"Special Report: An Exclusive Interview with Senator Barack Obama" supports AWB.

[jody]

Special Report: An Exclusive Interview with Senator Barack Obama

LICATA: Senator, earlier this year you made a comment about rural citizens clinging to guns that got a lot of criticism, and many sportsmen took that to mean that you don't respect or understand the traditions of American hunters and shooters. How would you respond to that?

SENATOR OBAMA: Well, you know, look, when you're on a campaign trail, you're not always going to choose the perfect word. But what I was specifically referring to--and thisis something that I've said before--is that when you've got a federal government that is doing nothing in terms of thinking about people's economic situation, then they don't end up voting on the basis of the economic issues. What they do expect is at the very least they can preserve those traditions that have been so important to them, like hunting, like their faith. That ends up being the focus of their attention. If I had said "relied on"--or that it's important to them--instead of "cling," there wouldn't have been a problem. You know, if you've been on the campaign trail and you're on your sixth event of the night, then you end up maybe choosing the wrong word. But if you talk to sportsmen in my home state of Illinois, they will tell you that I've always been a forceful advocate on behalf of the rights of sportsmen, on behalf of access for sportsmen and hunters. I've been somebody who, well before the recent Supreme Court case, stated my belief that the Second Amendment was an individual right.

LICATA: Do you agree with the Supreme Court's decision?

SENATOR OBAMA: What I think it has done is provided some clarity that, in fact, the Second Amendment is an individual right and that law-abiding gun owners can't be prevented from going out and hunting, protecting their family on their own. That doesn't mean that, as Justice Scalia and the Supreme Court noted, it doesn't mean that we can't have some common-sense gun control legislation out there-for example, background checks, making sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals or people who have mental illnesses. The important point is that I am very mindful of the fact that sportsmen in America may have gone hunting with their fathers, their grandfathers, their mothers, their grandmothers, and that this is part of a tradition and a way of life that has to be preserved. And there's nothing that I will do as president of the United States that will in any way encroach on the ability of sportsmen to continue that tradition.

LICATA: You mentioned common-sense gun legislation. Would you consider the assault weapons ban {AWB} and registration of guns to fall into that category of common-sense gun control?

SENATOR OBAMA: I think those are two separate issues. I think that when it comes to the assault weapons ban, the answer is yes. I think AK-47s generally are not used for hunting. AK-47s or vest-piercing bullets are generally used to hurt people. And I think that it's legitimate for us to say military-style weapons that aren't traditionally used for purposes other than killing people, we've got to be careful about. But I'll be honest with you. I'm more interested in enforcing the laws that we do have-for example, tracing guns that are used in crimes back to people who have been using them. I don't anticipate that there's going to be a whole slew of efforts at the federal level when it comes to gun control. But I think that strong background checks; making sure that we're dealing with the gun-show loophole, which I think has been a problem; allowing us to trace guns that are used in crimes back to where they were purchased--those are the kinds of initiatives that I think pose no threat whatsoever to law-abiding gunowners.

Obama says he supports “reinstating the assault weapons ban”. :shrug:

[Blue_In_AK]

1. God, why did I think Average White Band?

I'm losing it -- definitely.

[Kutjara]

2. My initial thought was exactly the same.

I think we're getting old.

[Orsino]

6. Me three.

:scared:

[Blue_In_AK]

9. What a relief!

I guess I'm NOT going crazy -- unless we all are.

[codjh9]

32. My first thought too. :^)

[JuniperLea]

33. We might all be! LOL!

Or... we're just showing we grew up in the 70's... not a bad thing:)

[Orsino]

47. "You Got It"

"Got The Love," that is.

[RC]

44. It would help a whole lot if posters would S-P-E-L-L things out.

Most of us have full size keyboards. We don't need to text message here.

[old mark]

55. "Play That Funky Music, White Boy"? nt

[Blue_In_AK]

58. That's the one.

That's what made me laugh at the subject line of the OP. I know, I have a weird sense of humor.

[Jackeens]

61. LOL!!! Weepin' laughing at the "Average White Band"!

[elkston]

3. A rifle or a handgun is good enough for self defense. Why do you need a P90? (eom)

[slackmaster]

4. The only P90 available in the USA to ordinary citizens is a handgun

The FN P90 submachine gun cannot be imported for sale to the civilian market. The National Firearms Act registry for automatic weapons was closed in 1986.

[elkston]

5. Yeah, that's the one I was thinking about the FN-P90 super machine gun (eom)

[slackmaster]

7. Well, you can't get one unless you are a police officer with permission from your department,

Or a federally licensed Special Occupational Taxpayer/machine gun dealer.

