July 28th, 2012, 08:40 AM
Join Date: Aug 2009
AK-47’s for America’s Enemies, Gun Control for American Citizens
Understanding the President’s statements means that each time a gun is transferred it would be assigned to an individual through the Federal Government.
President Obama’s proposal positions him to take future actions to put an unrealistic administrative burden on American citizens that all too easily make them criminals for possessing a gun.
| http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/27/ob...ican-citizens/ |
Obama’s Urban League Speech: AK-47’s for America’s Enemies, Gun Control for American Citizens
President Obama’s speech at the National Urban League Convention on July 26th had a series of tells on his true position regarding gun control.
The President stated “But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals — that they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities.” The Avtomat Kalashnikova (AK-47) was developed in Russia in 1949 and is still currently used by communist and third world countries. There are more AK-47’s than any other gun in the world, but most notably, it is the preferred weapon of America’s enemies. More Americans have died from AK fire than any other gun but the triggers were not pulled by American citizens.
AK-47’s are sold in America but they are not the AK-47’s of the battlefield. A soldier’s AK is a fully automatic weapon that is designed to fire continuously with one pull of the trigger. The AK’s sold in the United States are restricted to firing one round per one trigger pull, much like a deer rifle or shotgun used for skeet or trap shooting. Fully-automatic AK-47’s are highly regulated and not accessible to citizens for whom buying a gun is otherwise legal.
The AK statement the President made is akin to saying “We must stop companies from putting cyanide in baby formula.” The statement relies on the ignorance of the recipient not knowing the regulations surrounding automatic weapons already in place and makes the presupposition that these guns are bad, they are easily accessible, they must be removed from society and opposing these actions is extreme. AK47 battle rifles are not on our streets. However they are on the streets of Middle Eastern countries that are uprising against their dictatorial leaders with the support of the United States.
President Obama then went on to say “I believe the majority of gun owners would agree that we should do everything possible to prevent criminals and fugitives from purchasing weapons; that we should check someone’s criminal record before they can check out a gun seller; that a mentally unbalanced individual should not be able to get his hands on a gun so easily. These steps shouldn’t be controversial. They should be common sense." Indeed this is common sense and again the President uses the audiences’ lack of understanding to promote additional restrictions on gun ownership. To purchase a gun from a dealer everyone undergoes a background check. The President is setting up the argument to ban private sales and transfers of firearms between citizens. That means Gramps can no longer give his .22 squirrel rifle to his grandson without involving the Federal Government.
Understanding the President’s statement means that each time a gun is transferred it would be assigned to an individual through the Federal Government. If the Feds cannot track 2,400 guns intentionally provided to Mexican drug cartels then they certainly won’t be able to track 300,000,000 guns in the United States. Imagine this scenario: You are travelling and your wife is at home. A violent home invasion takes place and your wife grabs the gun she has bedside and shoots the intruder. The gun is not registered to her, it’s registered to you, and she is now charged with illegal use and possession of a gun. President Obama’s statement positions him to take future actions to put an unrealistic administrative burden on American citizens that all too easily make them criminals for possessing a gun.
How would the President enforce mental suitability for purchasing a gun beyond existing controls? It is already illegal for a mentally compromised person to purchase a gun. Without a note from a psychiatrist confirming mental viability for each and every gun purchase there is no way to confirm there has not been any change in the mental status of the purchaser.