Here it comes again. Eric Holder says Barack is going to ban guns

Hey, blue dog democrats who post here and keep telling me that democrats don’t want to take my guns… when the head of the Justice Department says that the President wants to push through another ban, I should take that to mean… what exactly?

It is coming. Mark my words. They’ve already demonstrated that they don’t care what America wants. They know what’s best. They’re going to do what they want. Might as well throw this on the pile.  I’m not in the gun business anymore, so maybe I won’t get accused of fear mongering or profiteering this time, but if you want guns, don’t screw around. Get them now.

I also like how Mexico’s brutal drug war is now the fault of American guns. So we need to pass another AWB to protect the failed state of Mexico from itself…  Under Clinton’s ban, innercity gangs slaughtering each other was somehow the fault of flyover America. I’m pretty sure that wasn’t my fault, but I’m really damn sure that my guns aren’t causing the Zetas to slaughter rival drug lords.

Well, Eric Holder already said we’re cowards. I guess he’s thinking we’re going to be cowards about this too.

I think he might be mistaken.

A bit from another fiction project
Online Fiction: Sweothi City

24 thoughts on “Here it comes again. Eric Holder says Barack is going to ban guns”

  1. I’m not as well-versed in my early 90s political catch-phrases as I might be. WTF is a “cop-killer bullet” again?

  2. *sigh*

    I’m not gonna repost my last blog entry here. But I honestly think we’re getting the start of a diversion right now…

    Oh… “cop-killer bullets”? Is MEANT to portray “ammunition purpose-built to defeat tank armor”. Or that’s what you’re supposed to think. In actuality, it seems to mean everything from a .177 pellet on up…

  3. HI
    This would not be possible, at this time, if he really want to do like that, he must wait for some time, when common people feel safe and secure at his home and country,


  4. Most of my lefty friends agree with a strong 2nd Amendment, but unfortunately, it isn’t a major issue for them. Additionally, with the economy being what it is, this isn’t going to be a major issue for many people. The timing for banning “nasty” looking guns is perfect. I sincerely hope that gun-rights advocates can bring enough attention to this that the Administration will see that any ban is a bad idea.

    I have a hard time with this Mexico connection. I generally take the view that the US, on some level, should be concerned with our standing in the world and that we shouldn’t intentionally do things to screw over other countries. I fail to see even a minor connection between our gun laws and the violence in Mexico. Maybe they should work on the towering level of corruption they have and take some responsibility for creating the situation.

  5. What’s a blue dog? Because I know Obama and Holder are black weasels but I don’t know what a blue dog is.

    Anyway Holder is a fool. He is not going to ban assault weapons. We are not going to let him.

    That he thinks disarming Americans will reduce Mexican drug crime – it shows Holder really is a fool. Holder may also be on some of those Mexican drugs too. He talks like a crackhead. He pissed me off when he said Americans (and you know he meant to say Whites) are cowards. Well, I liked it better when Holder was just giving his racist rants/pep talks. If he actually starts trying to do things he’s really gonna screw things up.

  6. “blue dog” equals democrat candidate trained to bark like a conservative on command.

    The DNC used a bunch of them to fool rural voters into electing Dems again.

  7. I posted on someone else’s blog awhile ago about the MEXICO connection.

    Here in AZ, there is a gun shop owner on trial (at least, last I heard) for selling over 600 guns to people he knew were “bought” by Mexicans connected to the drug gangs. Basically, they pay someone here in the US a salary to acquire weapons for them.
    And, as I mentioned in that blog. I had gone into that shop a couple times, was the only one in there, and it was made evident to me by the owner that he could care less if I was interested in buying a gun or not —
    the last time I went in looking I had seen Baikal single shotties on GB for under $100 including S&H, and figured I’d give the local guys my monies if they were semi-close to that price. His — $245. He made a couple nasty “You Don’t Know What You’re Talking About Remarks”,
    and I left not to return after that —
    — chalking it up to his I’m From New Jersey And Came Out Here (AZ) To Help Gun Owners With Fair Prices AND YOU GUYS SCREW ME OVER By Not Buying Guns You Say You Want.

    So, I wouldn’t be in the least surprised that he knowingly sold guns to people who were passing them over the border.

    The BAN, it’s coming, definitely sooner than you may think, and it’s not going to be stopped at Assault Weapons Ban.
    What they cannot get classified as something people shouldn’t have they will find and use language to regulate the heck out of and/or apply a very stiff tax to —
    such as ammo —
    prices have been going up because of mfg’s supposedly passing along their expense increases.

    This administration will, if they can, apply a tax rape on top of policies (such as amounts and limits) I’m sure they’ll try to write into law.
    My concern on top of such — despite the deficit and projects not completed (wind powered Chicago, solar powered Phoenix), he’ll be swept back in along with the even more liberal Pelosi’s, Frank’s, Rangel’s, Kerry’s, etc, etc who will by that time be embiggened beyond their emboldenment by our President.

  8. Check the latest post at Munchkin Wrangler. Pelosi, Reid and a bunch of Dems in Congress are already saying they oppose the ban or at the very least won’t push for it.

    I’ve always agreed that Obama would sign any gun control legislation that came to his desk. But it appears that I was correct in thinking that the Dems in Congress don’t want to touch gun control with a ten foot pole. Holder’s call for a ban is posturing, nothing more–he gets to make the base happy by supporting a ban, while knowing that Congress won’t do anything that will cost them seats.

  9. Gun nuts are perverts. The USA is the only country in the world with this problem. We are being laughed at because of it. Future generations will never understand why this madness was tolerated for so long

  10. Larry: No, my best hope is that Democrats, like all politicians, will be more interested in self-preservation than in being beholden to their constituents. I don’t think that’s a big stretch.

    Craig: Do you have any actual evidence that guns are responsible for crime, or are you limited to self-importance and ad hominems?

  11. The Problem, Nick, is that many people are ignorant of the laws, are somewhat anti-gun (my mom will occasionally go out with me & my dad and brother to shoot, but believes that something must be done to keep the bad guys from getting guns and sees no sense to the Bushmaster or Saiga AK or handguns we have) because they can kill (unlike a car one drives because cars are everywhere, people are comfortable with them, and they won’t accidentally go boom) and will give this battle no thought, especially facing economic gloom & doom….

    What does anyone want with a military weapon is the accepted answer —

    As for Pelosi….I think you’d best be careful with her stance —
    “The NRA claims America has too many gun laws and existing laws are not enforced. They are wrong. Gun control laws are enforced. Today’s USA Today reports that enforcement of the Brady gun control law has blocked the sale of more than 400,000 illegal gun sales. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the McCarthy amendment. Gun control laws are not problem. The problem is gun control loopholes. Let’s close the loopholes”…this was from 1999, and if anything she’s more left now.
    Now, you may understand Nancy’s motives and language and philosophy better than I — but then please explain to me the McCarthy amendment that was pushed–

    As for the Mexico connection — found this link today —
    and it has a picture of the guy (who told me he was from New Jersey but the article states CA, and who said he moved his operations to AZ because he wanted to help Hunters) accused of selling over 600 weapons (mainly AK types) to Mexican drug gangs.

  12. Matt…while some of the guns may be coming from the US, most of the heavier ordnance is coming from Mexico’s own military. Often they wills how pictures of guns supposedly obtained in the US, and included will be things such as full auto machine guns and RPG’s which are simply not available or widely available here on the legal market. Those ARE things widely available to the Mexican military, however, and they have had a small problem of late with desertion, often times with soldiers taking their gear with them.

  13. One more thing…if Mexico wants guns to stop coming into Mexico from the US, perhaps they should control their side of the border a little bit better. Seems it would work a hell of a lot better than trying to deny US citizens their constitutional rights.

    We could even help them out a little and build a fence on our side, complete with remote security systems. But of course, that would have the side effect of cutting off the flow of illegal immigrants into the US. Can’t have that now, can we?

  14. I’m not disagreeing — what I am saying is such activity from a possible corrupt gun-shop owner here in the US will be used in attempts to begin to disarm us.

