Obama on The D.C. Gun Ban

[ericire12]

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzIxYjFmYTcxYjA4ZjZhMmI0MGY2Yzc4Y2E3MmJiZGE=

Obama on D.C. Gun Ban: 'I don't like taking a stand on pending cases.'

Obama talks crime in Chicago and gun control with the Sun-Times.

    S-T: As a state legislator, you voted against a bill which would let people with orders of protection [against others] carry guns and another that would have barred municipalities from punishing people who kept guns in their homes. Why?

    B.O.: I felt that [the first one] was a precedent for conceal-and-carry laws. There has not been any evidence that allowing people to carry a concealed weapon is going to make anybody safer. [The second one] is relevant to the D.C. handgun issue. I wanted to preserve the right of local communities to enforce local ordinances and this would have overturned municipalities being able to enforce their own ordinances. We can argue about whether the ordinances work or not. But I wanted to make sure that local communities were recognized as having a right to regulate firearms.

    S-T: But you don't want to take a stand on the D.C. gun-ban law?

    B.O.: I don't like taking a stand on pending cases.

If Barack Obama supports the right of local communities to limit, restrict or to essentially nullify a citizen's Second Amendment rights, does he support the right of local communities to limit, restrict or to essentially nullify a citizen's First Amendment rights? Which other parts of the Bill of Rights does he deem optional?

And if he doesn't like taking a stand on pending cases... aren't all kinds of political issues the subject of one case or another making its way through the federal court system?

Spineless!

[Outlaw]

Much more than spineless. It tells me where he stands on the Constitution as a whole. The Supreme Court case is not a murder case. One which one could take sides. It's about the meaning of the Second Amendment. If he believed in it, he would have said so. I could never back a President like that.

[wisconsin]

Did you really expect anything different    from someone who receives personal protection. No worries on his part just let the rest of us fend for ourselves  .

[Pathfinder]

Did you really expect anything different    from someone who receives personal protection. No worries on his part just let the rest of us fend for ourselves  .

Actually, no, he doesn't want us to fend for ourselves. Makes us just that much easier to subjugate and control, you see.

He's a tyrant - with a smile, but a tyrant nonetheless.