Let’s have a look at the pattern of behavior regarding our 2nd Amendment presented by the Obama administration for a moment.
We know these things are happening, that they are consistent and that the list of them continues to grow but, sometimes, until we see it in writing, the overall danger of the pattern is dismissed.
It shouldn’t be.
To fully understand the Obama concept of our 2nd Amendment, one needs to go back to the beginning.
In this case, the beginning is when Obama was a “professor” at the university of Chicago teaching, of all things, Constitutional Law to young and impressionable, government school indoctrinated youth.
That is where economist, then a professor himself and now author, John R. Lott Jr. met Barack Hussein Obama.
In his book, “At the Brink” in the 3rd chapter, Lott tells of when he and Obama had a discussion regarding guns and the 2nd Amendment.
What, according to Lott, Obama said was stunning and important to his current stance on guns.
Said Obama…
”I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”
Quite the statement from a “professor” of Constitutional Law, isn’t it?
Apparently, he meant it because, in 1996, Barack Hussein Obama supported a ban on handguns.
”I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”
In 1998, Barack Hussein Obama supported a ban on the sale of all semi-automatic guns.
”I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”
In 2004, Barack Hussein Obama supported the banning of all gun sales within 5 miles of any school or park in Chicago which, when one looked at the locations of gun stores, would have shut down better than 90 percent of them.
”I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”
The 2nd Amendment is crystal clear: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” And yet, the constitutional law professor from the University of Chicago was saying: ”I don’t believe people sho
uld be able to own guns.”
And thus begins the pattern but, this pattern has 2 distinct and opposing parts.
While Barack Hussein Obama does not believe that you or I, as American citizens, protected by the 2nd Amendment, should be able to own guns, he DOES believe that OTHERS…SHOULD.
Barack Hussein Obama provided thousands of guns, high powered weapons to…The Mexican drug cartels.
Fast and Furious “walked” thousands of the weapons Barack Hussein Obama says you and I should not be able to own across our southern border and into the most dangerous of hands. Those weapons have been used to murder HUNDREDS of Mexican citizens and our own border agent, Brian Terry.
Did Obama call for an international conversation on guns regarding Fast and Furious?
Did Barack Hussein Obama say, if he had a son, his son would look like Brian Terry or any one of the hundreds killed in Mexico?
Did Barack Hussein Obama demand gun running control or sign 25 executive orders when congress turned him away related to Fast and Furious?
No.
He signed it away, buried his involvement in Fast and Furious with executive privilege.
Barack Hussein Obama believes that murderous Mexican drug cartel thugs SHOULD be able to own guns but…YOU should NOT be able to own guns.
Barack Hussein Obama gave weapons…Guns, rocket launchers, and RPG’s to the “rebels in Libya.
Those “rebels” were al Qaeda or, by another name in that region, Ansar al-Sharia.
Our enemies in a time of war.
THEY used those guns to rid Libya of Mommar Gaddafi and when that was done, 1 year ago, Ansar al-Sharia turned those guns on our own people in Benghazi.
Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith
, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were murdered and dozens others were wounded.
No calls for “conversations.” No calls for controlling guns given to our enemies. No demand for action by congress and no executive orders when congress refused to act.
Instead, Barack Hussein Obama has been, for a full year, trying his best to cover up the attacks and bury the truth by stonewalling congress and calling the pursuit of the truth, a “phony scandal.”
Barack Hussein Obama believes al Qaeda should be able to own guns but, YOU and I should NOT be able to own guns.
In Afghanistan, Barack Hussein Obama provided guns to the Taliban and instructed OUR people there to TRAIN the Taliban in how to provide security.
The Taliban was given bullets and their weapons were loaded. OUR personnel were required to carry UNLOADED or NO weapons as a sign of TRUST in the Taliban.
The Taliban used those guns to kill our people there because…Barack Hussein Obama believed the TALIBAN should be able to own loaded weapons but, he believed OUR people there should NOT have loaded weapons.
In Egypt, Barack Hussein Obama provided the Muslim Brotherhood with F-16’s and tanks.
Once the Muslim Brotherhood was overthrown, Barack Hussein Obama suspended that program.
Why?
Because Barack Hussein Obama believed the Muslim Brotherhood should be able to own such weapons but, the military, opposed to sharia law and another dictatorship bent on erasing the decade’s old peace accord with Israel…SHOULD NOT be able to own such weapons.
Now…In Syria…Barack Hussein Obama has been arming Syrian Rebels…Al Qaeda and al-Nusra with guns and weapons and, furthermore, Barack Hussein Obama wants to launch missiles at Syria’s and Assad’s military.
to whom, exactly, in Syria is Barack Hussein Obama giving guns? Who does he trust in Syria?
Barack Hussein trust THIS guy. Be careful, this is GRAPHIC and is NOT for the eyes of children.