    And it’ll begin in a small, concise, manner so as to open a door because the vast majority of Jim Zumbo’s will not realize the overall ramifications and simply shrug their shoulders to its’ effect..
    Especially given the turmoil in Mexico.
    Stop and think about it —

    Why, if these accusations are true,(and having been in the particular shop in question and talking to the owner, who has given me the impression they could very well be), would such be the case ie Mexican gangsters buying guns in the US to send back to Mexico?

    Regarding the case – My understanding, again, limited to what I’ve heard & read here in Phoenix, at least 2 AKs and a .45 have been linked directly back to the shop.
    The .45, supposedly in the waistband of one of the drug cartel leaders when apprehended. So, if the case is proven, especially beyond doubt, look out.

    I expect, with Holder sitting in the position he is, the pro Obama administration media will increase their attention on the instability of Mexico as well as the threats and carnage from the cartels.
    As a result, before the end of this year there will be a strike coming out blitzing the AWB back into effect in a much wider application that it was previously.
    Hope my senses are dulled so I’m way out in the wrong Wake Up & Smell The Coffee territory here –

    Pelosi can be mouthing she’ll vote against such; however, I fully expect President Obama and US Attorney General Holder, in conjunction with Homeland Security Napolitano (take a look at her voting record — being from AZ, it concerned me when she was slotted for the position) will have the thing worded in such a way as to see the Democrats stand up and applaud more widely than they did for the stimulus speech.

    See, from their next logical approach — it’s becoming something Beyond Our Rights As Laid Out In The 2nd Amendment.
    It’s becoming Global and will have to be re-thought of as applying beyond our borders where our rights are much less meaningful.

    If you start to see more play up the scare tactics (such as the played up INHERITED the Worse Economy Since The Depression speeches used to justify the spending taking place with When as an End???) with regards to Not Just Illegal ‘immigrants’ BUT Terrorists routes into the US will be hitting the air waves.
    We can’t allow a Mumbai here. So, tougher precautions must be taken — and as a result — the ban will be right behind.

    As for Mexico controlling their side…I wish it was so simple –Mexico was allowed to become bought and paid for — you get a Federale with Huevo’s enough to stand up, most likely, if you find him again, he’ll be headless with a warning written boldly telling others what to expect if they are as set in their cause.

    Here in Phoenix, I know of 2 friends, living in “nicer” neighborhoods, who’ve had gangland killings within their block within the last 3 years.
    In fact, in one instance, the guy was taking a smoke break in his garage (wife won’t let him smoke in the house), heard gunshots, looked out of his garage and saw the shooters taking off….ran across the street to watch the guy die….
    didn’t even know it was a drug house, nor did the ‘neighbors’, based on his telling of it to me.

    Was it on tv or in the papers — not that I saw because it was bad guy killing bad guy.
    But, I expect such news to start showing up because I expect the administration will start cranking out the need to crackdown.
    And then it’ll begin.
    Corrupt Gun-Shops here in the US.
    Terror filtering in from a corrupt Mexico.
    Start taking away bits and pieces as necessary to stop the cancer.

  15. just to better re-word/explain one of many poorly worded sentences I blathered above —
    my friend didn’t run across the street to Watch the guy die — he doesn’t have a morbid interest in death.
    He ran over to see if he could help the guy, then realized how vulnerable he’d made himself and beat a hasty retreat. However, before returning to his home, he did look at the guy. He suspects the guy was dead.
    When the police arrived, he was.
    And, FYI, — in the other instance, my other friend wasn’t home. It happened mid morning. He was at work. Found out about it from neighbors when he got home that evening.

  16. Matt: I understand the points you’re making and you’re not necessarily wrong. There certainly will be those in Congress who are going to jump at the chance to push an AWB. But I honestly think that the vast majority of Democrats–particularly those who won by slim margins–are going to be too concerned about losing their seats or the party’s control over Congress to want anything to do with gun control. Politicians are exceptionally good at looking out for number one, and with the exception of those few Democrats whose constituencies actually favor gun control (Feinstein, McCarthy, etc) they know that pissing off gun owners brought about 12 years of Republican control of Congress.

