Palin says Obama would ban guns if he could

Source: AP

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin warned NRA members Friday that President Barack Obama wants to gut the Second Amendment and told a separate gathering that "mama grizzlies" will help Republicans win this November, sweeping away the Democratic agenda.

Palin, a potential 2012 presidential candidate, told National Rifle Association members during their annual meeting that the only thing stopping Obama and his Democratic allies from trying to ban guns is political backlash.

"Don't doubt for a minute that, if they thought they could get away with it, they would ban guns and ban ammunition and gut the Second Amendment," said Palin, a lifelong NRA member who once had a baby shower at a local gun range in Alaska. "It's the job of all of us at the NRA and its allies to stop them in their tracks."

Gun enthusiasts have trumpeted fears that their rights would erode under a Democrat-led White House and Congress, but President Barack Obama has largely been silent on issues such as reviving an assault weapons ban or strengthening background checks at gun shows. Obama also signed a law allowing people to carry loaded guns in national parks.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jYg3yUuVGNAfWGdVNY0lBU2607_wD9FMUTV00

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"They" are coming!

To find out for themselves.

who will believe anything they are told with no proof what so ever...so she just keeps spewing out the republican bullshit just so she can pick up her pay checks....what fucking proof does she have, absolutely zero, none, zilch, because it's simply not true. The republicans said the same thing about Clinton, that he too wanted to take their guns...the republicans use these lying fear tactics because they work with the gullible...Palin just keeps making up the bullshit up because it sells easily with the ignorant uninformed racist

Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe."
--U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein Associated Press 11/18/93

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out right ban,
picking up every one of them... "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,
"I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."
--U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV's "60 Minutes," 2/5/95


There really are Dems out there that are dumb enough to keep trying to push this agenda no matter how many elections it costs us

It just struck me that the stuff you are saying Palin does is pretty much what the anti-RKBA folks do.

That expanded the rights of gun owners.

I read it on our Guns forum, it MUST be true!

:rofl:

Wasn't a gun law it was a credit card reform act W/ a rider on it to allow guns in National parks.

Obama has voted FOR every gun restriction that ever crossed his desk.

hasn't seen an anti hun law he hasn't liked yet, he favors a permanent ban on so called assault weapons, a national ban on concealed carry and if he could, I have no, zero, zilch, doubt that he would ban handguns if he could get away with it.

It was not an expansion, it was a "leveling" of the playing field.

How plausible do you think it is that Obama would have put his John Hancock to a bill that only concerned bringing National Park regs into line with the law of the state in which the park is located, without being attached to a piece of legislation that he really wanted?

But she's a republicon teabagger, and they just spout BS

not

Liars

Facts Please. If not then that makes you the liar

They exaggerate to defeat the lesser of two candidates when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms and far too often that has meant Democrats have been targeted. By and large, there is a kernel of truth in what they say.

And if a Democrat is the better candidate on 2nd Amendment civil rights, then they endorse the Democrat.

Their priority is electing Republicans

They've given at least 2 Democratic governors an "A" rating.

The NRA is apolitical and supports those who support 2A. If that means they endorse more Republicans, what does that tell you about the Democrats and 2A?

:sarcasm:

why does the NRA support Harry Reid?

Obama is anti-gun. Do you really expect a pro-gun organization to campaign for an anti-gun candidate?

You're right that the NRA endorses the better candidate on the issue which is their mission.

They will happily support a Democrat if that Democrat will support guns.

knows why it exists, and acts only in the direction of their stated goals.

While I don't agree with their goals, strong advocacy, and clarity of purpose is something we should require from those who would represent us.

Imagine healthcare reform pushed with NRA enthusiasm. Can you imagine the head of the NRA saying "freedom to own guns would be the best choice, but political realities makes us not even want to discuss that, let's start with renting guns at approved firing ranges four years from now?"

Our side doesn't really try, because we still reelect them when they don't.

blow them away in 2010. The NRA is determined to take aim at President Obama and make him the target of all it's members.

The NRA and Timothy McVeigh. The brotherhood of domestic terrorists.

of the Governors of New Mexico, Oklahoma and Harry Reid, huh. Those 3 pesky Republicans.

Please post it here so we can know what they're really up to.

whether it be R or D. Sadly, too many Democrats don't defend the 2nd Amendment well.

I am a member of the NRA, and I carefully examine their list of endorsements come election time.

During my last major election, both of my major Democratic candidates had A scores from the NRA.

The NRA seems partisan because, sadly, far more Republicans than Democrats actively support the right to keep and bear arms. But I guarantee you they support anyone with a record of supporting the second amendment.

I'm perfectly willing to believe that Obama, and certain prominent Democrats in Congress would indeed place severe restrictions on private gun ownership "if they thought they could get away with it." Thing is, certainly Obama and Pelosi have indubitably accepted that that can't get away with it. The mass panic buy of semi-auto rifles and ammunition last year made it abundantly clear that any attempt to restrict gun rights would result in a repeat of the 1994 mid-terms, only more so.

In short, the pro-RKBA camp doesn't need to mobilize to meet the threat, because the threat has already acknowledged the counter-threat and backed down. The Lautenbergs, Schumers and McCarthys may continue to pursue their agenda, but getting the rest of the Dems in Congress on-side is fairly unlikely.

Simply because you don't like her and I don't care for her doesn't mean what she says isn't true. My nature says to listen to what people have to say and judge for myself whether or not their statements are true, even in the face of pressure to do otherwise. In this SPECIFIC case, based on track record, I fail to see where the statements are false.

I believe if there were no political backlash to be suffered, draconian gun laws would have already been, or would be, enacted. Fortunately, a large segment of the population would take notice and the price would be paid at the polls.

Sometimes a severe dislike for the messenger causes the message, true or not, to be ignored.

Sometimes a severe dislike for the messenger causes the message, true or not, to be ignored.

That goes for anyone, R or D.

simply because SHE said it? Would you still say it was bullsh*t if a Dem had said it?

Find a group of people that are headed somewhere and get out in front of them.

Find a group of people that are headed somewhere and get out in front of them and make them think it was all your idea.

I bet she eats boogers too.

the mouth speaks.

or his mind is made up w/regard to gun "control". (most likely both, actually) Disclosure: I donated close to the max to President Obama's campaign, and a few hundred dollars to the DNC.

Our administration doesn't seem to have a clue about how even talking about working with the U.N. on firearms related issues f*cks us politically --- as they are woefully unaware of the level of distrust that RKBA folks feel toward the U.N. Here's Dave Kopel's take on President Obama's overtures re. CIFTA:

"At the OAS meeting in April 2009, President Obama said that he would send CIFTA to the U.S. Senate and urge ratification. The White House claimed that the convention was merely an expression of international goodwill, and that it had been negotiated with the participation of the National Rifle Association. Both statements were false."

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Mags/oas-treaty.htm

As I've mentioned before, around the time the CIFTA story was circulating quite a few guys at the range where I shoot were talking about it. Whether the pro-"control" folks can deal with it or not, this is going to cost us.

A great big pile of red meat for the pro-control folks, and an equally large pile of political damage. (for Dems)

;)

There really isn't any debate about his position or what he wants. He just hasn't acted on it.