Do you think President Obama would ban some guns if he could?

[Tim01]

I am pretty surprised at the amount of confusion over this one question. So this is just my own question for discussion.
If he had the political power, and it wouldn't hurt him much, would he ban semi-auto rifles that look like military rifles-assault rifles? And maybe some other stuff, like military calibers?

Please feel free to chime in.

[Cant trust em]

1. Aren't those already banned?

Expect a lot of responses on this question. DUers are surprisingly pro-gun.

[Tim01]

3. Semi autos are not.

Fully autos are not either, but they are horrendously expensive, and super tightly regulated.

[yay]

24. Right and wrong

Full automatic firearms are legal(in some states)and are transferable to anyone. But the amendment to the 1986 FOPA prevents the transfer of any automatic weapons made after **/**/86.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. No, semi-automatic weapons are perfectly legal.

[TheWraith]

7. Lookalike weapons aren't banned.

We're talking about semi-automatic weapons that look like military rifles but function like any regular semi-auto hunting rifle. Now there are restrictions on these in some states (including here in New York). However, since they're functionally no different from any other rifle except in styling, it's virtually impossible to ban all of them as a class. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban specifically banned a few items like bayonet lugs and flash suppressors, but most rifles could be retrofit with approved parts and still sold.

These are NOT to be confused with actual, fully-automatic military weapons. Those are regulated under the 1934 National Firearms Act, and to own one it must have been registered prior to 1986 and come with a full background check and tax stamps.

There is, of course, no ban on guns designed to use ammunition cartridges first developed for the military; such a ban would affect almost all of the most popular cartridges like 30-06, 308 Winchester, 223 Remington, .45 ACP, 7.62x39, etcetera.

[one-eyed fat man]

31. this is what he said as candidate last September

http://obama.3cdn.net/84b2062fc4a5114715_ftxamv9ot.pdf

Note especially the part about "As a long-time resident and elected official of Chicago, Barack Obama has seen the impact of fully automatic weapons in the hands of criminals. Thus, Senator Obama supports making permanent the expired federal Assault Weapon Ban."

Read that again, "FULLY AUTOMATIC WEAPONS in the hands of criminals" are a problem he proposes to solve by banning guns that are not fully automatic and not in the hands of criminals.

No matter how you wanted to parse the 2008 Democratic party platform, the gun plank is a direct lift from his stump speeches. He keeps saying, "He respects the 2nd Amendment," but sure is tough to square that with his voting record and his own website.

After all, someone who is college educated, fluent in English, a Constitutional law professor to mix up machineguns and semi-automatic assault weapons is either monumentally incompetent or deliberately deceptive, take your pick.

"I will not take your gun away" was campaign rhetoric. If he thought the political calculus would let him get away without gun owners' votes, they would be under the bus in a heartbeat.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

2. There'll be a dragnet soon.

:eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

5. He has put as much on his various websites at various times.

[NavyDavy]

6. I would hope he would ban some....that civilians don't need

[Callisto32]

15. Ah yes,

those dreaded guns that we mere civilians-to whom I will direct your attention to notice as the actual sovereign entity(-ies) of the United States-don't need. How's about we clear up that I am NOT a "civilian;" nor are you, or anybody else for that matter no matter the supposed meaning of that classist, elitist, bullshit term that our wanna-be dictators try to shove down our throats and have us accept by sheer repetition. We are sovereign entities ( with power flowing from us, to a government of by and for the people). How's about if the sovereign entities told their would-be "masters" that THEY (meaning the government) don't NEED to tell everyone what to do anymore, because?

What your neighbor "needs" is not for you or anybody else to decide or regulate. What they do with what they do or do not need is of no concern of anyone's so long as no one and no property is being harmed, and nobody's rights are being infringed upon. To think that it is in your, or anybody else's place to decide what another can or cannot do when no other person or property is actually being harmed is INDESCRIBABLY elitist.

[penster23]

38. gun ban

You are EXACTLY right. Propaganda has managed to alter societies views to make it all seem for the good of all. We are the ones to decide our own goverment and how it is chosen and how it best can meet our objectives. I wish people would research more about our goverment and all it's corruption. They WANT to regulate us, and they are managing to more and more with each new bill that takes away rights "for our own protection"

[freedom_to_think]

8. NO WAY!

Too many gun nuts in this country and it would kill the only major export of the U.S. Plus the NRA is BIG business.

[pipoman]

21. 1. Guns aren't even close to a major export by anyones standards, fail

2. The NRA is big business? No the AWB is big business, why else would so many who know better be willing to flush 15 years of recovery from the last failed attempt to lie about the same thing all over again? It is the blatant lies which are demonstrably lies known by literally millions of Americans which will cost us the House and Senate if these lies are allowed to prevail.

3. If all US gun manufacturers combined their annual sales the resulting revenue wouldn't make the Fortune 500.

[Lex]

9. oh yes, and force you to get gay-married, and replace your Bible with the Koran,

not to mention teach pre-schoolers about sex, and make abortions mandatory . . .

[Tim01]

10. So you are saying you believe he has no desire reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban. Right?

[jody]

11. YES, Obama supports "making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent."

White House, Urban Policy

[spin]

33. So all the people buying "assault weapons"...

were right all along.

Guess I'll have to consider buying one.