BTW - It would not have been covered by the expired federal AW ban. It's a machinegun.

IBMTGF

[Callisto32]

66. Super Machine gun?

Never heard of such a thing. Even if it exited, I would hardly call an awkward rifle chambered for a comparatively anemic cartridge and designed to be a last-ditch weapon for rear-guard troops and tank crews one. In effect, its more of an SMG designed to fire a high-velocity cartridge, as far as I can tell.

EDIT: Clarification, SMG Means SubMachine Gun.

[Testament]

50. No, it's a rifle. Link...

http://www.impactguns.com/store/818513004749.html

16.0625" barrel
26.25" OAL

Meant to be fired from the shoulder...hence...Rifle.

[benEzra]

54. That's a PS-90, not a P90. BIG difference.

The P90 is a small-caliber machinegun, restricted to police and military only. The PS-90 is a NON-automatic, civilian carbine with a long civilian-length barrel in the same caliber, designed to be difficult to convert to an automatic configuration.

Ballistically, it's similar to a .22 WMR (yes, a rimfire).

[Testament]

60. He posted the picture of the arm he was talking about after I posted.

I thought he was talking about the civilian version, the one I posted, and had called it a handgun. It's not, it's a rifle. I didn't realize he was talking about the Ruger P90 .45 ACP pistol. And yes, I know 5.7x28 is not high powered by any stretch of the imagination, heck, it's even less than .223.

[ContinentalOp]

11. You sure as hell better not take my P90s away.

You can pry these puppies from my cold dead hands.




:P

[jpgray]

13. Soapboars for life!

[derby378]

8. K&R!

So much for the "Obama will never take your guns away" meme... :mad:

[jpgray]

10. Maybe if you're a lousy shot, you need that large-capacity magazine and collapsible stock?

I've never fully understood why the AWB is such a cause celebre for gun fans--essentially all it does is ban semi-auto weapons with military design characteristics. You can still get a nice powerful rifle, it just won't have a collapsible stock, bayonet lugs, or enough bullets in its magazine to kill fifty people.

[jody]

14. "why the AWB is such a cause celebre"? It loses elections for we Democrats. n/t

[jpgray]

16. Evidence?

[davepc]

30. A quick recap of the 2004 election:

21 Electoral Votes in 2004.

North Carolina:

Mike Easley (D) 55.6% -- NRA "A" Rating
Patrick Ballantine (R) 42.9%

Bush 56%
Kerry 44%

West Virgina:

Joe Manchin (D) 63.5% -- NRA "A+" Rating
Monty Warner (R) 34%

Bush 56%
Kerry 43%

Montana:

Brian Schweitzer (D) 50.4% -- NRA "A" Rating
Bob Brown (R) 46%

Bush 59%
Kerry 39%

See the trend? Pro-gun Democrats beat Republicans handily on the same day Bush beat Kerry in those same states by double digit margins.

Kerry's most publicized senate vote, one he came off the campaign trail specifically to cast, was for the (failed) reauthorization of the 1994 assault weapons ban.


Then theres this fun gem from President Clinton's 1995 State of the Union. You know, the one he gave the year after Republicans took control of congress for the 1st time in a generattion...

I don't want to destroy the good atmosphere in the room or in the country tonight, but I have to mention one issue that divided this body greatly last year. The last Congress also passed the Brady Bill and, in the crime bill, the ban on 19 assault weapons. I don't think it's a secret to anybody in this room that several members of the last Congress who voted for that aren't here tonight because they voted for it. And I know, therefore, that some of you who are here because they voted for it are under enormous pressure to repeal it. I just have to tell you how I feel about it.

[jpgray]

41. I don't see any evidence there of the AWB being the definitive issue

Correlation isn't evidence of causation on its own--there is rather more than that one stance separating those three Democrats from Kerry.

[1corona4u]

17. Especially when people like you, KEEP POINTING IT OUT.

AND MAKING IT A FUCKING ISSUE.

[jody]

20. Do you suffer from the Ostrich Syndrome?

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

29. I see the answer is yes. Have a peaceful evening. n/t

[derby378]

48. We didn't make it an issue...

The Brady Center, VPC, Joyce Foundation, and AHSA already did that for us. We're just stepping up and asserting our Constitutional rights as pro-RKBA Democrats. Chill.

[Wickerman]

12. the important quote that will be overlooked

"But I'll be honest with you. I'm more interested in enforcing the laws that we do have-for example, tracing guns that are used in crimes back to people who have been using them. I don't anticipate that there's going to be a whole slew of efforts at the federal level when it comes to gun control. But I think that strong background checks; making sure that we're dealing with the gun-show loophole, which I think has been a problem; allowing us to trace guns that are used in crimes back to where they were purchased--those are the kinds of initiatives that I think pose no threat whatsoever to law-abiding gunowners."

