Obama: Gun Control Is 'One Thing' I Still Want to Do

[mystery-ak]

http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx/?nodeid=701186


Newsmax
Obama: Gun Control Is 'One Thing' I Still Want to Do
Sunday, November 8, 2015 05:54 PM

By: Greg Richter

In an email sent out over the weekend by the Democratic Party, President Barack Obama urges followers to join him in the effort to enact stricter gun laws.

"We have not gone more than eight days without a mass shooting in this country this year," Obama begins in the email.

"That means that each week, more families are grieving, more communities are being pieced back together. As a nation, we're holding everyone affected by these heartbreaking events in our prayers."

But, he adds, prayers aren't enough. The email links to a Democrats.org webpage where recipients can add their name to a petition to support the cause.


Obama says there have been more than 300 mass shootings in the United States so far in 2015, killing nearly 400 and injuring 1,000.

"We can't sweep this problem under the rug, or allow ourselves to become numb to it, or accept that there's nothing we can do because 'stuff happens,'" a reference to a statement by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush after the October Oregon community college shootings.

"Let me be clear about this: Unless we do something – change our politics and change our laws – these painful tragedies will continue," Obama says.

He does not lay out a specific strategy.


Obama says the issue is not about the Second Amendment, but about "commonsense reform measures" the American people want.

Despite his previous attempts at executive actions, Obama says, "I cannot change this by myself.

"I need members of Congress, state legislatures, and governors who will work with me," he says. "And I need people like you to stand up and say that enough is enough."

The president cites such Democratic gains as Obamacare, same-sex marriage and climate change.

"But this is one thing we haven't been able to do," he said. "We have not reformed our gun laws to help reduce the unnecessary deaths we see in this country every single day."

Latest: Assess Your Heart Attack Risk in Minutes Online. Start Here.
But it is not too late, he said, "by making sure we urge future leaders to act where we have been stalled."

[libertybele]

Not good at all.  I'm sure that he will try to accomplish what he wants to do by Executive Order. He states that this has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.  It has EVERYTHING tot do with the 2nd Amendment. This is the last step to dismantling our country.  The 2nd Amendment is all we have left keep us from total government and U.N. control.

Meanwhile; DEMS in states like Wisconsin are pushing for confiscation.

http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2015/11/06/dem-gun-ban-require-confiscation-ban-pistols

[mountaineer]

Just look at history, e.g., 1930s Germany.  Free speech and private ownership of firearms are the first to go. Obama and his handlers really, really do not like the First and Second Amendments.

[GourmetDan]

Just look at history, e.g., 1930s Germany.  Free speech and private ownership of firearms are the first to go. Obama and his handlers really, really do not like the First and Second Amendments.

"Millions more people have been killed by governments with guns than by individuals with guns."

That needs to be repeated constantly...

[andy58-in-nh]

"Millions more people have been killed by governments with guns than by individuals with guns."

That needs to be repeated constantly...

Historically speaking, all tyrannies have depended upon a monopoly on the use of force, exercised so as to restrict or prohibit speech, property rights and the right of self-defense. Silencing dissent and disarming dissenters are always among the first steps taken, though they are inevitably followed by worse actions.

And yet, no government ever succeeds in becoming an autocracy without the support of at least a significant portion of the population.

[libertybele]

Historically speaking, all tyrannies have depended upon a monopoly on the use of force, exercised so as to restrict or prohibit speech, property rights and the right of self-defense. Silencing dissent and disarming dissenters are always among the first steps taken, though they are inevitably followed by worse actions.

And yet, no government ever succeeds in becoming an autocracy without the support of at least a significant portion of the population.

[/b]

Yet another reason to fight against amnesty and all the 85,000 annual refugees that have been planned.

[240B]

It is very obvious that Obama's idea of gun "control" is gun "confiscation".

The most important part of Obama's agenda seems to be, to stir up hate and resentment towards police and then announce his confiscation edict.

This will lead to either national social chaos if the already resented and hated police attempt to carry it out, or an outside force possibly from the U.N. will be brought in to do it.

My opinion is that either or both of these scenarios would be pleasing to Obama. I have no doubt that Obama will stir up as much chaos and civil unrest as possible before the election.

The important question is, if Obama hates and disdains police as much as he obviously does, then who does he have in mind to carry out his commands when he begins his final assault on the country of America? Possibly the military? Who does he think is going to obey his orders?

That is the question that brothers me the most.

[GourmetDan]

And yet, no government ever succeeds in becoming an autocracy without the support of at least a significant portion of the population.

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."    Abraham Lincoln

This is why I said it needs to be repeated constantly...

"Millions more people have been killed by governments with guns than by individuals with guns."

That needs to be repeated constantly...

[libertybele]

It is very obvious that Obama's idea of gun "control" is gun "confiscation".

The most important part of Obama's agenda seems to be, to stir up hate and resentment towards police and then announce his confiscation edict.

This will lead to either national social chaos if the already resented and hated police attempt to carry it out, or an outside force possibly from the U.N. will be brought in to do it.

My opinion is that either or both of these scenarios would be pleasing to Obama. I have no doubt that Obama will stir up as much chaos and civil unrest as possible before the election.

The important question is, if Obama hates and disdains police as much as he obviously does, then who does he have in mind to carry out his commands when he begins his final assault on the country of America? Possibly the military? Who does he think is going to obey his orders?

That is the question that brothers me the most.

Rumor has had it for quite sometime that he will rely on U.N. troops.  It is no secret that Obama has negotiated "deals" (though we probably don't really know how many) without the consent of Congress first. For almost a decade now it has also been rumored that U.N. troops are already stationed within our borders and occupy those military bases that were supposedly closed during the Bush administration ready to "assist" when our government collapses. IMHO the only thread that is holding this country together right now is the fact that we are the most armed nation in the world.

[flowers]

It is very obvious that Obama's idea of gun "control" is gun "confiscation".

The most important part of Obama's agenda seems to be, to stir up hate and resentment towards police and then announce his confiscation edict.

This will lead to either national social chaos if the already resented and hated police attempt to carry it out, or an outside force possibly from the U.N. will be brought in to do it.

My opinion is that either or both of these scenarios would be pleasing to Obama. I have no doubt that Obama will stir up as much chaos and civil unrest as possible before the election.

The important question is, if Obama hates and disdains police as much as he obviously does, then who does he have in mind to carry out his commands when he begins his final assault on the country of America? Possibly the military? Who does he think is going to obey his orders?

That is the question that brothers me the most.

Who does he think is going to obey his orders?

I wonder as well. He will have neutered  the military and police by the time he wants this done.He will also have taken the internet too before the 2016 election.  What about his own gov employees who are now armed? EPA, IRS etc. Also he wanted a larger than military force in usa. What about him arming his new sharia types and undocumented democrats? Will he arm all the BLM's types after he federalizes the police? So they could fight White Privilege types?  all that gun running for Fast n Furious and Benghazi. Buying up all that amo. Where are they storing that? If they give arms to isis and sharia and mexican drug cartels, they will have no problem arming all his new dem voter base and all the other anti-American types too.

[libertybele]

Some videos and thoughts.  During his original campaign in 2008 Obama has been quoted as stating that he needs a "civilian" national security force.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pUqprkCHqs


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyfkQkchlu4      *** UNITED NATION gun grab


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jozOvt0M9Bc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQhdXUuFbDE


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRK2dKUQDR

[Scottftlc]

Who does he think is going to obey his orders?

That is the question that bothers me the most.

This question would give me a sense of security, except that Obama has NEVER had an order disobeyed.  A lot of military leaders have resigned...a lot of things have happened.  Yet his orders are ALWAYS obeyed by those charged with carrying them out.  What makes you think this would be an exception?

[mountaineer]

This question would give me a sense of security, except that Obama has NEVER had an order disobeyed.  A lot of military leaders have resigned...a lot of things have happened.  Yet his orders are ALWAYS obeyed by those charged with carrying them out.  What makes you think this would be an exception?

Exactly. A lot of people believe our soldiers never would obey an order to fire on American citizens, but I'm not so sure. Maybe some officers would object, but the average enlisted man and woman is a young person who's already been thoroughly indoctrinated by the public school system that government knows best.

[flowers]

This question would give me a sense of security, except that Obama has NEVER had an order disobeyed.  A lot of military leaders have resigned...a lot of things have happened.  Yet his orders are ALWAYS obeyed by those charged with carrying them out.  What makes you think this would be an exception?

yep

[PzLdr]

The "'one thing' I still want to do" is be in a position to moon Barry and the Wookie on their way out of town after the next Inauguration.

[libertybele]

...then there is Jade Helm ... oh, wait ... that's nothing but a conspiracy theory.

[libertybele]

Exactly. A lot of people believe our soldiers never would obey an order to fire on American citizens, but I'm not so sure. Maybe some officers would object, but the average enlisted man and woman is a young person who's already been thoroughly indoctrinated by the public school system that government knows best.

Something else to consider:

..."These law enforcement branches Obama has created are not comprised of just one or two security guards. Obama has armed these agencies to the teeth. Maj. General Jerry Curry, a 40 year, decorated, military veteran, wrote an op-ed for The Daily Caller pointing out how, in addition to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations’ purchase of 46,000 hollow point bullets, the Social Security Administration (SSA) bought 174,000 hollow point bullets.

