BARACK OBAMA: THE MOST ANTI-GUN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN US HISTORY
Friday, September 19, 2008
As the presidential campaigns head into the final seven weeks, Senator Barack Obama is courting voters in key states such as Pennsylvania, Florida, Indiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia. His campaign is also focusing on such unlikely states as Montana, Nevada, and North Dakota, states that typically vote Republican.
One thing all of these states share in common is that they have high rates of gun ownership. So it's imperative that Obama do one thing to gain gun owners' votes.
Barack Obama must erase decades of radical anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment stances. He must hide them. He must keep the media from mentioning them. He must make sure that no gun owners know his true positions, because he is without question the most anti-gun candidate nominated to be president in US history.
Bill Clinton used gun control as an issue where he saw political opportunity. Al Gore had at one time been a member of the NRA, and changed his public stance on gun issues to align himself with Clinton. Barack Obama, on the other hand, has a long history of supporting extreme gun control measures, and working with groups dedicated to eliminating gun ownership in the US.
Senator Obama's campaign has desperately tried to obscure his record, but it's there for all to view.
Barack Obama was a board member of the Joyce Foundation, a left-leaning group that, among other things, gives millions of dollars annually to gun control groups. In his eight years as a board member of the Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama voted to approve nearly $2.7 million in grants to anti-gun groups. $2.5 million of those grants went to the Violence Policy Center, a radical group that advocates total gun bans.
Professor John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime," met Obama in the mid-1990's. Lott recalls Obama telling him, "I don't believe that people should be able to own guns."
In 1996, Barack Obama indicated on a questionnaire that he supported a ban on all handguns.
In the Illinois legislature in 1998, he voted for a ban on all semiautomatic firearms, a vote which would ban the majority of rifles, shotguns and handguns on the market.
While in the Illinois state legislature, Barack Obama voted for a bill to limit handgun sales to one a month.
In 2003 he voted for a bill to ban guns with a bore size greater than .50", which would have banned most shotguns and black powder rifles. Even more ominous, the bill Obama voted for would have allowed law enforcement to forcibly enter homes to confiscate the newly-banned firearms.
In 2004 he opposed a bill that would have allowed Illinois citizens to use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using handguns for self defense. This bill was a reaction to a case in which a Chicago man shot an intruder in his home, and was charged with violating Chicago's handgun ban.
Also in 2004, Barack Obama advocated banning all gun sales within five miles of a school or park. Since it's almost impossible to find a location that isn't within five miles of a school or park (unless you're in the middle of nowhere), his proposition would have effectively banned all gun sales in the country.
Again in 2004, Senator Obama called for federal legislation that would nullify the laws of 48 states that allow trained, licensed, law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons for self defense.
In 2005, Senator Obama voted for a bill authored by Senator Ted Kennedy that would ban many calibers of ammunition, including one of the most popular hunting calibers, the .30-30.
Also in 2005, Senator Obama twice voted to hold gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers and importers liable for the acts of criminals using guns.
Obama has consistently said that he supports a ban on "assault weapons," which is a loose term referring to any semiautomatic firearm that merely looks like a military firearm. An "assault weapons" ban is a ban on cosmetic features, and nothing more. More worrisome, the term "assault weapons" has now become so vague that it encompasses firearms that were not included in Clinton's 1994 ban.
When the US Supreme Court was hearing the Heller vs DC case involving Washington DC's ban on handguns, Obama supported the ban. On ABC news he flatly stated that he thought the ban was constitutional.
However, when the US Supreme Court found the ban unconstitutional, Obama flipped and said that he thought the ban was unconstitutional.
After the Supreme Court's decision in the Heller case, Obama was asked about the ban on handguns in Chicago, as that ban is nearly identical to the one in DC. Obama tried to skirt the question by saying that "what works in Chicago..."
Let us summarize: Barack Obama has helped raise millions of dollars for radical anti-gun groups; he has stated that he doesn't believe people should be allowed to own guns; he has voted to ban all handguns; he has voted to ban all semiautomatic guns; he has voted to limit gun purchases; he has voted to ban shotguns and black powder rifles; he has voted for confiscating guns by force; he opposes allowing citizens to use handguns to defend themselves in their homes; he has proposed banning all gun sales within five miles of a school or park; he has called for nullification of state laws that allow citizens to legally carry guns for self defense; he has voted to ban popular hunting ammuntion; he has voted to hold gun manufacturers liable for the actions of criminals; he supports banning guns based upon the way they look; and he has been on both sides regarding the constitutionality of Washington DC's handgun ban.
Yet this is the same Barack Obama who claims to support the Second Amendment, and the rights of gun owners (now that he's a candidate for president, of course).
Clearly, the Obama campaign has its hands full trying to downplay or completely obfuscate the senator's record. HIs campaign has said that he did not support the DC gun ban, a total ban on handguns, or any of the other bans he voted for, but his statements in the press show that his campaign is flat out lying about Obama's record on gun control.
There's an old saying in the gun community: Why should I trust a politician to control my life if he doesn't trust me to control my guns? In Obama's case, that saying should be, "Why should I trust Obama to control my life when he doesn't trust me to control my guns, and then lies to me about it?"
Even if a voter is not concerned about gun control, he or she should ask: if Obama is lying to me about his record on guns, what else is he lying about?