Obama Unveils Plan to Federalize Police

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • JWG223

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Aug 16, 2011
    6,000
    36
    Shreveport
    I agree that this is crazy talk, but...

    Obama traded terrorists for a deserter illegally, then greeted said deserter in Arabic on the White House lawn.
    Obama has gutted healthcare by pushing a broken plan forward without even knowing what was in it (noone did).
    Obama has gotten his nose in the middle of every single racially charged incident of local-level that he can during his terms, and in every case championed the criminal element.
    Obama allegedly (according to him...) has no clue what the Justice department is doing when American citizens and Police are killed by firearms purposefully leaked to drug cartels...and then prevents justice from being served to the one(s) responsible by shutting down the investigation for "reasons of national security" right when things heat up for Holder.


    So, really...why doesn't this make sense? I can't really argue against it. Do I think it's the case? No. but it's just as likely as an "American" President doing all of this other ********. I cannot logically decry it as "tin foil hat material" in light of all this, really, even if my gut says it's...a bit much. Because it's right in line with his historical actions.
     
    Last edited:

    JWG223

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Aug 16, 2011
    6,000
    36
    Shreveport
    It would be too daunting of a task to do this nationwide with less than 2 years left for Obama. This is like the crazy talk that takes place during the lame duck stage of a term. "He is going to declare marshal law so that he can remain in office."

    I agree. That's why things like Obamacare were not passed into law. There was no way to make them truly functional in a timely manner, so logic prevailed and they...oh...wait. ****.

    Seriously, this country is all sorts of knotted up. It is identical to Rome in its last days, and damn near anything goes, IMO
     

    olivs260

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    45   0   0
    Sep 23, 2009
    2,846
    38
    Geismar, LA
    We already pretty much have federal police. The FBI. Even if this were to happen, I don't think anything would change in any significant way. This 'article' is just a crazy person's crazy interpretation of an uncrazy non-event.
     

    JWG223

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Aug 16, 2011
    6,000
    36
    Shreveport
    We already pretty much have federal police. The FBI. Even if this were to happen, I don't think anything would change in any significant way. This 'article' is just a crazy person's crazy interpretation of an uncrazy non-event.

    Yep. While I hate Obama's decisions in office (and before, and probably after his terms as well), it was Bush JR who gave us the wonderful "Patriot" Act which allows people like you and I to be imprisoned indefinitely if "accused of terrorism" without legal counsel/trial/charges being brought, as I understand, as well as a laundry list of other "Patriotic" things.
     

    olivs260

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    45   0   0
    Sep 23, 2009
    2,846
    38
    Geismar, LA
    Yep. While I hate Obama's decisions in office (and before, and probably after his terms as well), it was Bush JR who gave us the wonderful "Patriot" Act which allows people like you and I to be imprisoned indefinitely if "accused of terrorism" without legal counsel/trial/charges being brought, as I understand, as well as a laundry list of other "Patriotic" things.

    Let's not forget who gave us the '86 assault weapons ban, either. Obama and Clinton aren't the only ones that have been working on passing gun restrictions.
     

    JWG223

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Aug 16, 2011
    6,000
    36
    Shreveport
    Let's not forget who gave us the '86 assault weapons ban, either. Obama and Clinton aren't the only ones that have been working on passing gun restrictions.

    Nope. That is why I wonder why the radical right can hate the radical left so much, when they look at what radically right presidents have pushed through. I mean, unless radical right-wing politics are anti-MG, anti-normal magazine capacity, anti-right to due process, etc...

    It's two sides of the same citizen-devaluing coin.
     

    Peacemaker

    Well-Known Member
    Silver Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 10, 2012
    1,809
    83
    Slidell, La
    Yep. While I hate Obama's decisions in office (and before, and probably after his terms as well), it was Bush JR who gave us the wonderful "Patriot" Act which allows people like you and I to be imprisoned indefinitely if "accused of terrorism" without legal counsel/trial/charges being brought, as I understand, as well as a laundry list of other "Patriotic" things.

    Would that be considered unintended consequences?
     

    olivs260

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    45   0   0
    Sep 23, 2009
    2,846
    38
    Geismar, LA
    As far as firearm rights go, we would most likely be in far worse shape under Romney than Obama.

    More like, less bad off.


    Sorry. Reading comprehension fail. I think either of them are really bad on gun rights, but I still think Obama is worse.
     
    Last edited:

    Vermiform

    Free Candy!
    Gold Member
    Marketplace Mod
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Sep 18, 2006
    5,271
    48
    Shreveport - or therebouts
    More like, less bad off.

    Obama polarized the nation and gave us all someone to rail against whenever there was any talk of gun control. "Obama's taking our guns, Ma! Call our senator again!".

    Romney's weak ass, much like McCain, would have caved and "walked across the isle" in the name of "compromise" the minute the press started dancing on the bodies of some dead kids. All of the RINOs would have toed the line, called him reasonable and gone along with him. Hell, even several members of this forum were ok with Universal Background Checks to protect dem chil'ren! With Romney we would easily be looking at a defacto National Gun Registration and probably much, much worse.

    This is also what will happen if we continue to let the media choose our candidates in 2016 cause that's how you get things done in 'Murican Pol'ticks. You gots ta have ya some compromise!

    Given the choice of Chris Christie or Hillary, I'll go with Hillary if we are strictly speaking gun rights and not Supreme Court Judge retirements and replacements. Our reps will fight everything Hillary tries to accomplish just out of principle, much like they did with Obama....
     
    Last edited:

    olivs260

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    45   0   0
    Sep 23, 2009
    2,846
    38
    Geismar, LA
    (read update)

    But I still think Obama hurt us worse than Romney would have. Neither of them would have moved us in a positive direction, and I agree with your points, and that's why I'm scared of Christie possibly being elected. I think Obama's attacks on our rights, all of them, are going to take years to pan out. We won't know how bad things got until his presidency is in the history books.
     

    JWG223

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Aug 16, 2011
    6,000
    36
    Shreveport

    Keep in mind this man's role in the demise of citizens and police officers in this and other countries as a result of his previous scheming against our Constitution.
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom