Response from the White House

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply
powerboatr
Senior Member
Posts: 2276
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:53 pm
Location: North East Texas

Response from the White House

Post by powerboatr »

Anyone get this email about the 2nd amend discussion
I quote
"When Discussing the Second Amendment, Keep the First in Mind Too

By Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

Thank you for participating in We the People to speak out on an issue that matters to you.

Let’s not let arguments over the Constitution’s Second Amendment violate the spirit of its First. President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. However, the Constitution not only guarantees an individual right to bear arms, but also enshrines the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press -- fundamental principles that are essential to our democracy. Americans may disagree on matters of public policy and express those disagreements vigorously, but no one should be punished by the government simply because he or she expressed a view on the Second Amendment -- or any other matter of public concern.

We recognize that the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, sparked an intense, and at times emotional, national conversation about the steps we can take as a country to reduce gun violence. In fact, your petition is one of many on the issue, and President Obama personally responded by sharing his views on this important issue.



In a recent press conference, President Obama also addressed the Second Amendment and the important perspective that law-abiding gun owners bring to the public conversation on this issue:

Look, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. This country has a strong tradition of gun ownership that's been handed down from generation to generation. Obviously across the country there are regional differences. There are differences between how people feel in urban areas and rural areas. And the fact is the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible -- they buy their guns legally and they use them safely, whether for hunting or sport shooting, collection or protection.

But you know what, I am also betting that the majority -- the vast majority -- of responsible, law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war. I'm willing to bet that they don't think that using a gun and using common sense are incompatible ideas -- that an unbalanced man shouldn't be able to get his hands on a military-style assault rifle so easily; that in this age of technology, we should be able to check someone's criminal records before he or she can check out at a gun show; that if we work harder to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be fewer atrocities like the one in Newtown -- or any of the lesser-known tragedies that visit small towns and big cities all across America every day."

there was an embedded video of potus pontificating as well. But my virus software told me not to open it :nono:
Last edited by powerboatr on Tue Jan 08, 2013 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Proud to have served for over 22 Years in the U.S. Navy Certificated FAA A&P technician since 1996
User avatar
Oldgringo
Senior Member
Posts: 11203
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Pineywoods of east Texas

Re: Response from the White House

Post by Oldgringo »

If Jay Carney says it, it must be so.
User avatar
Topbuilder
Senior Member
Posts: 631
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:14 pm

Re: Response from the White House

Post by Topbuilder »

More Double-speak.
"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God, and the Bible." George Washington
User avatar
handog
Senior Member
Posts: 376
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:01 pm
Location: Cedar Park / Austin

Re: Response from the White House

Post by handog »

powerboatr wrote:Anyone get this email about the 2nd amend discussion
I quote
"When Discussing the Second Amendment, Keep the First in Mind Too

By Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

Thank you for participating in We the People to speak out on an issue that matters to you.

Let’s not let arguments over the Constitution’s Second Amendment violate the spirit of its First. President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. However, the Constitution not only guarantees an individual right to bear arms, but also enshrines the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press -- fundamental principles that are essential to our democracy. Americans may disagree on matters of public policy and express those disagreements vigorously, but no one should be punished by the government simply because he or she expressed a view on the Second Amendment -- or any other matter of public concern.

We recognize that the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, sparked an intense, and at times emotional, national conversation about the steps we can take as a country to reduce gun violence. In fact, your petition is one of many on the issue, and President Obama personally responded by sharing his views on this important issue.



In a recent press conference, President Obama also addressed the Second Amendment and the important perspective that law-abiding gun owners bring to the public conversation on this issue:

Look, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. This country has a strong tradition of gun ownership that's been handed down from generation to generation. Obviously across the country there are regional differences. There are differences between how people feel in urban areas and rural areas. And the fact is the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible -- they buy their guns legally and they use them safely, whether for hunting or sport shooting, collection or protection.

