Constitutional Law, Courts, Justice, Media, Politics

Second Amendment Boogey Man

Respectfully Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger

 

When it comes to the Second Amendment and guns, it seems that President Obama can’t make anyone happy.  Ever since Obama announced his candidacy for the Presidency, the NRA has screamed that Obama will be taking away the guns. This scare tactic continued when Obama defeated John McCain for the Presidency.  Just what has Barack Obama done to make the NRA and gun owners frightened for their guns?  The simple answer to this question is nothing. The head of the National Rifle Association, Mr. Wayne LaPierre actually admitted recently that Obama has done nothing to attack gun owner’s rights to bear arms, but claims Obama’s inaction against guns is actually a conspiracy to take away guns!!  ‘ “[The Obama campaign] will say gun owners — they’ll say they left them alone,” LaPierre told an audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) Friday.  “In public, he’ll remind us that he’s put off calls from his party to renew the Clinton [assault weapons] ban, he hasn’t pushed for new gun control laws… The president will offer the Second Amendment lip service and hit the campaign trail saying he’s actually been good for the Second Amendment.”  “But it’s a big fat stinking lie!” the NRA leader exclaimed. “It’s all part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and destroy the Second Amendment in our country.” ‘  Raw Story

Now, before anyone thinks I am making this stuff up, the linked site includes a video clip wherein Mr. LaPierre verbalizes this alleged reverse conspiracy.  Mr. LaPierre makes a point of throwing in the necessary names of alleged liberal co-conspirators to rev up his base.  ‘ “Sotomayor, Kagan, Fast & Furious, the United Nations, executive orders. Those are the facts we face today… President Obama and his cohorts, yeah, they’re going to deny their conspiracy to fool gun owners.  Some in the liberal media, they are already probably blogging about it. But we don’t care because the lying, conniving Obama crowd can kiss our Constitution!” ‘

The lying, conniving Obama crowd as Mr. LaPierre labels them has not done anything to harm the Second Amendment rights that the NRA claims to be at risk.  I was interested in the last few words of LaPierre’s quotation above.  The phrase “kiss our Constitution” appears to lay claim that the NRA and its followers own the Constitution and its protections.  I could have sworn that my law school Constitutional professors taught me that the Constitution protects all citizens, but maybe I heard them wrong.  But, I digress.

As the Raw Story article suggests, President Obama has actually taken heat from his own supporters over his alleged conspiracy to not take away the guns.  NPR  Does Mr. LaPierre provide any evidence of this bizarre claim?  None that I could find.  Maybe you will have better luck than me in finding evidence of presidential actions to hide President Obama’s intentions and/or actions of stealing legal guns from their owners.

I have to admit that if you read the comments section of the NPR article that details how the Left is disappointed with Obama’s inaction on gun control, you will read almost nothing except gun owners claiming that Obama’s words of inaction are actually code words that the End is Near and the Sky is Falling for gun owners!  Just what will it take gun owners to ask Mr. LaPierre for evidence of his wild claims?  I, for one would love to hear his answer to that question. I understand that candidate and President Obama may have stayed away from the 2nd Amendment issues for political reasons, but where is the evidence of this alleged conspiracy?  I would think Fox News would be sending Bill O’Reilly’s reporters all over the country to uncover such a heinous conspiracy.

If Mr. Obama has not written any executive orders or supported additional legislative steps to control or take away guns since he has become President, just what is the basis for these wild claims?  I realize that the NRA has a financial interest in getting gun owners scared into buying more guns, but are there other, underlying reasons why the gun owners are frightened so easily, when the facts do not support the NRA’s claims?

Respectfully submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)- Guest Blogger

Additional sources:  Gun Owners of America; NRA-ILA; Pajamas Media;

 

 

798 thoughts on “Second Amendment Boogey Man”

  3. Ranger fan here, but I don’t watch baseball much until the play-offs. Dallas Mavericks and Mark Cuban are my favorites and of course the Texas Longhorns. See the movie “Moneyball”.

  6. I am sorry…

    Tampa Bay at Texas 5:07 PM TBS Shields vs Wilson

    Detroit at NY Yankees 8:37 PM TBS Verlander vs Sabathia

    Now I do have a quandary..Tiger or Rangers….But, then I resolve it by….going with my favorite….The Tigers……

  7. AY,

    Don’t get the impression I dislike Tampa because I said I’m no fan. I dislike the Yankees. I’m indifferent to Tampa.

  9. Elaine,

    So sorry about your Sox.

    This in no way changes that the Yankees suck.

    Better luck next year.

  10. Personally, I’d like to see evidence where anyone here coerced or threatened you with violence, Bron.

    And simply losing arguments, being the butt of a joke, or having your opinion challenged doesn’t count as either coercion or threat.

  11. Bron said:

    Slarti:

    I got news for you, I dont believe in free enterprise to the point of violating some one’s right to privacy

    Which I didn’t do – all I revealed is what author names were siblings – there’s no right to sock puppets in the Constitution…

    or to the point of violating ethical standards.

    Something else I didn’t do – people are data mining websites all the time – it’s perfectly legal and acceptable. Some websites will kick you out if they catch you scraping, but they can’t stop you from using the data you gathered (unless you violate fair use on copyrighted material – which I certainly didn’t).

