Ammo For Sale

« « Blackhawk | Home | What could possibly go wrong? » »

Obama and guns

Unsurprisingly, he’s pretty ignorant of them, actually. From his sportsmen issue paper:

As a long-time resident and elected official of Chicago, Barack Obama has seen the impact of fully automatic weapons in the hands of criminals. Thus, Senator Obama supports making permanent the expired federal Assault Weapon Ban. These weapons, such as AK-47s, belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets. These are also not weapons that are used by hunters and sportsmen.

Of course, the assault weapons ban had nothing to do with regulating fully automatic weapons, which have been regulated since 1934 and transfers to the public have been banned since 1986.

Via Illspirit.

17 Responses to “Obama and guns”

  1. karrde Says:

    So, if Obama does a public Q&A session (Or if they can pull off more of the YouTube-style debates like we had in the primaries…), will someone kindly ask him if he thinks the 1934 National Firearms Act has done enough to control the use of fully-automatic weapons in crime?

    And if not, why?

    I’d love to see his response to that.

    A guy can dream, I suppose.

  2. Bruce Says:

    Lies + ignorance = Fail

  3. thirdpower Says:

    The version that is available on his website states that, as a former constitutional law professor,

    Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right,”


    Can anyone see anything wrong w/ that statement?

  4. chrisb Says:

    Yeah it only affirms the right, not creates it. Moron.

  5. Ron W Says:

    “These weapons, such as AK-47s, belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.” says Obama. Many of us, like myself, have “these weapons” and they’re for self-defense and “security” purposes as the explanatory cluse of the 2nd Amendment says. But he has the full-auto weapons around him which are “on our streets”. Will his porposed ban include them…..NOT!

    And what about “the equal protection of the laws” (14th Amendment); why should gun control laws apply to “the people” and not to their public SERVANTS??

  6. Rabbit Says:

    Guess he hasn’t heard about my deer hunt when the only thing I had available to hunt with was a selective fire Uzi, and 3 rounds of 9mm Silvertips.


  7. Huck Says:

    But he has the full-auto weapons around him which are on our streets.

    But the false annoited one is truthfully seeing fully automatic weapons in the hands of criminals… the SS.

  8. UNHchabo Says:

    If he were truly committed to getting AKs off the streets, he would let us buy them so that we could securely keep them in our homes.

    And the only reason that AKs aren’t used by many hunters is that the cartridge is too weak. Many states won’t let you use anything less powerful than .30-06 for deer.

  9. Kris Says:

    [quote] And the only reason that AKs arent used by many hunters is that the cartridge is too weak. Many states wont let you use anything less powerful than .30-06 for deer. [/quote]

    Huh? 7.62x39mm has essentially the same ballistics as the .30-30…the quintessential woods deer cartridge.

    [quote] Many states wont let you use anything less powerful than .30-06 for deer. [/quote]

    Name them…

    I hate to pick at your words but if you’re going to cry foul, you ought to have your facts straight.

  10. LearnAboutGuns Says:

    I’m so tired of seeing gun control groups exploit people’s lack of understanding as to the difference between full auto and semi auto firearms…

  11. Sigivald Says:

    I gotta go with Kris on this.

    I’d thought that many states banned hunting with .223s, but a search has found none that ban even that, let alone 7.62×39.

    The most common restriction I’ve found is “must be at least .22 and centerfire”.

    The most common reason I know of that AKs aren’t used by hunters is that it can be annoying to get a 5 or 10 round magazine to comply with semi-auto hunting restrictions, and many hunters like a scope, which can be awkward and annoying on an AK – especially if you like to keep yours stock for other purposes.

    I mean, heck, I own a variety of EBRs, but if I was going deer hunting, I’d take my old Savage 99E in .300 Savage, because it’s a lot more convenient and easy to lug around.

  12. UNHchabo Says:

    I hate to pick at your words but if youre going to cry foul, you ought to have your facts straight.

    On the contrary, I appreciate the correction. I thought I’d read it somewhere, but it’s quite possible that information was wrong.

  13. Lyle Says:

    Interesting how all antis are ignorant, isn’t it? At least Obama does recognise a use for AKs “on foreign battlefields”, so that’s an improvement.

    WA State requires at least a 24 caliber (6 mm) for big game. 40 cal for muzzleloader on deer, and 50 cal for ML on “all other big game”. The .223 is absolutely not legal on anything deer-sized or larger, but it’s OK for ‘yotes and small game. Idaho’s equipment restrictions are bery similar to WA’s. AKs are fine in both states, and make a perfectly good deer rifle for any distance at which you’d use the old .30-30. Interestingly, I can’t find the usual magazine capacity restriction this year in WA state:

  14. straightarrow Says:

    Where I grew up the .30-30 was a prohibited arm for deer hunting because it was believed that too many fatally wounded deer were able to run away and die without being recovered. So Kris isn’t exactly wrong, a lot of places had caliber or power restrictions for deer sized or larger game.

    I have taken deer with an 87 grain bullet, perfect shot placement, but not a perfect choice of cartridge. .25 caliber is too small, my shot was lucky and close, and I was hungry.

    One must remember that the majority of hunting laws are created to apply to the city dweller who goes afield once or twice a year. Hence, many states required stronger calibers than absolutely necessary. A weak cartridge such as the .30-30 or 7.62×39 are fully capable of taking deer, but requires much more skill from the hunter than is required for larger calibers or higher velocities which will usually damaged the prey too much to become lost, before dying.

  15. straightarrow Says:

    I no longer hunt, but if I did, despite the fact that I own the smaller calibers in question and they are handy as Hell, I might be pesuaded to use one of my M-44 carbines. They can kill it and cook it with one shot. 😉

  16. Dan Says:

    The only true way to make a gun child-proof is by not having one at all. I guess that is the direction he wants to take us. But it is smart of him not to include what he would do to make guns ‘child-proof.”

    But since our soldiers do not us AK-47s as standard issue, what foreign fighters is he talking about?

  17. Kirk Parker Says:


    What Lyle said.

    On the matter of magazine capacity, I don’t think there ever has been a restriction here for big or small game hunting. The only restriction I could find was from Migratory Waterfowl and Upload Game regulations:

    It is unlawful to hunt game birds with a shotgun capable of holding more than three shells.

    So I guess, since .308 is a perfectly respectable cartridge for deer and elk, if you wanna haul your M-14 out there, you can. 🙂