[penster23]

37. assualt weapons

Better start ordering them now, there's a backload. It's ridiculous to say our legally obtained guns are going to mexico. They can be traced,they are registered, involving a paperwork trail. That's what a legally obtained gun is.Why wouldn't it be coming back to the legal purchasers? Root cause in the guns and drugs passing through the border,is likely from years worth of lack of security by the US Goverment at the border and not enforcing laws that provide consequences to the illigal act of gaining entry. Illigals committing crimes her are not likely to be charged, but repeatedly sent back, with little paperwork in tracking them. They usually return. They can obtain drivers licences, work , obtain housing, all the while making it impossible to determine what's the true unemployment rate. They receive full benefits at times, and manage to have taken over large numbers of blue collar workers jobs, at lesst where I live. They actually number of people in the workforce,due to illegal workers, comes down to a much lower unemployment rate. The legal workers are the ones that are increasingly unemployed.
The goverment is looking for a way to blame illigally obtained guns by criminals as a way to take away our constitutional rights to own firearms. Do you think the crimes are comitted mainly by legally obtained,registered firearms? No, but's exactly who will suffer. This should never be considered or allowed,and if our goverment decides to take this right away, well, I think they are seriously underestimating the American people and the strength in numbers. The day they manage to confiscate, and take our guns, is when we have surrendered all our rights to our goverment, and can no longer be considered a democracy.

[spin]

39. I agree with your post and welcome to DU. (n/t)

[NutmegYankee]

12. What do you consider a "Military" caliber?

The .45, 9mm, .223, .308, and .30-06 are all used in civilian firearms across the country but were once linked to military use. The 9mm, originally designed for the German Luger (of WWI and II Fame), is the most common handgun round out their today. The .45 is well known from the Colt 1911s that were once the US Army pistol of choice. The .308 and .30-06 are popular hunting rounds, as is the .223. The .223 is commonly used in AR-15s, but actually is slightly different from the 5.56x45mm NATO that the M16 and M4 use.

Please go into more detail on just what you propose be banned?

[Tim01]

13. No, that isn't the point of my post.

The question is do you think he would ban some calibers which HE thinks should be banned?

[Callisto32]

16. I think you need to go re-read the Constiution.

What HE thinks doesn't really matter, since any such action (which would likely be stopped on the 2nd's doorstep in the wake of Heller) would have to originate in the legislature. We pissed and moaned about the unitary executive under Bush, and we ought to continue. Power concentrated in one man, ANY man, is dangerous.

[yagotme]

40. Military Ammo

You forgot a few. .45-70. .45 Colt. Musket caps. Percussion caps. .30-30 (Yes, some Winchesters were issued out for "home guard" duty during WWII). .45 Schofield. .38 spl. .38 S&W. .38 long colt. .30-40 Krag. Probably squeeze .44-40 in, too. .300 Min Mag. .50 BMG. Just off the top of my head. Might have missed a few more. Oh. .22 rimfire.

[Lint Head]

14. Obama is going to ban death and Rush Limpballs and have Ted Nugent.

drawn and quartered.

[biermeister]

17. yes

[Hangingon]

18. He'd ban if he could.

[Pullo]

19. Some?

[raimius]

20. Of course

He has stated his desire for a new AWB on multiple occasions, and had it included in the whitehouse.gov description of urban policy.

...then, take a look at his voting record. He is a product of the Chicago political system, and all of their rediculous gun-control ideas (some of which would be unconstitutional...if only the 2nd Amendment applied to all governments in the US).

[C......N......C]

22. I thin he would stay away from gun bans.

[rq4a]

23. Biden - ban. Clinton - ban. Obama voting record - ?

I can't believe that there actually delusional people who don't believe Obama will not ban guns if it was his choice. Common, his voting records speaks for itself.

[gorfle]

25. It is in his official published policy. Why wouldn't he?

Do you think President Obama would ban some guns if he could?

It has been part of his official policy since before he was elected. It was on www.change.gov and now it is under www.whitehouse.gov under urban policy. He clearly favors an assault weapon ban, and I'm quite certain he would and will do it as soon as he thinks he can get away with it. The only thing holding them at bay are the financial crisis and possibly the fear of voter backlash.

[Tim01]

26. Response 1 and 9 are what I was expectiong

and those are what I got before the mods moved this thread to the guns forum.
Until fairly recently even many gun guys were hopeful Obama was no threat to the second amendment. But he has made his agenda quite clear.
Non-gun guys however, have mostly only heard that President Obama said he would not take our guns. And "who needs a machine gun to hunt anyway".
It looks like the gun guys are now well educated and not in the mood to be mislead. We'll see if our numbers are great enough. I'm already hearing rumblings about the mid term elections.

[HALO141]

27. Absolutely.

Your question contained the qualifiers "if he could" and "if it didn't hurt him too much." His record and his own words indicate that he would ban all firearms if it was up to him.

[jmg257]

28. Yes. He says he wants to, so why would he be lying? Not sure

about singling out certain calibers though. Probably depends on how effective he thinks his ban on the guns that use them would be. He isn't stupid, so I would think he would try to make a new ban somewhat (more) effective.

[Xela]

29. Sad to say. Yes, he would.

notxt.

[aikoaiko]

30. Yes, given his roots in the Joyce Foundation and stated position (Urban Policy paper).

I think the huge run on guns post-election was a powerful demonstration of how this issue motivates people. When people start spending hundreds and thousands of dollars on the fear of certain guns and accessories being banned or made more expensive through taxes, a politician has to wonder what would happen them in the polls if they actually banned or increased taxes on those items.

[Iktomiwicasa]

32. If he could get away with it politically...

...I think he'd have gun laws much like Great Britain's. Snowball's chance of that happening here.

[spin]

34. And the attempt to ban firearms will result in 20 years of Republican

control of Congress and the Presidency.

[Iktomiwicasa]

35. True that...

...but I'm not sure the dopes in Washington fully realize that.

[Tim01]

36. I think some 2nd amendment democrats are already furious.

And based on some other policies, it looks like the mid term elections could get ugly.