NRA's Inaccurate Statements about Obama

[DaveBeal]

On its ILA webpage (http://www.nraila.org/obama/), the NRA has posted many statements about Barack Obama's history regarding firearms.  I've been doing some research on them.  For instance:

Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.

In fact, the amendment that he voted for would have banned rifle ammunition only if it was "designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability".  See http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r109:./temp/~r1098C4m9n, search down for "SA1615".

Barack Obama has endorsed a 500% increase in the federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition.

The NRA's reference for this statement is one poorly constructed sentence from a December 13, 1999 issue of an obscure newspaper. Even if the statement is accurate, it was years before Obama became a US senator.  See http://www.volokh.com/posts/1203389334.shtml, last sentence on page.

Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.

Here, the NRA's reference is a one word response on a questionaire that Obama may or may not have personally filled out in 1996, before he was even elected to the Illinois state senate.  See http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269_Page2.html, second paragraph.

Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.

What Obama actually said in the NRA reference: "It's hard for me to find a rationale for a 19-clip semi-automatic.  I said at a forum earlier this week, 'If you need 19 rounds to shoot a deer, you probably shouldn't be hunting' and so that I think is something that we should be able to have a reasonable conversation about."

[MicroBalrog]

``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, under section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or

That's from the very document you linked to.

Note it doesn't have to be designed to penetrate armor, but only capable of doing so.

.30-30 and .223 handguns exist in mass production.

[DaveBeal]

That's from the very document you linked to.

Note it doesn't have to be designed to penetrate armor, but only capable of doing so.

The NRA's claim was that the bill would have outlawed many kinds of common rifle ammunition.  If you look farther down in the document I referenced, it applied only to rifle ammunition that was designed or marketed as armor piercing.

[K Frame]

The search has timed out. You'll need to post your search criteria or it will happen again.

Teddy Kennedy, IIRC, and others used to claim that they weren't trying to interfere with hunters and other sportsmen when, in fact, they supported proposed legislation that would have banned, as armor piercing, about 95 to 99 percent of all sporting ammunition as armor piercing when much of which had absolutely no ability to penetrate body armor.

[MicroBalrog]

That's from the very document you linked to.

Note it doesn't have to be designed to penetrate armor, but only capable of doing so.

The NRA's claim was that the bill would have outlawed many kinds of common rifle ammunition.  If you look farther down in the document I referenced, it applied only to rifle ammunition that was designed or marketed as armor piercing.

No, there are separate provisions, one for handgun, and one for rifle ammunition.

[wacki]

That's from the very document you linked to.

Note it doesn't have to be designed to penetrate armor, but only capable of doing so.

The NRA's claim was that the bill would have outlawed many kinds of common rifle ammunition.  If you look farther down in the document I referenced, it applied only to rifle ammunition that was designed or marketed as armor piercing.

I can't believe we are seriously debating this.  Read this:

http://obamagun.blogspot.com/2008/08/ban-rifle-ammunition-commonly-used-for.html

Kennedy introduced the bill by calling for a ban of 7.62, 30.30 and .223.  All of these rounds are "rifle" rounds.  And as my blog post explains there is no such thing as a "rifle" round.  Heck, I've fired all of the above bullets from a handgun.  The armor piercing clause is a joke that is only meant to fool those that don't understand ballistics.  A 9mm round is "armor piercing" against a Type I vest.  Heck a high velocity 9mm will penetrate anything up to and including a Type II vest.

The law is so broad it would give the attorney general power to ban just about every bullet out there.

[wacki]

Here, the NRA's reference is a one word response on a questionaire that Obama may or may not have personally filled out in 1996, before he was even elected to the Illinois state senate.  See http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269_Page2.html, second paragraph.

You actually denying the questionnaire with Obama's handwriting didn't belong to Mr. "5 mile ban"?

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Wow.  Little ol' APS must be moving up in the world.  We now merit the attention of the Obama gun control misinformation campaign.

[GigaBuist]

The NRA's been stretching it a bit with their 10 facts about Obama list, which is silly, because they didn't need to at all.

[wacki]

The NRA's been stretching it a bit with their 10 facts about Obama list, which is silly, because they didn't need to at all.

I'm no fan of the NRA's president, he annoys the crap out of me.  But what on this list do you consider a stretch?

http://nraila.org/obama/

[MechAg94]

Well, they are going to have to do a whole lot better than dredge up stuff that has been debated and settled on gun sites years ago.  Half truth BS is pretty obvious to anyone who cares to look.

[Monkeyleg]

I went through and checked Obama's record, and did so without the help of the NRA.

Here's what I found, which I posted on my site here

Here's a video of a Fox news interview with an Obama spokesman. Notice how he tries to wriggle out of the handgun ban charge.

[GigaBuist]

The NRA's been stretching it a bit with their 10 facts about Obama list, which is silly, because they didn't need to at all.

I'm no fan of the NRA's president, he annoys the crap out of me.  But what on this list do you consider a stretch?

http://nraila.org/obama/

I was referring to their 10 point plan poster/flyer/cards that they were promoting a while ago with that URL at the bottom.  You can see it here:  http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?id=308&issue=047

Scroll down a bit.  I think its' the 2nd graphic.

