- Reaction score
- 5,692
- Points
- 1,060
The best gun salesman in the US has done it again. Expect increased shortages of ammo, firearms and supplies once more.
THE DAY THE CLOWN CRIED: “‘Every time I hear about those kids it makes me mad’: Obama cries for the victims of Newtown as he pushes gun control at speech surrounded by families who lost loved ones in mass shootings,” gushes the London Daily Mail, ignoring Obama’s silence on both the over 440 murders last year and disgraced crony Rahm Emmanuel’s sinking fortunes in Chicago, a city that should be entirely pacified, if overwhelming blue state gun control efforts actually worked.
But “The MacGuffinization of American Politics,” as Ace described how the media crafts its Obama narratives in late 2013 rolls on:
For Obama’s fanbois, this is not politics. This isn’t even America, not really, not anymore.
This is a movie. And Barack Obama is the Hero. And the Republicans are the Villains. And policy questions — and Obama’s myriad failures as an executive — are simply incidental. They are MacGuffins only, of no importance whatsoever, except to the extent they provide opportunities for Drama as the Hero fights in favor of them.
Watching Chris Matthews interview Obama, I was struck by just how uninterested in policy questions Matthews (and his panel) were, and how almost every question seemed to be, at heart, about Obama’s emotional response to difficulties– not about policy itself, but about Obama’s Hero’s Journey in navigating the plot of President Barack Obama: The Movie.
As with a MacGuffin in the movie, only the Hero’s emotional response to the MacGuffin matters.
Speaking of which, “Chris Matthews talking about Obama crying on ‘Hardball’ today will be must-see TV,” Allahpundit predicts. (An earlier tweet by Allah also inspired our headline above.) But then, as NewsBusters’ Geoffrey Dickens writes, the MSM has worked hard to pave the way for Obama’s anti-Second Amendment efforts.
Finally, just a reminder, here’s Obama on the stump in 2008:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMxMl32xmW4
Kilo_302 said:As far as I understand it, all the new laws will do is make background checks mandatory and require dealers to obtain federal licenses. Is this really a reason to panic and assume "Obama is after everyone's guns?"
If you pass a background check, you're good to go.
Kilo_302 said:As far as I understand it, all the new laws will do is make background checks mandatory and require dealers to obtain federal licenses. Is this really a reason to panic and assume "Obama is after everyone's guns?"
If you pass a background check, you're good to go.
Kilo_302 said:You're right, I don't understand their psyche at all. I would think background checks are a completely reasonable and appropriate measure. Any law abiding citizen has nothing to fear.
As for the American public, the majority clearly want something done with regards to further regulation. As for the minority, sales might go through the roof when he opens his mouth, but is this a rational reaction based on reality?
Rocky Mountains said:A gun owner selling a single gun may have to register as a dealer or sell through a dealer or risk being fined $25,000 should some bureaucrat determine he should have been registered. Background checks are done through registered dealers. Private sales of guns do not have federal background checks. Firearms are otherwise a state concern with a whole variety of different regulation.
Kilo_302 said:So shouldn't private sales be subject to background checks? I mean, there's more paperwork when it comes to buying a car privately.
The male gunmen in the San Bernardino shooting knew he wouldn't pass a background check so he borrowed his relatives.Rocky Mountains said:And when has a background check ever stopped someone who wants a gun from getting one? Never?
Care to cite your sources for that particular assertion? Don't get me wrong, the current political climate down south is going to the implementation of universal background checks an overall failure but I reject outright that not one person would be prevented from getting a gun.Rocky Mountains said:And when has a background check ever stopped someone who wants a gun from getting one? Never?
jpjohnsn said:Care to cite your sources for that particular assertion? Don't get me wrong, the current political climate down south is going to the implementation of universal background checks an overall failure but I reject outright that not one person would be prevented from getting a gun.
Loachman said:And stop talking about "gun deaths". That is a red herring. The means by which somebody is murdered or commits suicide is irrelevant. The best that gun laws can do is push somebody to use an alternatve method of killing him/herself or somebody else if they cannot acquire a firearm. They do not reduce overall murder or suicide rates.
And that non-benefit comes at the cost of leaving people helpless when confronted by violent criminals - those people who never have to undergo a background check.
Kilo_302 said:Given the fact that Reagan was for more gun control than Obama, it's hard to see why Obama is so demonized by gun rights advocates. This just shows how irrational the discussion has become.
Reagan was a long-time member of the National Gun and Rifle Association (NRA) who said he took a pistol in his suitcase on his first trip to the USSR in 1988.
He even maintained his support of the gun lobby after an assassination attempt in 1981 that left a bullet an inch away from his heart, and paralysed his press secretary Jim Brady.
And yet two years after he left office, Reagan spoke out strongly in favour of a proposed bill named after his friend and colleague Brady that would have required a mandatory seven-day waiting period between the sale and acquisition of guns.