President Elect Obama thinks that gun owners are as stupid as the voters who elected him based on a one word slogan.  They’re not.  Gun owners know what’s coming, and if Obama was a true supporter of the 2nd Amendment, he wouldn’t have found it necessary to make an almost frantic plea for people to stop buying weapons before he can ban them.

From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Obama: Don’t stock up on guns

As gun sales shoot up around the country, President-elect Barack Obama said Sunday that gun-owning Americans do not need to rush out and stock up before he is sworn in next month.

“I believe in common-sense gun safety laws, and I believe in the second amendment,” Obama said at a news conference. “Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven’t indicated anything different during the transition. I think people can take me at my word.”

But National Rifle Association spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said it’s not Obama’s words — but his legislative track record — that has gun-buyers flocking to the stores.

Barack Obama has a bullet proof voting record when it comes to guns.  He doesn’t want you to have them.  Obama hasn’t shown a great respect for the Constitution, and the 2nd Amendment is no exception.  If he truly believes that Americans have a right to bear arms, then why does he try and violate that right every chance he gets?  Does Obama try and curtail anything else laid out by the Bill of Rights?

• Obama feels cities and states can constrain the right to bear arms through local laws
• Obama endorsed the Illinois handgun ban
• Obama supported the D.C. gun ban, deeming it constitutional
• Obama wants to register and license all gun owners
• Obama opposes consealed carry, with they exception of retired police officers
• Obama wants to keep guns out of inner cities, where lawful citizens need them most
• Obama supports renewing the assault weapons ban
• Obama supports a ban of semi-automatic weapons
• Obama wants to require manufacturers to provide child safety locks with firearms
• Obama supports lawsuits against manufacturers, dealers or importers of guns or ammunition, seeking damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others  (from OnTheIssues)

You may not like the 2nd Amendment, Mr. Obama, but don’t forget the 10th:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Translation:  When the Bill of Rights says “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,” state governments are not allowed to infringe on or curtail the peoples right to own and carry guns in any way, beyond the punishment for crimes committed with them.

And remember the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers were quite clear:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Mr. Obama, is there any part of our Constitution that you don’t want to ignore?

From Scott Wieser via Big Head Press:

So would the knowledge that any number of civilians might be carrying concealed guns and be trained to shoot deter potential attackers?

John R. Lott at FOX Forum seems to think so:

————————-

The Life-and-Death Cost of Gun Control

Banning guns is in the news. India practically bans guns, but that didn’t stop the horrific Muslim terrorist attacks this last week.

Given that the terrorists smuggled their machine guns in with them, would anyone argue that India’s extremely strict gun licensing and artificially high prices for guns helped prevent the terrorist attacks? In fact, the reverse is more likely the case.

In India, victims watched as armed police cowered and didn’t fire back at the terrorists. A photographer at the scene described his frustration: “There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything. At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, ‘Shoot them, they’re sitting ducks!’ but they just didn’t shoot back.”

Meanwhile, according to the hotel company’s chairman, P.R.S. Oberoi, security at “the hotel had metal detectors, but none of its security personnel carried weapons because of the difficulties in obtaining gun permits from the Indian government.”

India has extremely strict gun control laws, but who did it succeed in disarming?

The terrorist attack showed how difficult it is to disarm serious terrorists. Strict licensing rules meant that it was the victims who obeyed the regulations, not the terrorists.

[...]

Read the Rest at ScottThong

From the OCRegister:

Hundreds of letters have been sent out advising current permit holders of impending revocation.

The Sheriff’s Department has begun the process of revoking hundreds of concealed weapon permits across Orange County.

This week, department officials confirmed that 146 letters have been sent out advising current license holders that their permits to carry firearms in public – called CCWs – are being revoked. There are currently 1,024 permit holders.

“The Department has determined that your identified risk does not meet the good cause threshold as required under the new CCW policy based upon the information you provided. As a result of this determination, the Department’s present intention is to revoke your CCW license,” reads the form letter sent out this month.

The letter, sent out under the signature of Captain Dave Nighswonger, advises current holders that if they feel that additional information should be considered they have roughly one month to provide additional good cause information for the department to consider before the revocation becomes final.

This week, county supervisors grilled Sheriff Sandra Hutchens during her 120-day update on the reorganization of the agency about the status of the concealed weapons review.

Hutchens acknowledged to supervisors that she had indeed tightened requirements for the permits but highlighted the fact that no current license had yet been revoked.

But it seems unlikely that those who are getting the letters won’t be revoked.

“Most of them are not coming back with the information we need,” said Nighswonger. “A lot of them are arguing the second amendment (to the U.S. Constitution),” he said.

