- Joined
- Jul 12, 2005
- Messages
- 36,913
- Reaction score
- 11,283
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Where is my check?
Where's your tax form for the year these guns were purchased new?
Where is my check?
I guess you couldn't figure out the analogy. Maybe someone else will explain it to you but the bottom line is
you cannot disprove my claim that Obama and biden are the two biggest gun haters to be elected to the Oval Office merely by noting they have yet to pass any anti gun laws.
Using that logic you could say the government pays for nothing, as you can never tell what spending in the federal budget was borrowed, printed, or actually collected.
And most anti-gun President in history? What anti-gun laws has he signed? Literally none, and I'm pretty sure none is less than Clinton's Assault Weapon Ban.
You're right, he loves guns. He a real gun guy. :roll:
I literally said the exact opposite in the post right before yours...
Too bad you had to argue with Turtle for a couple page before finally stating your opinion.
The White House referred questions on the issue to the Pentagon, which referred questions to the U.S. Embassy in South Korea, which deferred back to the State Department.
Come on man are you serious? I stated in the first post in this thread I wanted these weapons to come to the US, then I stated that in my opinion Obama wasn't the most anti-gun President we've had, I never said he was pro-gun or a "real gun guy." The argument was who was the worst, someone can still be bad but not the worst. Then I felt it necessary, as I do now again, to explain exactly what I thought of Obama's gun opinions, because it wasn't reaching Mr. Turtle that I wasn't arguing Obama was a "real gun guy" but that he wasn't the worst. Just because I say someone isn't the worst at something doesn't mean I think they are good at something, those are two totally different lines of thought and the two have nothing to do with each other. I mean he could be the 2nd worst, or 3rd worst, or he could just be generally bad in my opinion but not the worst.
Do I really have to explain this?
Wait wait wait wait wait.
Do mine eyes deceive me?
Usually when Fox News is used as a source - people say "nooo! I won't believe anything from Faux News!" and completely toss aside the story for origin issues.
Why not that reaction in this thread? Surely everyone who normally does that isn't absent for the day! Where are you people!
The only thing stopping Obama from enacting the same laws he supported in Illinois is the fact he is worried about having the same political repercussion Clinton had when he signed the Brady Bill. So because of that potential political repercussion he has to either wait for the second half of his second term or use incrimination to pass something similar or more strict to what he supported in Illinois.
Barack Obama on Gun Control
Wait wait wait wait wait.
Do mine eyes deceive me?
Usually when Fox News is used as a source - people say "nooo! I won't believe anything from Faux News!" and completely toss aside the story for origin issues.
Why not that reaction in this thread? Surely everyone who normally does that isn't absent for the day! Where are you people!
I love this part:
You have to prove your right. You can't simply make a statement and assume it to be true without evidence of some kind of evidence and data to back it up? Now if you were to decide which President has been the most anti-gun, why would you weigh statements more than action? The old saying goes actions are louder than words, if I say I'm going to kill someone its much less serious than if I actually kill someone. And not only that but Obama's statements in favor of additional gun control are almost non-existant since he's been President, and he hasn't acted upon his pro-gun control opinions. Clinton however had much stronger language and actually did something.
Personally I don't see any reason to think Obama is more anti-gun other than your baseless speculation and desire to paint Obama as badly as possible.
Now I am a gun owner myself, and I think these weapons from Korea should be allowed into the US. And I think Obama, while he may not be gun-friendly, has certainly not done anything against weapons yet, which is far more perferable than past Presidents.
I understand your point and I'm admittedly worried about it as well, but I'm not as convinced as many others seem to be that its inevitable that some kind of wide scale gun law is going to put into affect, or at least be attempted to put into affect. Especially if the Dems lose the House and/or the off-chance they lose the senate.
Given our huge deficits?they don't-the government would collect the money
given our huge deficits only a moron would be against selling stuff like that -a garand in excellent condition sells for about 900 dollars, in good condition about 500, A carbine in excellent condition 800 or so
they could raise alot of money with those weapons but they aren't going to sell them to other governments since they are obsolete as military armaments. (and most other countries don't trust t heir citizens to own such things)
what is inevitable is that Obama will do what helps obama
Given our huge deficits?
You do realize, if I read everything correctly, that Korea would be selling these guns to us. The US gov't might make a little off taxes and whatnot but they aren't the ones selling the guns.
You're talking as though they are the US military's guns. They belong to Korea.
I still think the sale should go through because these guns aren't any worse than what you can buy on the market right now, but it seems like this is mostly just whining about a non-issue.
you think the US Government is gonna pay as much for guns we GAVE korea as what the government charges us Citizens for them
so if the US government buys them for 200 a rifle and 150 a carbine and sells them to the OCMP for 500/250 it doesn't help increase our government's finances?
I read the article and couldn't find anywhere where it said that they were going to sell them to our government and then they'd sell them to us. All it said is that Korea would sell them to american gun collectors and that everyone would have to go through the normal background check process. Where did you get the information that the government was going to buy and resell them?
Again, I still think the sale should go through, as I myself would even love to be able to buy one of these as a collectors items and a cool piece of americana, but I don't think you're right on the government making a bunch of money off of it.
I can't find too much on it and you seem to be more knowledgable on this than I, but I checked out their forum for this topic and the guy that runs the CMP website has a good explanation.uh under current laws a foreign government cannot sell weapons to american civilians
having owned several "reimports" that came from Italy and Korea, I know they went through the US government before ending up here
CMP Sales
The Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) is a U.S. government-chartered program that promotes firearms safety training and rifle practice for all qualified U.S. citizens with special emphasis on youth.
M1 Garand Sales
uh under current laws a foreign government cannot sell weapons to american civilians
having owned several "reimports" that came from Italy and Korea, I know they went through the US government before ending up here
CMP Sales
The Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) is a U.S. government-chartered program that promotes firearms safety training and rifle practice for all qualified U.S. citizens with special emphasis on youth.
M1 Garand Sales
The emals and calls keep pouring in to CMP asking about the Korean rifles and carbines. The following is our reply:
The rumors, reports, articles about Korea have been circulating for at least five years. A few months ago a Korean newspaper once again reported that they would selling Garands and carbines to a US importer. The CMP is not a firearms importer and we do not have any involvement of any kind in anything that may happen with these Korean rifles and carbines.
The only way any rifle or carbine from any country can find its way to the CMP is if the country returns loaned rifles back to the US Army. When that happens, the CMP "may" possibly receive some of those rifles. According to the recent articles, Korea will not be returning anything to the US Army, but will be "selling" these rifles to an importer. If, in fact, these rifles are sold to an importer, the CMP will not see even one of them. We do not have any additional information on this subject. Thanks for understanding.
Orest Michaels
Chief Operating Officer
And here's a quote from the CMP's CEO:
Like I said, seems to be a bunch of bull**** and whining about nothing just to demonize Obama.
"The transfer of such a large number of weapons -- 87,310 M1 Garands and 770,160 M1 Carbines -- could potentially be exploited by individuals seeking firearms for illicit purposes," the spokesman told FoxNews.com.
"We are working closely with our Korean allies and the U.S. Army in exploring alternative options to dispose of these firearms."
Of it came from FOX news it must be true! :lamo:lamo:lamo
There are you happy now?
Deserves demonization?yes and no
Obama deserves demonization if he is preventing anyone from buying privately arms from a friendly government
but I commend you for doing some research