In reaction to these purchases, Maj. Gen. Curry said, “Hollow point bullets are so lethal that the Geneva Convention does not allow their use on the battlefield in time of war. Hollow point bullets don’t just stop or hurt people, they penetrate the body, spread out, fragment and cause maximum damage to the body’s organs. Death often follows. Potentially each hollow nose bullet represents a dead American. If so, why would the U.S. government want the SSA to kill 174,000 of our citizens, even during a time of civil unrest? Or is the purpose to kill 174,000 of the nation’s military and replace them with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) special security forces, forces loyal to the Administration, not to the Constitution?”

Read more at http://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/ben-carson-might-obama-cancel-the-2016-election-28523/#yrj4YW8ZXDVrT5HQ.99

[mountaineer]

Even the EPA is armed to the teeth. Good grief. 

[240B]

Well, when I was In I saw some of these reserve bureaucrats show up for training. Most of them had pot bellies and couldn't run a hundred yards. You could give these guys the best weapons on Earth and they still couldn't shoot their own foot, even with a sighted scope.

As for arming the Blacks, Muzzies, and Mexicans, the problem there is that each of these groups has their own individual agendas, and they will kill anyone at all, including each other and even Obama himself, as many of these have already said they want to do. America would become another Syria, and Obama would become another version of Assad.

Arming the militant ethnic wackos would be mass chaos for everyone, including and most especially Obama and the government.

Even the UN troops are chain smoking child raping pieces of crap, and are not much of a real threat.

I don't know what he has planned, but it would not surprise me at all if he invited in Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, Taliban, al Qaeda, and the PLO to fight with him. I am fighting this idea, but it does seem to be the most logical path to his caliphate goal. He has already done as much already. He has gone to lengths to tell them of his respect for them, and that he honors them, and to beg their approval and acceptance of him as being 'on their sides'.

I don't know what he has planned, and that is what worries me.

[libertybele]

Well, I hate to be redundant here, but his goals started back when he was in the Senate and drafted his Global Poverty Act which in essence gave the U.N. control over our country.  Nothing has changed.  His agenda hasn't changed.  He is out to destroy this country and dismantle the Constitution.  I'm not so sure how you do not see U.N. troops as no concern considering a vast majority of our troops are over in the middle east.  Also, he is arming federal agencies. If you take example of the incident in AK that recently happened; In September of 2013, 70 federal agents in full body armor, carrying M-16s raided one person’s gold mining operation in a tiny Alaska town. They were from the Environmental Protection Agency looking for violations of the Clean Air Act.

That is 70 federal agents wearing full body armor, carrying M-16'a raided ONE person's operation ... that's 70:1.  I don't care how well you are armed as an individual 70:1 odds are nearly impossible....even if you're RAMBO himself.

[sinkspur]

Not good at all.  I'm sure that he will try to accomplish what he wants to do by Executive Order. He states that this has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.  It has EVERYTHING tot do with the 2nd Amendment. This is the last step to dismantling our country.  The 2nd Amendment is all we have left keep us from total government and U.N. control.

Meanwhile; DEMS in states like Wisconsin are pushing for confiscation.

http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2015/11/06/dem-gun-ban-require-confiscation-ban-pistols

Wisconsin Democrats should look at Connecticut and New York to see that gun owners WILL NOT TURN IN THEIR GUNS and there's not a  damned thing the politicians can do about it.

[sinkspur]

This question would give me a sense of security, except that Obama has NEVER had an order disobeyed.  A lot of military leaders have resigned...a lot of things have happened.  Yet his orders are ALWAYS obeyed by those charged with carrying them out.  What makes you think this would be an exception?

Who would confiscate the guns?  He'd demand that the local cops do it. Posse comitatus prevents him from using the military for such a purpose.

And the local cops WON'T DO IT!!!

[sinkspur]

This is nothing but fundraising talk.  Everybody needs to calm down.

Remember, there are 300 MILLION GUNS in this country and more of us than there are of him and his followers.

[240B]

That was exactly my point all along. Yes, who would do it?

UN troops are famous for dropping their weapons running away any time they hear gunfire. This is well known and has been documented countless times.

Furthermore, if 70 fat old EPA guys showed up at one guy's place, then there ate two facts to that.

First, they were scared shitless about the mission.
Second, they were all there to get it in their record for promotion purposes. They wanted to play Rambo for a day.

If he would have fired one shot, they would have collectively crapped themselves and would have run away as fast as they could waddle.

We know Obama is a thug. He has bragged about being a thug.  We know that government agencies are thugs. They brag about it too.

But that only works when there is a calm law abiding society. In chaos things would happen much differently.

[libertybele]

Who would do it?  Federal agents wearing full body armor, carrying M-16's.