But you know what, I am also betting that the majority -- the vast majority -- of responsible, law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war. I'm willing to bet that they don't think that using a gun and using common sense are incompatible ideas -- that an unbalanced man shouldn't be able to get his hands on a military-style assault rifle so easily; that in this age of technology, we should be able to check someone's criminal records before he or she can check out at a gun show; that if we work harder to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be fewer atrocities like the one in Newtown -- or any of the lesser-known tragedies that visit small towns and big cities all across America every day."

there was an embedded video of potus pontificating as well. But my virus software told me not to open it :nono:

I had this White House propaganda emailed to me as well. I noticed the word KEEP missing from the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. then there's a pretentious pro second amendment statement followed by "however" and "but." When Someone Uses The Word, “But” In A Sentence They Negate Everything They Said Before It! Then sums it up by telling us what we gun owners think. :banghead:
Last edited by handog on Tue Jan 08, 2013 10:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
gregthehand
Senior Member
Posts: 1399
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:48 pm
Location: NW Houston, TX

Re: Response from the White House

Post by gregthehand »

And the fact is the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible -- they buy their guns legally and they use them safely, whether for hunting or sport shooting, collection or protection.
Yet you want to ban them and say you're protecting gun owners rights? If I go to bed one day with the ability to purchase or own something that is addressed in the Constitution, and then wake up the next day and I am no longer allowed to, that means I have less rights. That seems common sense to me.

Did anyone else who got the letter notice that they are hitting on what seems to be a drive for tougher background checks but never made mention of the assault weapons ban?
My posts on this website are worth every cent you paid me for them.
User avatar
Jaguar
Senior Member
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:24 pm
Location: Just west of Cool, Texas

Re: Response from the White House

Post by Jaguar »

powerboatr wrote:Anyone get this email about the 2nd amend discussion
I quote
By Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

[...]a weapon of war. [...]
Funny, the new "evil" term. Why?

Q. Typically, who wages war?
A. The state.

Q. Typically, is war good or bad?
A. War is bad.

Q. Should "weapons of war" be avaliable to citizens, since the state wages war and it is a bad thing?
A. Bliss ninnies, "No."
A. Students of history and people able to read the Constitution, "Yes."

I reject the term "weapon of war" and substitute "weapon of freedom". Don't let them redefine the language.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison
User avatar
anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: Response from the White House

Post by anygunanywhere »

Jaguar wrote:
powerboatr wrote:Anyone get this email about the 2nd amend discussion
I quote
By Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

[...]a weapon of war. [...]
Funny, the new "evil" term. Why?

Q. Typically, who wages war?
A. The state.

Q. Typically, is war good or bad?
A. War is bad.

Q. Should "weapons of war" be avaliable to citizens, since the state wages war and it is a bad thing?
A. Bliss ninnies, "No."
A. Students of history and people able to read the Constitution, "Yes."

I reject the term "weapon of war" and substitute "weapon of freedom". Don't let them redefine the language.
Good point Jaguar.

It is interesting that they are referring to them in this manner. Maybe they are beginnning to see the light, just not in the right context.

Anygunanywhere
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
User avatar
Jaguar
Senior Member
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:24 pm
Location: Just west of Cool, Texas

Re: Response from the White House

Post by Jaguar »

anygunanywhere wrote:
Jaguar wrote:
powerboatr wrote:Anyone get this email about the 2nd amend discussion
I quote
By Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

[...]a weapon of war. [...]
Funny, the new "evil" term. Why?

Q. Typically, who wages war?
A. The state.

Q. Typically, is war good or bad?
A. War is bad.

Q. Should "weapons of war" be avaliable to citizens, since the state wages war and it is a bad thing?
A. Bliss ninnies, "No."
A. Students of history and people able to read the Constitution, "Yes."

I reject the term "weapon of war" and substitute "weapon of freedom". Don't let them redefine the language.
Good point Jaguar.

It is interesting that they are referring to them in this manner. Maybe they are beginnning to see the light, just not in the right context.

Anygunanywhere
I don't want to be accused of violating the U. S. Code so the less I say the better. But, if and when it is time to act, you will know me by my actions. From reading what you have written, we will be brothers.

:patriot:
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison
Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”