Black Friday breaks record with 185K gun background checks

[Teddy B 17,252]

The only reason Obama wasn't aggressive about firearms is that the timing was all wrong. He was very quiet about firearms legislation in his first term, likely because he wanted to be reelected. As soon as he lost congress any thoughts he had of higher regulations were dashed.

It would be reasonable to assume if democrats had congress in his second term, we would see Australian type confiscation laws being signed.

I don't think that would be a reasonable assumption. There simply isn't enough support for that type of action, even on the Dems side.

[Sousuke 1,214]

I don't think that would be a reasonable assumption. There simply isn't enough support for that type of action, even on the Dems side.

You think the Australian method would have been too far for them? You might be right. At the very least one could argue another AWB, perhaps a bit stricter than the 90s version.

[Teddy B 17,252]

You think the Australian method would have been too far for them? You might be right. At the very least one could argue another AWB, perhaps a bit stricter than the 90s version.

Even after Sandy Hook there were an ample amount of democratic senators who were against any changes in gun control period, and all that was being suggested at that time was an assault weapons ban like what we had previously in the 1990's. I don't ever see an Australian type law being passed in this country, no matter who has political power. Although I personally think it's a good law and is warranted here.

[Sousuke 1,214]

I don't ever see an Australian type law being passed in this country, no matter who has political power. Although I personally think it's a good law and is warranted here.

lol.

Its okay. I still like you and agree with you on many other topics.

[Teddy B 17,252]

lol.

Its okay. I still like you and agree with you on many other topics.

Same here. It would be awfully boring if we all agreed on everything.

[Dakine10 5,452]

My assumption is within the context that Congress was in the democrats hand's during Obama's 2nd term presidency. I think you missed that and instead applied it to the present.

I saw. I just don't agree.

I think if they were going to do it, having the supermajority in congress would have been the time to act. I think it's more of an assumption that Obama was waiting for a second term, because we already knew that congress wasn't going to stay that way.

Again, I'm talking about politically. Is it Obama's personal wish to take your gun from your warm, alive hands? Maybe. Politically it was never on the table.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Again, I'm talking about politically. Is it Obama's personal wish to take your gun from your warm, alive hands? Maybe. Politically it was never on the table.

[Sousuke 1,214]

I saw. I just don't agree.

I think if they were going to do it, having the supermajority in congress would have been the time to act. I think it's more of an assumption that Obama was waiting for a second term, because we already knew that congress wasn't going to stay that way.

Again, I'm talking about politically. Is it Obama's personal wish to take your gun from your warm, alive hands? Maybe. Politically it was never on the table.

According to Pelosi "we didn't have time". I do recognize that many Blue Dogs would have been in danger then. I question though whether the climate is different today. For one there aren't as many Blue Dogs in Congress today, but under my model I recognize that many of them would have had to retain their seats to make it possible.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

How right you are. Can't have a Fast and Furious 2 if there are no guns to sell, eh?

Congratulations. Only took 8 years to figure out and that was still faster of roughly half the population.

Obama's not coming for your guns!!! Anyone who thinks he is is paranoid and probably a bit delusional and should spend more time reflecting on the real reason someone might be coming to take their gun(s) away.