[1corona4u]

15. Exactly, and that's why this is a toxic post.

not surprising from this poster.

[jody]

27. Do you know what S.2237 or H.R. 1022 define as assault weapons? If not, how can you know what

firearms would be banned by reinstating the assault weapons ban?

If you don't know such basic facts, how can you listen intelligently to a debate on assault weapons or ask an intelligent question about that issue?

[1corona4u]

35. ...

[jody]

39. Thanks, I take that as answering No, No, No. n/t

[jody]

18. I agree but don't forget Kerry was damaged by a picture of him accepting a Remington shotgun that

could have been banned by the assault weapons bill he cosponsored at that time.

[jpgray]

21. I'm not seeing it. Is there a detachable magazine for that sucker?

[jody]

22. Apparently you need to read very carefully H.R. 1022 sponsored by 67 Democratic congresspersons. n/t

[jpgray]

23. Let's see if I remember:

To be banned it would need to have two or more of: Pistol grip, folding stock, > 5 round fixed capacity, detachable magazine.

[jody]

31. Plus other features in H.R. 1022 that would include such firearms as the popular Remington model

1100 shotgun with over 4 million in use.

Picture below shows Kerry accepting a similar shotgun during the campaign season of 2004.

[jpgray]

34. Other features such as...?

Here's the shotgun section from HR 1022:

(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a pistol grip;

`(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or

`(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:h1022:

[jody]

37. See below.

`(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

[jpgray]

38. So the relevant AG had determined the Remington was unsuitable for sport?

[jody]

40. Apparently you don't know the difference between law and a bill proposed for law, e.g. H.R. 1022 and

S.2237.

Sorry but I don't have time to explain that to you.

[jpgray]

42. It would be rather preemptive of the AG, but that's your argument, isn't it?

There's nothing in HR 1022 which says that shotgun would be banned that I can see. I ask again: where are you seeing this?

[jody]

43. I quoted the section from H.R. 1022. I assume readers will understand its meaning. n/t

[jpgray]

45. Explain it directly anyway, just for kicks

[jody]

46. Why don't you try to understand it yourself, just for kicks. n/t

[benEzra]

57. "procured for use by...any Federal law enforcement agency" = "assault weapon."

In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

"procured for use by...any Federal law enforcement agency" = "assault weapon," unless the AG chooses to exempt it.

FWIW, just the features list would ban the most popular civilian target rifles and defensive carbines in the USA. Since 4 out of 5 U.S. gun owners are nonhunters, that is a Very Big Deal.

[Wickerman]

28. And he had a lot of help by DU supporters, too

Recall the thread in the Gungeon where all our good Dems argued for 200+ posts that he was using poor trigger discipline. I recall having to blow up the image, post it, and forward it to two of our users to show that his hand was covering the trigger, not with his finger on the trigger as so many wanted to argue. When Palin was cited in the same forum using poor down range management most jumped to defend her. :crazy:

I really hate to see guns being so important to some in the Dem party that they throw Obama under the bus in the process of citing their displeasure with his stance on RKBA.

It is one thing to say that his stance is costing us votes and to make that point; its quite another when Dems act in concert to insure those votes go elsewhere. I hope we can keep that balance here at DU. Chances are we are going to shift opinion of the campaign here. I'd rather not try to shift votes.

[jody]

36. Apparently Obama is now courting the votes of 54 million gun-owners. He appears to be making

progress with his repeated statements about supporting the Second Amendment.

IMO the only issue remaining is AWB and his statement in the interview about AK-47 used for hunting strongly suggests he has not been properly briefed on the topic.

I don't believe it's too late for Obama to clear up his position on the AWB because of the differences between AW definitions in Biden's bill S.2257 and H.R. 1022.

IMO Biden's bill could be rewritten because it specifically excludes the Remington Model 1100 Shotgun that is a symbol of an AW definition that would be unacceptable to many gun-owners whereas H.R. 1022 gives authority to the Attorney General to ban that firearm.

[FrenchieCat]

19. Are you back?

[1corona4u]

26. Unfortunately, it would seem so.

:mad:

[Liberal Dose]

25. King George banned the Colonists from owning guns in order to prevent a revolution.

I'm just sayin'

[Redneck Socialist]

49. The Obama campaign is completely tone deaf when it comes to guns. n/t

[derby378]

51. Paul Helmke practically had a front-row seat for Obama's Denver speech

Now reaching for the Maalox...

[joshcryer]

52. That's too bad.

Don't think it will affect the outcome of the elections, though.