    There are 2 aspects to human liberty, they are economic and political freedom. You cannot have one without the other.

    Yet you are supporting anon who wishes to violate my economic freedom by depriving me of my own work product… You’re on really thin ice here (given your known positions).

    Personal privacy is a part of political freedom. A violation of some one’s privacy is a pretty serious offense in my opinion.

    Who’s privacy was violated? Again – there is no right to not have your sock puppets identified.

    But I understand why you did it and I also agree with anon that just because something can be done doesnt mean you should do it.

    First off, you don’t understand why I did it – you and anon and NL all have made very wrong assumptions about my motives. I wouldn’t base your analysis of my behavior on those assumptions. Second, I didn’t do this on a whim – I’ve got a long email chain of discussion about the ethics of what I was doing. None of your or anon’s arguments that what I did was unethical hold water and a group of people that I respect all agreed with me that it was ethical at the time.

    I also agree with anon [who is about my age] that there is a real problem in this country with ethics.

    Yup – it goes along with Lazeiz faire capitalism. Ethics have no value in the free market – the only reason not to break the law is the prospect of getting caught, that it is unethical isn’t a consideration to the free market.

    Now I may have backslid a bit here [and you know why] but you and others did what you did to try and stifle dissenting opinion.

    Again, completely wrong. We didn’t stifle anyone’s opinion and would have completely ignored you if you had stuck to posting under “Byron”. Our beef wasn’t with dissenters, it was with bad actors. There IS a difference.

    You may think I am a troll but my views are shared by very many people who have concern for our country and people.

    I don’t think you’re a troll – I think you avoid engaging (which wasn’t always true – for example, we were starting a really good discussion when the thread got hijacked by 9/11 truthers…) and you have a tendency towards straw men… (and you’re really wrong about a bunch of stuff)

    The harvesting of email addresses isnt that big a deal,

    Nor is it relevant since I didn’t harvest anyone’s email address.

    as Gene H said there isnt much expectation of privacy on the web, but the reason you did it is rather disturbing.

    What do you think my reason was? So far, no one here has come up with the correct one…

    Honestly, did you think about what you were doing?

    As I said – yes. There were discussions about what I was trying to do (before the fact). Since it is something that many companies do every day, why are they not unethical? Do you think that I’m the only one that’s ever mined Professor Turley’s site?

    Did it occur to you and others that you were engaging in force to stifle dissent?

    We neither stifled dissent nor did we use force in any way, so, no, it didn’t.

    To me that is the unconscionable part, that a person who classifies himself as a liberal would resort to force to discourage others from voicing their opinion.

    No one was singled out on the basis of their opinion – people were singled out on the basis of what we considered bad actions. What we did was refer to them by their other screen names. How did calling you “Byron” when you were posting as “Roco” discourage you from voicing your opinion? How is that the use of force? Because that’s all we did.

    And then to defend the indefensible instead of just admitting a mistake.

    You should know that I admit mistakes when I make them, I stand by my actions here – I did nothing wrong.

    I would expect Buddha is Laughing to stifle dissent through force but not you.

    My dictionary says that force is: “coercion or compulsion, esp. with the use or threat of violence : they ruled by law and not by force.” Please provide a link showing me coercing someone, compelling someone, threatening someone, or taking violent action against someone. If you can’t (and I know you can’t) then you should probably shut up about how I used force.

    Anyway, thanks for posting as “Bron” – at the very least, I appreciate it… Now can you try to cut down on the straw men?

  12. I was taking a break from being a busy critter and thought I say, “Hi, Max!”

    You should drop by more often. 😀

    I hope you and Mike have a wonderful holiday with the family.

  14. So then you have all those new developments on the west side of 127… Plus ll rd…. There is the 7/11 meeting place…My daughter wants to go to the university of HI… Think that won’t happen….she’s taking accelerated high school and college courses…. However that works…

  16. El az in EL is better that the one on Saginaw…..there is or was an El Palmento on saginaw across from the old gm plant… Yeah Cedar Fest…good times…

    When I first moved there I bought Sally Rogers old home by grossbeck golf course…nice times…

    You going back to ll rd?

  17. AY,

    The REAL El Az was in the basement on the first block of MAC (between Grand River and Albert). And whatever pathetic remnants remain aren’t Cedarfest either – if there aren’t bonfires in the street in Cedar Village… (and if you can control it without tear gas…)

  18. Slarti,

    El az….It finally dawned on me…the roof top lounge…..The only issue I see the Peoples Republic of EL…..Then again….Ceder Fest will never be the same….Damn that Judge…that blocked the part tays….

  19. OS, I am so sorry for your loss. You just can’t catch a break lately and it sucks beyond words. You are in my thoughts.

  20. Mike’s (moderately pissed off wife )
    1, September 28, 2011 at 4:57 pm
    @ anon now that is cute. Thanks for the comic relief. It was needed today. Nice humor site.

    Someone is always wrong on the Internet.

    ——-

    How true. But fear not, many on this blawg are making it our mission in life to point that out, thread by thread, poster by poster, day by day.

    Not me, no, never ever me 🙂

    Nice to see you again Maxine, stick around or drop in if you get the time.

Comments are closed.