  17. Nick, you’re dead on about politicians being about #1.
    I haven’t been in the world all that long, but I’ve been around long enough to have learned that lesson a long time ago.

    Maybe it was the issue of gun control that changed the power of the parties in the House & Senate during 1994.

    My memories of that time are fuzzy with regards to the who’s that were involved.
    What I recall is my dad talking about the stink Clinton was making about Health Care Reform as well as the Republicans being the champions of the Contract With America.

    Yet, I concede to you that the AWB was enacted just a few months prior to the mid-term elections.
    And, I can tell you my dad wasn’t happy about it despite his only owning so called normal “hunting” rifles and some single action pistols.

    From what I recall, based on his talking about it, it seemed it was passed rather decisively — with the backing of many of the Republicans in the Senate to boot???
    but that info is indeed fuzzy for me (I base it on recalling my dad sending McCain a rather harsh letter about the intent, but don’t remember him getting a reply) — and it was the House which basically flushed the Democrats in the elections of 1994, wasn’t it?

    However, I expect our President to strike while the striking is hot with regards to securing as many of his campaign “promises” as he can.
    Kind of like forcing a vote on something so expensive to the American people without anyone having time to read through, let alone make sense of. And being able to do it while at the same time criticizing the previous president for playing the very same SKY IS FALLING tactics.
    Therefore, with the play up given the current sweep netting some 750 or so bad guys tied to the Sinaloa Cartel which allowed our US Attorney General to state “They are a national-security threat,” and “They are lucrative. They are violent. And they are operated with stunning planning and precision.”
    Such, coupled with knowing some of our Homeland Security Secretary’s past voting record —
    Me — I think we best listen for buzz words and watch for changes in what the media is presenting.
    And I don’t believe it’ll come as a big type of initiative — I believe it’ll begin in small increments vague enough to seem “best” by most people.

    As Steve S above noted —
    Most of my lefty friends agree with a strong 2nd Amendment, but unfortunately, it isn’t a major issue for them. Additionally, with the economy being what it is, this isn’t going to be a major issue for many people.

    Honestly, I’ve righty friends who are the same way….ie Who needs a fully automatic weapon?
    And when I reply, well, if I could afford one, I do, they look at me rather incredulously.

    1994 V2.0 — indeed I see in the near future. I won’t speak to Civil War as a result.
    I do believe this administration is very aware of the run on weapons and ammunition since coming into power.
    I don’t expect them to wait until after 2010 to begin addressing such whether it begins as a series of “luxury” taxes or something similar.
    Initially, I was thinking maybe steps would come after 2010. Less so now that ammunition that was set aside for the middle east maybe coming home.

    Something this administration did “inherit” is the mess in Mexico.
    So, I could also see them begin to enact longer waiting periods with tougher background checks on shops within 500 miles of the border (some distance chosen) regardless of the state the shops are in.
    The things would could have been different if the citizens were armed in Mumbai arguments is one I don’t expect they buy into in any form.

    But I’m encouraged that there are still many out there who, like Larry in starting this stated —
    Well, Eric Holder already said we’re cowards. I guess he’s thinking we’re going to be cowards about this too. I think he might be mistaken

  18. Matt, I , unfortunately, do see the potential of a Civil War. I’d rather it not happen, but I see the possibility as entirely too real.
    Yeah, how’s that going for you there, 52?

  19. cmblake6….
    As I said, I won’t speak to that,
    however, I guess I’d better start learning some trapping-survival skills —
    my dad has already scouted some sites out around the various lakes in the Phoenix metro area, but he’ll be the first to admit his ‘in country’ skills are limited and haven’t been practiced for years & years as his knees started acting up years ago..
    “The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” —- right???

  20. yeah, let them do another AWB, then standback from the polls in 2010. Gun regulation is the third rail in politics for the dems. That is why they lost both houses of congress in 1994 and didn’t get it back until 2006. They are scared crapless that the Lightbringer and his minions are blindly going down that road again.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.