I contacted the Ornage County Sheriff’s Dept. today, and asked for the number of CCW holders had been involved in a gun crimes in recent years.  The Sheriff’s Office informed me they did not keep those records.  I asked if they could provide me the number of CCWs that had been revoked in recent years, thinking this would be a good indication of CCW breaking the law.  The Sheriff’s Office did not have those record onhand, but offered to look them up for me, if I submitted a request.

I decided not to wait.  Revoked CCWs would not indicate gun crimes only.  One can loose a CCW for DUI, a restraining order, drug or alcohol rehabilitation, or after being declared mentally ill.

However, with a Sheriff preparing to take away law abiding citizens’ right to carry weapons, you would think they would have some stats for the following questions:

• How many gun crimes were committed by CCW holders in recent years
• How many crimes have been prevented by CCW holders in recent years
• How many citizens have been victims of violent crimes, who owned guns, but could not carry them
• How many citizens have witnessed violent crimes, who did not have CCWs, but did own firearms at home

A disarmed population of responsible, law abiding citizens is not a safer one.  This sheriff should surrender her weapon, if she dislikes guns so much.  However, do not create a senario where the only armed people are criminals and a few police officers.  It doesn’t work.

The Republican whores are already lining up to kiss Obama’s ring.  And he hasn’t even taken office.  Names below….

From The Arsenal:

What:

H.R. 6257: Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008

To reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act.

Who:

Sponsor:
Rep. Mark Kirk [R-IL]

Cosponsors [as of 2008-11-07]
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL]
Rep. Michael Ferguson [R-NJ]
Rep. Christopher Shays [R-CT]
Rep. Michael Castle [R-DE]

Did I mention that I hate R.I.N.O.s?   (hat tip Jawa)

(CNSNews.com) – President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team is showing its hostility toward lawful firearm owners by “weeding out” job applicants who own firearms themselves, a Second Amendment group says.

The Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) notes that question 59 – part of a 63-item questionnaire given to Obama administration job applicants – asks for information about firearms owned by the applicant and his or her family.

Found in the questionnaire’s “Miscellaneous” section, question 59 reads, “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”

[...]

Although it’s not clear that gun ownership would disqualify a job applicant, ISRA says question 59 shows the Obama team’s “distaste” for firearm owners. [...]

And…

Obama’s Assault Weapons Ban : Back from the Memory Hole

Originally, the scary-looking gun ban (aka the “assault weapons” ban) was listed as an agenda item on Obama’s CHANGE.GOV website.
(hat tip Jawa)

2nd Amendment fans should be prepared.  They will be coming for our guns.  The recent jump in gun sales is not an economic downturn.  Those of us that exercise our right to bear arms, aren’t fooled by rhetoric, and are a lot smarter than the Democrats think we are.

This is Fantastic. [pic]  From Moonbattery:

This from Chicago Boyz:

Most people who are not firearm enthusiasts are surprised when I mention that the city of New Orleans enacted a campaign of illegally seizing privately owned firearms in the aftermath of Katrina.

Think about that for a moment. With the looting, the breakdown of order, and the sheer overwhelming job that the police and authorities faced when it came to providing aid to those who needed it, disarming law abiding citizens who needed their guns to protect their homes and loved ones was still deemed top priority.

It was conducted like a military campaign. National Guard troops were under orders to break into homes to find guns, and they were ready to shoot any who resisted.

Sounds like some paranoid right wing conspiracy novel, doesn’t it? But all you have to do is watch this video to hear them freely admit it. Note the images of innocent home owners, flex cuffed and lined up by the side of the road like they were terrorists.

One of the most egregious example of police overstepping their authority was caught on video.

Do you think that cop needed to tackle an old woman, in her own kitchen? God only knows what they would have done to her if the cameras weren’t rolling, considering how she is such a terror and all.

This was all three years ago. Why am I bringing up this ancient history?

Because New Orleans has finally agreed to return the guns they seized illegally. It seems that the city has been extremely reluctant to return the private property of the residents, even requiring a sales receipt. Considering that it takes more than a century for regularly maintained firearms to wear out, and many firearms are family heirlooms passed from one generation to the next, this is a ridiculous burden that was enacted by the city to avoid obeying the law.

I have been following this since it happened.
Never before, have I heard of such a mass violation of a population’s rights. And never has there been a time that the population so desperately needed to exercise those rights, during the immediate aftermath of Katrina, and in the lawless period that followed.

I just hope the government has enough money to bailout New Orleans when the class action suit ends. I hope every gun owner in New Orleans sues the city, state and anyone else they can.

I wonder how many gun owners were robbed, raped, assaulted or murdered, in N.O., while the state left them defenseless????