Four More Years of Obama Means Gun Control ‘Under the Radar’ No More

President Barack Obama
President Barack Obama

Washington DC – -( President Obama is pro-gun control to his core, and his past is full of anti-gun legislation and anti-gun rhetoric that provides a clear indication of where the Second Amendment is headed in the next four years if we’re silly enough to give him a second term.

For example, as a state senator in Illinois, Obama supported one-gun-a-month purchase limits; he supported legislation that banned the use of handguns for self-defense (even in one’s own home); he supported an Illinois bill that would have not only banned but also confiscated “assault weapons” had it passed; and he supported a total ban on handguns.

As a Senator in DC, Obama opposed every pro-gun Supreme Court nominee he had the chance to vote against. He supported the Assault Weapons Ban and even joined Senator Ted Kennedy in attempting to pass huge increases on ammunition taxes in order to discourage gun ownership through cost inflation.

During his candidacy for the presidency in 2008, Obama filled out a candidate questionnaire in which he indicated his support for a national handgun ban. He also supported micro-stamping legislation while on the campaign trail and came out in support of DC’s handgun ban.

Candidate Obama knew he had to conceal his anti-gun tendencies; thus, he not only voiced support for the DC gun ban but also for the Supreme Court decision that overturned it (Heller, 2008). He would do the same thing as president in 2010 when Chicago’s gun ban was before the Supreme Court (McDonald, 2010).

As president, Obama has filled important posts with notorious anti-gunners. For example, Attorney General Eric Holder shares Obama’s opposition to gun rights. Under Holder’s watch, we have seen the Fast and Furious debacle — an attempt to justify new gun regulations come to pass with a body count in the hundreds. And there are new gun control requirements on long-gun sales in Arizona, Texas, California, and New Mexico.

And justices nominated by Obama have already begun chipping away at the Second Amendment and concealed-carry laws by ruling that there’s no Supreme Court-recognized, Constitutionally-explicit right for Americans to carry guns outside their homes.

And we can’t forget the fact that Obama recently expanded the ATF’s ability to seize guns without going through all the hassles of “due process.” Nor we can overlook the fact that we’re still waiting to see exactly what he meant via his 2011 promise to push for gun control “under the radar.”

When Sen. Obama was running for the presidency in 2008, the National Rifle Association warned that he would be the most anti-gun president in history. Larry Pratt, executive director at Gun Owners of America, sounded the same alarm. We didn’t listen then. It is imperative that we listen now.

About AWR Hawkins

AWR Hawkins writes for all the BIG sites, for Pajamas Media, for, for and now AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.

His southern drawl is frequently heard discussing his take on current events on radio shows like America’s Morning News, the G. Gordon Liddy Show, the Ken Pittman Show, and the NRA’s Cam & Company, among others. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal (summer 2010), and he holds a PhD in military history from Texas Tech University.

If you have questions or comments, email him at [email protected]

AWR Hawkins

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ivan, that is your opinion, and as I told Tex, you have every right to that opinion, no matter how wrong headed I think it is. My opinion of your opinion is ultimately completely irrelevant, so let’s move on to the meat and potatoes here. For starters, thank you for coming back with a logically presented argument. Your points are thought out, and, to an extent, valid. Would Obama be a lame duck president? Absolutely. You get no argument from me on that point. As for the ATF being a rogue agency, again, you are correct. On this one, however,… Read more »

Ivan Pistov

Joel, I don't think Romney is just as corrupt and anti gun as Obama by a LONG stretch. But here's what you're forgetting: Obama would be a LAME DUCK president who then could put out EO's with impunity and pretty much do anything he wants. It's apparent that Congress won't try to stop him. NRA can't stop him. The ATF is a rogue agency. I'm even concerned that if Romney is electd, the period between Nov 6 and Jan 20 2013 gives Obama 2 1/2 months to be that LAME DUCK. A lot can happen in 2.5 months. And Congress… Read more »


Tex, with all due respect, that's where you're wrong. Romney is not a good person. He has spent his professional career buying viable companies, systematically stripping all assets, laying off the workers, shutting the companies down, and sending the money off-shore. Check out his record on that front with Bain Capital. As for my "antics" getting anyone elected, you give me far too much credit sir. I am but one man. What I am attempting to do is point out the basic flaw in this line of thinking. Neither candidate will fix anything. They are both corrupt. Neither supports our… Read more »


Joel, Your antics will do nothing but get Obama elected. There IS a difference between Obama and Romney. We may not agree with all of Romney's views, but you will not agree with ANY of Obama's. Romney is a good person. Obama is a good Marxist.


Bottom line, voting for the lesser of two evils is exactly why this country is in the shape that it is. Who cares which politician takes away our rights? They are still gone. See my earlier analogy. The time has come to remove the entire damned bunch from power. Trying to affect change while hamstrung by our current corrupt system is a fool's errand. The entire system has become a cancer, malignant and growing exponentially. It will not get any better until the people of this country, originally designed to be the ruling body, step up and stand up for… Read more »


When Obama was an Illinois State Senator he supported SB1195 which was about as close to a total semi-auto ban has you could get. When Romney was governor he said in 2004 that people don’t need assault weapons! Personally Obama is bad news but Romney isn’t much better if there is an election to hold your nose and vote for the lesser of 2 evils I guess this is it. Here’s my take, I want to repeal the gun control laws on the books. In 1994 we were promised by the GOP that if we put them in power the… Read more »


And I ask again, why is one corrupt politician better than another? Both have proven that the laws they will enact, or enforce, are suited to one purpose only: theirs. Neither candidate cares a bit about your rights or mine. They are loyal to money and power. Period. Politicians of any ilk have exactly zero credibility, and to speak of good faith in regards to a politician is naive at best, and downright foolish in my personal opinion. "Let's all vote for Romney because he's so much better than Obama!" NO HE IS NOT. HE IS YET ANOTHER CORRUPT POLITICIAN,… Read more »


Agreed Romeny does not have a perfect record of voting for Gun Rights but he has been throughly vetted by the NRA and he shows us good faith by picking one of the most pro gun Congressmen going, in Paul Ryan. Obama and the democrats have come out swing for more gun control and Eric Holder has gotten away with a direct attack on the second amendment with Fast and Furious, time for a change, I'll take my chances with a new guy in Romney rather than a sure thing in Obama.


But you would have voters toe the party line and vote for Romney instead, who has just as abysmal a record on Second Amendment rights? Why is one corrupt politician that wants to take away our guns better than another corrupt politician that wants to take away our guns? That's like deciding whether you die of malaria or syphilis; the means doesn't really matter as much as the result. Yet, it's this kind of head in the sand "lesser of two evils" mentality that has crippled this country. How about neither of the damned evils, and quit allowing the evils… Read more »