When I got to #4 ("Close down 90% of gun shops in America.") I felt a little insulted.  That wasn't the stated goal, it was local to Chicago, 5 miles, etc.  It wasn't as cut an dry as the NRA made it sound there and they could have spared the 7 or 8 words to make it clear.

[wacki]

The NRA has a history for making such mistakes.  Believe it or not some of these mistakes have actually benefited Obama.  I've written to them and they have made corrections to their fliers.  I suspect the NRA just prints pamphlets without a whole lot of review and then makes corrections after the fact.

[BReilley]

Can anybody tell me why we're not supposed to pay any mind to survey responses or statements made before Obama occupied a public office?  Why don't they matter anymore?  If you aren't willing to stand behind your statements, you should stay out of the public eye.  This is, unfortunately, the Information Age, and things are no longer forgotten; they're just waiting to be found.

Also, hasn't the Obama campaign admitted that the notes written on the actual survey response are in Obama's own handwriting?

...My wife thinks I'm crazy for planning some serious gun purchases before the election.

[Manedwolf]

The search has timed out. You'll need to post your search criteria or it will happen again.

Teddy Kennedy, IIRC, and others used to claim that they weren't trying to interfere with hunters and other sportsmen when, in fact, they supported proposed legislation that would have banned, as armor piercing, about 95 to 99 percent of all sporting ammunition as armor piercing when much of which had absolutely no ability to penetrate body armor.

He also called out 30-30 by name as one of those "armor piercing" calibers.

...My wife thinks I'm crazy for planning some serious gun purchases before the election.

If Obama wins, prices are going to spike. It's wise to buy what you want now. Entire firearms, receivers, and high capacity magazines. Bolt actions and revolvers you can leave, but anything semiauto you want now...

...because if Obama does win, prices will spike, and then by next year, you won't be able to buy anything like an AR, AK, FAL, SKS, PS90, AUG, HK 91 or any other EBR. And possibly vast restrictions on semiauto handguns. That is what I expect, at least.

[GigaBuist]

I suspect the NRA just prints pamphlets without a whole lot of review and then makes corrections after the fact.

How is that possible?  How is that excusable?  I do this "gun rights" thing in my spare time and even I know when they're trying to push some BS down my throat.  A friggen intern at the NRA could have, or should have, caught the mistakes in that "10 reasons" list.

There's simply no reason for them to have even attempted at stretching the truth with that 10 reasons list.  None at all.  There are plenty of things about Obama that simply cannot be questioned on the gun rights front. There was absolutely no reason to do this. 

The NRA is, unfortunately and unfairly, viewed as an "extremist" group by a good number of people.  By publishing semi-truths they're doing a disservice to their members and tarnishing their reputation.

[gunsmith]

Oh PLEASE!!!!!!

What Obama actually said in the NRA reference: "It's hard for me to find a rationale for a 19-clip semi-automatic.  I said at a forum earlier this week, 'If you need 19 rounds to shoot a deer, you probably shouldn't be hunting' and so that I think is something that we should be able to have a reasonable conversation about."

 I am not a hunter. I have owned rifles that can take 30 round magazines, they were not for hunting.
Its none of B.O's business (or yours) what firearms I own. How about we have a "reasonable conversation" on what rights you cherish
that we can minimize? hmmmm...I think you need a background check to own a computer or better yet.
it is "only reasonable" that a drivers license be subject to background checks and no one "needs" to own a car that goes faster then a bicycle.

WHAT THE HELL IS A "19-clip semi-automatic."

[Manedwolf]

WHAT THE HELL IS A[/i] "19-clip semi-automatic."

An M1 with a big bandolier of enblocs?

[El Tejon]

1.  The NRA's statements are accurate.

2.  Barry knows absolutely nothing about firearms and has told me that Chicago laws are a "reasonable compromise" which he would like to see enacted nationwide (in case you did not know, Dave, Chicago has had a handgun freeze since 1983).

3.  The right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with hunting.

[Hutch]

Paging Mr. Beal, Mr. David Beal, please return and claim your baggage....

<crickets.....>

Dimbulb.  If someone deeply, truly believes that Mr. Obama's vision for America is worth ignoring his position on firearms ownership, then feel free to try explain why this is so, but DON'T try to re-invent his stance on gun control.  As my Daddy said "Don't piss in my ear and tell me it's just rainwater"

[buzz_knox]

Paging Mr. Beal, Mr. David Beal, please return and claim your baggage....

<crickets.....>

Give him a minute.  He's got other forums to spread disinformation on.

[Jamisjockey]

If that wasn't a drive by, I don't know what is.

[Nitrogen]

But McCain is OK, right?
RIGHT?

AWB McCain?

He changed HIS mind, can't Obama change his?
(I'm not saying Obama changed his mind, I'm saying McCain hasn't changed his.)

[Manedwolf]

But McCain is OK, right?
RIGHT?

AWB McCain?

He changed HIS mind, can't Obama change his?
(I'm not saying Obama changed his mind, I'm saying McCain hasn't changed his.)

McCain is imperfect. Obama is total disarmament for all but the elite.