BO has temper tantrum over rejection of gun laws


#1

Well, here we have the commie-muslim-in-chief having a temper tantrum because the senate rejected his bid for more gun laws. Awwww…poor baby. And Bite-me Biden almost took out his handkerchief to blot away the tears… Where were their outrage about Gosnell’s shop of horrors??? Oh, and btw, BO, criminals don’t buy guns legally…moron…

» Obama Calls 2nd Amendment Supporters Liars, Vows to Defeat Them » News – GOPUSA


#2

Usually, if something makes a liberal commie socialist mad, it makes me happy.

This is no exception.


#3

Schadenfreude


#4

I feel his misery like a cool spring breeze ahhhhhhh


#5

A majority voted for it. It was a scant five of six that blocked it. And after reading the legislation, I found it to be reasonable. Expanding background checks at gun shows and Internet sales would help reduce the likelihood of criminals and mentally ill people from getting guns. Look at what that terrorist guy said last week, how he was encouraging jihadists to buys guns here because they’re so easy to get. Sorry, but convicted felons, the mentally ill and terrorists shouldn’t have it easy buying guns in this country.


#6

Agreed but none of these limitations would have made a dent in the illegal firearms transactions. Criminals don’t follow laws. This would have only hinder the law-abiding gun owner, made it more expensive, time consuming, AND, whether you want to believe it or not, a registry would be kept. What’s point of having a background check unless you know who has weapons and misuses weapons? And a majority Senators, not people, the majority of people LIKE the 2nd Amendment and want it to continue to exist without government interference.


#7

It’s like trying to combat ILLEGAL immigration by making LEGAL immigration more difficult.


#8

From what I have seen of those who have committed the atrocious crimes they have all shown signs of being mentally unstable. yet not a single person either reported it or try to get them admitted, except in the case of the Newtown shooting. The problem isn’t the availability of guns but our lack of responsibility for doing what is right. These individuals would have still been able to get guns even with this law in place. Senators are not attacking the problem. Just doing what they believe will get them reelected.


#9

You thought it was reasonable to ban private sales of guns?


#10

Best way to sum up their think process.


#11

[quote=“ClassicalTeacher, post:1, topic:39123”]
Well, here we have the commie-muslim-in-chief having a temper tantrum because the senate rejected his bid for more gun laws. Awwww…poor baby. And Bite-me Biden almost took out his handkerchief to blot away the tears… Where were their outrage about Gosnell’s shop of horrors??? Oh, and btw, BO, criminals don’t buy guns legally…moron…

» Obama Calls 2nd Amendment Supporters Liars, Vows to Defeat Them » News – GOPUSA
[/quote]Of course there will be exceptions for those who can have guns when Obama tries to confiscate all others.


#12

I heard a clip of his remarks. He. Was. POed. Would that Obama had displayed such passion after Fort Hood. Would that Obama had displayed such passion after Fast and Furious guns were used to kill that Border Patrol agent. Would that Obama had displayed such passion over the Benghazi attack. Would that Obama had displayed such passion over the Bostom Marathon bombing. Passion indicates priorities.


#13

If I had a booth at a gun show and I sold firearms to some jihad guy or some nutbag convicted felon who used those guns to kill a bunch of people, I can’t imagine how I’d feel.


#14

I would feel like crap but I did not sit them down the path they chose and I can chose not to do business with them. Do you think bankers felt bad after the housing bubble crashed?


#15

Convicted felons, wife beaters and sex offenders should not own guns. If I’m selling weapons, I would want a way to confirm that I’m not doing buisness with these people.


#16

#1: Your post indicates a high level of ignorance of the law, and how firearms transaction are undertaken at gun shows.

If you ran a booth, you would be a licensed gun dealer. You would do a federally required background check for every firearm purchase, and also you’d have the buyer fill out the appropriate form.

The loophole is bullshizzle. The only unregulated sales are individual to individual sales, just like if your neighbor came over to your house and liked your shotgun, and offerred to buy it.

Booth holders at shows are required to perform the background checks, just as in a gun store.


#17

[quote=“JStang, post:16, topic:39123”]
#1: Your post indicates a high level of ignorance of the law, and how firearms transaction are undertaken at gun shows.

If you ran a booth, you would be a licensed gun dealer. You would do a federally required background check for every firearm purchase, and also you’d have the buyer fill out the appropriate form.

The loophole is bullshizzle. The only unregulated sales are individual to individual sales, just like if your neighbor came over to your house and liked your shotgun, and offerred to buy it.

Booth holders at shows are required to perform the background checks, just as in a gun store.
[/quote] How long does it take to do the check? When do they get the gun?


#18

Look I’ve had it up to my eyebrows with this. Background checks won’t do squat. You think the aurora guy or the kid in newton went in and bought these weapons in a shop? They had no criminal background, no history of violence, and so this piece of legislation was a big piece of toilet paper in stopping those killings. This has nothing to do with safety. It has everything to do with chipping away at the 2nd amendment. First background checks. Than national background checks. Then govt registry. Then, the next logical step is banning certain guns. First large magazines. Than assault rifles. Than handguns. Then one day, no guns at all. This is not about safety. It’s about control. The rights of the many must be preserved even if it means the abuse of freedom. North Korea has a a VERY strict gun control law. Want to model us off of them?


#19

[quote=“FloridaLibertarian, post:18, topic:39123”]
Look I’ve had it up to my eyebrows with this. Background checks won’t do squat. You think the aurora guy or the kid in newton went in and bought these weapons in a shop? They had no criminal background, no history of violence, and so this piece of legislation was a big piece of toilet paper in stopping those killings. This has nothing to do with safety. It has everything to do with chipping away at the 2nd amendment. First background checks. Than national background checks. Then govt registry. Then, the next logical step is banning certain guns. First large magazines. Than assault rifles. Than handguns. Then one day, no guns at all. This is not about safety. It’s about control. The rights of the many must be preserved even if it means the abuse of freedom. North Korea has a a VERY strict gun control law. Want to model us off of them?
[/quote] You’re right up to a point. However let me ask you a question. Should a convicted felon be legally sold a gun? Should guy who served time for armed robbery be legally sold a gun? How about someone who has domestic violence raps on their record? Sex offenders? How about a guy who has serious drug offenses, burgulary and lives in a halfway house? At some point a line has to be drawn saying who we are and are not going to legally sell guns too. It’s like saying 15 year olds are going to get beer one way or the other so the hell with carding them, just let em have it.


#20

Roughly 15 minutes.

Depends on state law.