Barack Hussein Obama believe that this “rebel,” this terrorist…A man who would cut open the chest of another, cut out his heart and liver and…EAT THEM, is more deserving of a gun than YOU are and what’s more…DESERVING OF THE FULL FORCE OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY because, Obama claims, the side of the dead man in the above video…committed atrocities.
See the pattern?
Do you now understand exactly who Obama believes is more deserving of your 2nd Amendment rights than YOU are?
Let’s return to where we began.
Our 2nd Amendment, the one to which Barack Hussein Obama is so opposed that he has now signed 25 executive orders, subverting congress, to weaken and/or eliminate, was established for the right of the people, AMERICAN CITIZENS, to protect their lives, their homes, their properties and, perhaps most importantly, their liberties against an oppressive government and, Barack Hussein Obama says, ”I don’t believe people should be able to own guns,” while, on a global scale, he continues to provide weapons to the worst humanity has to offer.
Here’s the really frightening part of it all.
In Libya, in Egypt, In Syria, in Afghanistan…Oppressive dictators, not representing the people of their nations, have been or are in the process of being overthrown by the weapons…GUNS…provided them by Barack Hussein Obama and, in every case, replaced by those even more oppressive and, in Mexico, the drug lords are using the Barack Hussein Obama provided weapons to wreak havoc on innocent people and legitimate law enforcement.
And he has done all of this without demanding registration of those weapons or background checks or limitations on the numbers of bullets or size of ammo magazines.
In our country, in this great nation, it is not terrorists or drug lords Barack Hussein Obama has to worry about.
It is God fearing, constitution loving advocates of liberty who stand FOR our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms that are his and his ilk’s greatest concern.
THAT is to whom Barack Hussein Obama referred when he said…
”I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”
If only the Tea Party were the terrorists the liberals and socialists make us out to be…
If only we were bitterly clinging to the Koran…
We wouldn’t have to fight to protect our 2nd Amendment rights from the regime of Barack Hussein Obama…
He would be handing out free OBAMA GUNS like they were free Obama phones.
You are right, thank you. This issue has made my blood boil and passing it along for others for a bit of enlightening. Well done!
I would like to ask Obama how he feels about celebrities who have armed bodyguards and if they should have the right to own guns. I guarantee you he would sat ‘yes’ simply because he is an elitist and sees celebrities and their ilk as being more in need of protection than the average citizen. In other words, the life of a famous person who lives behind 10 foot walls and has security cameras posted throughout their property is more valuable than someone who lives in a high-crime area and only wants to protect his family, property and himself.
this dumb butt we have as a president is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood this is one reason he is standing up for them. He Must Go
CALIPATE – It’s the one’s with beards, long hair, unbathed, Islam vs. World. The Muslim Brotherhood has started with blacks amd Coptic Christians. WE THE PEOPLES time in near. OFF with the infidel’s HEAD!
Why WAIT another second. Practice daily drawing mohammed on a page from a koran and use the page to light your Cuban CIGAR.
A note to Derrick: I don’t believe that our Constitutional Rights CAN LEGALLY be restricted by any level of government without a change, an amendment to the Constitution. To do so is nothing short of a criminal act. We are a nation of laws. Our Constitution and the Bill of Rights are a statement of our most fundamental laws. To pass laws that violate our Constitution rights is, uh, let me think………oh yeah! UNCONSTITUTIONAL and, therefor, ILLEGAL! Those whom we entrust to represent us in Washington have failed miserably to uphold their solemn oaths to protect and defend the Constitution over and over again. They should be held accountable to the letter of the law! As to the rest of your statement, Derrick, I couldn’t be more in agreement.
This is precaching to the choir! No libtards or democraps will read this website; only true Americans and patriots will come here… How many of Obamma’s minions will read this? We need to get this information published on the main press… maybe freedom of information should include something about mainstream media giving equal space to articles like this… If a baker can be forced to bake wedding cakes for lesbian couples, because the bakery provides a public service, then newspapers, who also provide a public (dis)information service should be made responsible for reflecting all aspects of a situation, politician, policies, etc.!? Sounds reasonable no?!
John and Mary,
Rest assured…I irritate the hell out of liberals every day.
Craig.
It has reached the point where I fully support the violent overthrow of this administration, to be replaced with a new, original Constitution-following government.
I think that if he takes our right to bear arms away then there will be a revolution and the government will lose
The person who should not have a gun is the bum.
My feeling is that Constitutional Rights shouldn’t be restricted on the basis of what a person “might” do. This really amounts to punishment in advance of a crime. Illegal behavior should be punished appropriately, not in anticipation that it might be done.
The 2nd Amendment is clear in it’s wording. I personally think that if a person or an organization has the financial resources to purchase a tank or a fighter jet and the armament that can be used on it they should be allowed.
Punish behavior, not anticipated behavior.