How can you tell Obama is lying about wanting to ban your guns?
Ummm … his lips are moving?
That’s a silly joke, but it’s almost true.
Have you seen the latest viral video of Obama answering questions about gun control at a townhall type meeting? Check it out at the clip below:
Obama Not Only Wants To Confiscate Guns, He Admits To Surveillance of American People In The Video
There are two things I find interesting in Obama’s response:
1. He (as always) sidesteps the real question (why is gun control failing in Chicago if it is supposed to work so well) and claims that he doesn’t want to “take folk’s guns”)
2. He admits to surveillance of American people
Remember to listen for this key part when Obama responds (around 1:55):
“”I just came from a meeting, today, in the situation room, in which I’ve got people who we know have been on ISIL websites living here in the United States – US citizens. And we’re allowed to put them on the no fly list when it comes to airlines, but because of the National Rifle Association I cannot prohibit those people from buying guns!”
Doesn’t that make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
The President of the United States admitting that they are tracking what websites you visit so that they can put you on a no fly list?
(#Sarcasm or whatever the kids are saying these days)
Obama Wants Gun Control Like Great Britain & Australia (Spoiler Alert = Gun Confiscation)
Numerous times Obama has stated he wants gun control like Great Britain and Australia. To quote the president, “We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.”
“We have seatbelt laws because we know it saves lives. So the notion that gun violence is somehow different,” Obama added, “that our freedom and our Constitution prohibits any modest regulation of how we use a deadly weapon, when there are law-abiding gun owners all across the country who could hunt and protect their families and do everything they do under such regulations doesn’t make sense.”
TheHill.com tells the real story in response to such comments by Obama – That Great Britain and Australia Gun Control = Gun Confiscation:
“The so-called “common-sense” and “modest” laws in Britain and Australia Obama refers to aren’t common-sense or modest at all, but rather require extreme confiscation and bans.
In 1996, the Australian government confiscated hundreds of thousands of personally owned firearms as part of their new “common-sense” gun control laws. In 1997, British citizens were forced to turn over their handguns for destruction. The prettier and more expensive versions were confiscated and placed in museums. Is this what Obama is suggesting should happen to the estimated 300 million firearms owned by American citizens? Is that what he means by “common sense,” “modest regulation” and “changing our laws?”
Of course it is.
It should be noted that after the Britain handgun ban was implemented, crime committed with guns skyrocketed and the ban has done little to reduce overall homicide rates. The same has been shown for homicides committed with firearms in Australia after the 1996 National Agreement on Firearms.
“The Government’s latest crime figures were condemned as ‘truly terrible’ by the Tories today as it emerged that gun crime in England and Wales soared by 35% last year. Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed,” the Daily Mail reported in 2003. “Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362. It was the fourth consecutive year to see a rise and there were more than 2,200 more gun crimes last year than the previous peak in 1993. Figures showed the number of crimes involving handguns had more than doubled since the post-Dunblane massacre ban on the weapons, from 2,636 in 1997-1998 to 5,871.”
In 2009, the United Kingdom was found to be the most violent country in Europe.“
Why The “No Fly List” Is No Answer
As tons of reports have pointed out, banning everyone from buying guns on the “no fly” list is a bad idea.
ZeroHedge notes:
“Unfortunately, his idea to restrict gun ownership for people on the no-fly list is exactly the kind of thing that could lead to the tyrannical destruction of the Second Amendment. In a perfect world it would be nice if we could keep guns away from terrorists, but restricting the gun rights of people who are on the no-fly list is anything but reasonable or “common sense.”
That’s because literally anyone can find themselves on the no-fly list. You don’t have to commit a crime and you don’t need to visit any suspicious websites. They can take away your right to travel freely without any due process whatsoever. At best, all the government needs to do is hear that you might have some sympathies for a terrorist organization, and you’ll be barred from being on a plane for life.
As Techdirt.com pointed out last year, more than a third of the people on the no-fly list have no known terrorist affiliations. If Obama’s plan were ever put in place, you could lose your right to bear arms over nothing more than a hunch or a rumor.
… And let’s not forget, that our government has a very broad definition of “terrorist,” and has in the past claimed that conservatives, libertarians, veterans, and Christians should be watched closely for their supposed terrorist potential (i.e., the groups that are most likely to own firearms).”
What Do You Think?
Does Obama want to ban guns?
How dishonest is it to compare his ideas to countries “like ours” like Great Britain and Australia when he knows that they confiscated guns — so that he can later say “I never SAID take your guns”?
I think we all know the answer to that one …
How does it make you feel to know your every website visit is being monitored?