[and-justice-for-all]

53. I completly agree with Obama on this...nt

[benEzra]

56. Problem is, more Americans lawfully own "assault weapons" than hunt.

The "assault weapon" issue is not about military automatic weapons like AK-47's, which are already tightly controlled under existing law and always have been. It's about the most popular NON-automatic civilian target rifles and defensive carbines in the USA, which more people lawfully own than hunt. It is a red herring designed to suck Dems into supporting radioactive gun bans, IMO, the same way Gingrich used it in 1994.

FWIW, less than 3% of U.S. murders involve ANY type of rifle, despite their widespread ownership. They're just too big to be easily concealed on one's person.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_20.html
Total murders............................14,990.....100.00%
Handguns..................................7,795......52.00%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged)....2,158......14.40%
Edged weapons.............................1,822......12.15%
Firearms (type unknown)...................1,465.......9.77%
Shotguns....................................481.......3.21%
Hands, fists, feet, etc.....................833.......5.56%
Rifles......................................436.......2.91%

[Captiosus]

59. He's not alone because I agree with him.

I agree with reinstating the AWB, but a better bill needs to be defined, not these vague bills that would outlaw shotguns I could buy at my local sporting goods store.

But when it comes to bona fide assault rifles, there's no point. You're not going to hunt with one unless you want your venison to be riddled with holes. You're not going to protect your house with one because you're going to end up destroying your house if you actually have to shoot it.

Armor piercing rounds, military grade weapons, there's no point for the private ownership of them other than bragging rights.

But I might be jaded because I grew up with a NRA zealot of a father.
Wayne LaPierre's articles in American Rifleman always made me cringe.

[Statistical]

62. What is an "assault" weapon?

But when it comes to bona fide assault rifles, there's no point. You're not going to hunt with one unless you want your venison to be riddled with holes. You're not going to protect your house with one because you're going to end up destroying your house if you actually have to shoot it.

What is an "assault" weapon?

Because if you think the following are "assault weapons" that need to be banned...
Uzi SMG
Automatic AK-47
Select fire (burst capable) M-4 or M-16 rifle
Fully automatic combat shotguns.
Armor Piercing Ammo (capable of defeating Class III or IVa vest)

THEY ARE ALREADY ILLEGAL.

Once again. Fully automatic weapons (and select fire burst weapons) have been restricted under the NFA.

Guess when the NFA was signed into law? 1936.
All new sales of NFA weapons have been banned since......... 1986.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for you to buy any of the weapons you think you can buy new today UNDER EXISTING LAWS.

So what exactly can AWB add? NOTHING except lose votes of gun owners. Period.
The AWB should really be called the "scary looking gun" ban.

[jody]

63. You do know that the "assault weapons ban" has nothing to do with "assault rifles". n/t

[smiley_glad_hands]

64. You could still buy the weapons in the AWB.

They just didn't have the militarized components to them like large clips and muzzle flash suppressors, thats why many gun owners saw it as bogus.

If the dems feel the need to go down this path again, can they at least frame it differently and not call it a ban? It will turn some voters away and give the repugs fuel to fire up there base.

on edit: Automatic weapons aren't legal now and the AWB had no bearing on them either.

[Tejas]

68. "Automatic weapons aren't legal now" - yes they are

Under the NFA (National Firearms Act), fully-automatic weapons can be bought/sold by virtually any law-abiding citizen of this great country.

[benEzra]

69. Actually, rifle magazine capacity wasn't significantly affected...

at least for ban-era AR-15 type rifles, civilian AK's, FAL's, CETME's, HK's, etc. And you could still have a flash suppressor, as long as you deleted the protruding handgrip. Or you could have a protruding handgrip, and have a muzzle break instead of a flash suppressor.

Here's my 2002 model SAR-1, with a standard, ban-era 30-round magazine:

[ieoeja]

65. What weapons are banned by the AWB? Oh, that's right ... none.

Any buying or selling of those weapons must include a registered firearms dealer.

I still oppose the law. But must you always insist on spinning it as worse than it really is? Yes, THEY will spin it that way. Which is one good reason to oppose it. But when they do we should point out that they are lying.

Heck, look at what you did with this interview. What about this interview is really newsmaking? Something exciting and different? The Democratic nominee supporting AWB is pretty much expected. The "news" in this interview is that ...

We finally have a Democratic nominee stating that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right!


DU is a fine place for you to come to complain about our candidate. But when you are in the real world, I sure hope you are spreading the above talking point instead of working for a McCain victory.

[Tejas]

67. "must include a registered firearms dealer"

So much for private transactions between two law-abiding citizens eh?