn't your candidate. However, be heartened. He will not attempt to ram gun control down your throats without a fair hearing. Personally, I don't think that someone owning an AK-47 has anything to do with a "well-regulated militia." I believe his positition is to limit posession only within local (i.e. urban) jurisdictions. If that's unacceptable to you, by all means vote for someone else.

Anonymous said...

I did - This Nader-voting progressive just voted for Ron Paul..Sadly there was no other candidate I could vote without supporting someone who would revoke my right to protect my family. Try stopping a two-person attack without a semi-automatic. ("Wait at the threshold while I work the bolt action on my pistol..")

Anonymous said...

Last I checked it was illegal to own a fully automatic Ak-47 or Uzzi without permission from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the signature of the chief of police or county sherrif, and written permission must be received from ATF any time it is moved across state lines. No machine gun made after 1986 is legal and the ones made prior to 86 are consequently insanely expensive.

Please, by all means, show us that the weapons used in inner city crimes are often legally owned machine guns. If they aren't, then what's the use in banning legally owned, and very expensive, personal property?

The fact of the matter is that the so-called assault weapons ban did nothing to ban true machine guns and did nothing to lower crime. All it did was make life harder on legal assault weapon owners by raising the prices of pre-ban items.

Obama and his kind have no qualms about infringing on people's rights and taking away legally owned personal property by banning "all semi-automatic weapons" as long as it buys them the votes they need to get into positions of power.

Anonymous said...

What a lot of people (like Obama) fail to understand is that the "Assault Weapons Ban" absolutely did NOT BAN any actual weapon whatsoever, and gun manufacturers NEVER stopped making them. All the AWB did was temporarily ban flash suppressors, bayonet lugs, collapsible, and folding stocks on guns made after that date. Semi-automatic, military styled weapons were still made and available, they just made a few minor cosmetic changes and sold them anyway. What that proves is that the AWB did nothing to reduce the (nearly non-existent)acts of crime and violence committed with a $1500 3 foot long, 7.5lb semi-auto instead of a 7 inch long, 21oz $50 Jennings pistol.

Anonymous said...

And lets not forget, it's not necessarily in the public good for law enforcement to have overwhelmingly more access to highly lethal arms than anyone else, than it is for them to have significantly less. I know it sounds unimaginable, but suppose some radical left-wing nutjob were to become President, and joined with a liberal Congress to suddenly give the government authority over everything. Suppose our rights to liberty and other basic human freedoms were being unbearably infringed upon, and suppose we as a people finally decided that we had to resist. Do we really want to leave ourselves no chance to defend our freedoms?

Anonymous said...

Simple issue. Criminals will always have access to guns. He's only hurting the good people who aren't the perpetrators of crime and enabling the perpetrators to continue hurting others. Not only that but the 2nd amendment was instilled to protect us, the people, against our own country, should we have a wacko like obama, to protect ourselves against the threat of being overrun by our own government. Look at what happened with Mayor Nagin after Katrina. PERFECT example. Terrifying!

Anonymous said...

"I know it sounds unimaginable, but suppose some radical left-wing nutjob were to become President, and joined with a liberal Congress to suddenly give the government authority over everything."

I think it far more likely that it will be some radical right-wing nutjob become President and join with a uber right-wing Congress and suddenly clamp down on the population.

That said, I think if guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. And the last 8 years makes me very frightened of this prospect. If you really think that those who are willing to trample over the rest of the Bill of Rights will leave the 2nd Amendment alone once they have complete power...

I believe we can apply enough pressure on the Democrats to block or greatly soften any attempts at gun control laws. We always have. And they are more likely to protect wilderness, leaving us a last refuge in case the unimaginable does happen.

Jerry said...

Refreshing to see sighns of life from the kind of more conservative minded Democrats who respect the 2nd amendment that I grew up around. There is a lot of unrest in Texas over the thought of Obama taking the helm of this country with the likes of Pelosi and her anti gun minions in charge of the congress. I have hope and pray that if the worst happens that there are enough liberty loving members of the Democratic party to blunt the inevitable radical attack on the constitution. On the other hand a lot of folks out here in flyover country are buying and stashing large amounts of ammo.
Many see a possibility of the socialist antics of the extreme far left driving this country to civil war.. God help us all if they are correct..

God bless you folks and keep your powder dry.

Anonymous said...

I believe you are all crazy rednecks. talking about civil war and socialism. You all have been perpetrated by this fear paradigm that the Bush administration has instilled in most Americans over the past 8 years. Your the same people who believe God will save us all, and that the terrorists who attacked the WTC were from Iraq. You believe in drilling and likely drive gas guzzling trucks, SUVs or Hummers.
Having the sense, not the ammo, to stand up for you and yours, and your country, comes from a place of love and patriotism. NOT fear of your government, the terrorists, etc. If we operate from a place of intelligence and negotiation, which I believe is what this country was based on, then there should be no problem w/ you all owning your own guns for sport and protection.
Yes, there are scary things going on out there. But the scariest is that some rednecks in good ole TX are out stocking up on ammunition instead of becoming informed citizens and voicing their concerns through our beloved and judicious political system.
Ron Paul? Indeed. Having a stockpile and fall-out shelter? Ludicrous.
This is not the wild, wild west, boys. Wake up and read a book or something!
~A Southern Belle

Anonymous said...

yes, because sense, love, and patriotism will do much to protect me against someone breaking into my rural home with a can of gasoline and the intent of lighting my family and i on fire while we arfe still alive... and beleive me... it happens

Anonymous said...

really... if you live down in the south with all the drug runners, your sure gonna want some protection. They just found 12 or so headless bodies by the border in AZ, granted they themselves were drug runners. There's a drug war going down right now and i sure as hell wont want to be near when it happens, but you cant really decide to be in it or not, it's all around you. So wouldn't any of you want a weapon?

Anonymous said...

No, this isn't the Wild West, this is the beginning of the Obama era. I expect to see change of: values, beliefs, our way of life and more. Inner city or rural, things will be different. If gun control is tightened it will probably be just as effective as drug control (we have that under control, right?)...Boy Scouts Motto, "Be Prepared". mia

Anonymous said...

Wait until Obama pushes for laws that make the victimized homeowner a criminal. What? thats right Obama wants to make it a felony if your house is broken into and the thief gets your gun! Because You did'nt lock up your gun good enough! So please when my house is broken into, I hope that the city jail is kind enough to allow me to make a claim with my insurance company from my jailcell! I doubt the cops will find the burglars because they will be processing the homeowners. Obama if you are reading this, Please show us a government that uses common sense to govern its citizens, that would be a change.

Anonymous said...

I think people often forget to address the main issue. Taking any kind of firearm out of the hands of the people is the equivalent of putting a band aid on a severed limb. People are killing each other not because guns are available, but because of all the social problems plaguing the middle and lower class. The choice to take a life isn't made by an inanimate object.