Obama Lies About Guns

Kurt got a response from Barack Obama’s Senate Office about guns:

On the other hand, I support the re-imposition of the ban on the sale of assault weapons that expired in September 2004 because I believe these guns are used primarily for criminal rather than sporting intent.

Again, Obama does not understanding what the Second Amendment is about, and he’s even dead wrong on the sporting intent.  I am about to go out and embarrass myself by attempting to shoot my evil “assault weapon” in the gun blogger summer rifle match.

Lest one of the Brady lurkers thinks this match was concocted out of thin air by myself need only check out this video by Robert of the Texas State Rifle Association’s Highpower Championship to see that’s its also common in sanctioned matches, and has been for years.  If either The Brady Campaign or the Obama Campaign want to explain how these firearms lack “sporting intent,” I’m all ears.

7 Responses to “Obama Lies About Guns”

  1. In fact, I would be willing to wager my evil, .50 caliber “assault pistol” that the AR-15 platform is used vastly more often in sporting events like those you describe than in criminal acts–so much for Obama’s “I believe these guns are used primarily for criminal rather than sporting intent.”

  2. AntiCitizenOne says:

    Something tells me that it really isn’t Obama saying it, it’s just a scripted prompt, he says the exact same wording over and over again without giving it much thought or any real backup.

  3. B Smith says:

    I am still waiting for someone to tell me why it’s not a “sporting use” if I want to go out on the back 40 and shoot tin cans with my AK-47.
    I’m also waiting for this pack of asses to explain WHY they believe those EBRs are ‘primarily used for criminal intent’, when law-enforcement data tell us the exact opposite, year after year.
    Good thing I’m not holding my breath while I wait.

  4. AughtSix says:

    B Smith… because the HR 1022 (the AWB renewal/expansion) says suitability for sporting purposes doesn’t imply that it’s suitable for sporting purposes. Discussing the role of the Attorney General in determining if a military-derived semi-auto is “not particularly suitable for sporting purposes,” the bill states “a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.”

  5. Sporting use is semantically and constitutionally useless.

    I do not care what Barack Obama or anyone else wants or doesn’t want, or thinks he does or doesn’t have the votes to accomplish. My answer in every instance is the answer Andrew Jackson gave to John Marshall:

    “He has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.”


  6. Chuck B. says:

    If HR1022 ever got passed into law, does this mean that I’ll have to surrender my semi-automatic Ruger 10/22 rifle to gun grabbers like Barack Obama and Joe Biden?

    I mean after all, my semi-automatic Ruger 10/22 rifle is such a fearsome and formidable “assault gun”, isn’t it? Since my semi-automatic Ruger 10/22 rifle also has a Butler Creek folding pistol-grip stock on it, and there are some after-market and “high-capacity” magazines for it in its storage case, it’s even more fearsome and formidable than it would be normally. This is simply because these accessories that I have for my semi-automatic Ruger 10/22 rifle would enable me to “spray shoot” it from my hip, right? Additionally, the .22 LR round that it is chambered for just gives it so much menacing firepower, you know.

    Sometimes, I lie awake at night, wondering why rifles like my customized and semi-automatic Ruger 10/22 rifle have not yet been issued to our troops in theater, so that they can better fight the war on terror with them. Instead of pondering this question so much and losing sleep, I guess for now, I’ll just have to keep plinking empty cans and plastic jugs with my semi-automatic Ruger 10/22 rifle at my gun club on Saturday afternoons instead.

  7. Advance! says:

    Sporting purposes. A more laughable term has never been coined. The heart of the matter is control. The Democrats, in their desire for total and abject control and obedience, don’t want the people to have suitable weaponry to enforce the rules Democrats can’t get around. I own assault weapons. While I don’t put alot of concern in worrying about what out-of-touch nitwits half a country away want me to have permission to do, I do not commit crimes. I don’t hold up convenience stores with my AKs, nor have I ever driven by anyone’s house and sprayed it with fire from my AR-15. That’s not what these weapons are for. These weapons’ sole purpose are a last resort to defend my and my family’s lives and freedom from government-sponsored criminals, fully equipped and financed jack-booted thugs attempting to violate the Constitution and deny me the rights it guarantees. THAT is why they want to ban them. Molon Labe.