Home Ammunition Don’t underestimate the stupid things President Obama says about gun control

Don’t underestimate the stupid things President Obama says about gun control

Don’t underestimate the stupid things President Obama says about gun control


As Pro-2nd Amendment gun owners, many of us with average and above intelligence listen in disgust to President Barack Obama when a tragic mass shooting occurs as he struggles to contain his excitement and squeeze out a fake tear or two to convince someone – anyone – that he cares about someone other than himself and his “legacy”. But because of so many of the stupid things he says, many pro-gun Americans simply dismiss his ignorant, agenda-driven comments. I say, not so fast.

After Tuesday’s horrific shooting in Oregon, President Obama said that his biggest frustration as president is that American society has refused to go along with his sweeping gun control efforts.

“People ask me what I’m proudest of and what are my biggest frustrations as president,” Obama said. “My biggest frustration is that this society hasn’t been willing to take some basic steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who can do damage.”

He went on to make a subtle, yet telling comment about ammunition.

“You know, the United States does not have a monopoly on crazy people. It’s not the only country that has psychosis. And yet, we kill each other in these mass shootings at rates that are exponentially higher than any place else,” Obama said, according to BuzzFeed. “Well, what’s the difference? The difference is, is that these guys can stack up a bunch of ammunition in their houses and that’s sort of par for the course.”

While the President is correct that we don’t have a “monopoly on crazy people”, we clearly have a monopoly on unqualified, unConstitutional, and uninformed leaders. The President is once again playing games and pandering to the low-information voters out there. Does he really believe that an unhinged murderer will make the moral decision NOT to murder if our country unconstitutionally bans or limits access to guns? A psychopath did not become one after being exposed to a gun. He was one prior to that. The absence of a gun ONLY eliminates the possibility of a gun being used in that murder; it does not eliminate the murder itself. Someone still dies. Does it make gun-grabbers happy when someone is killed with a knife, a hammer, or a spoon? Here are some numbers that Barack Obama and his followers ignore and don’t want you to know:

The United States has a homicide rate of less than 4.99 per 100,000 people. Not acceptable. But look at JUST the top 10 countries’ with the world’s highest homicide rates:
Screen Shot 2014-06-11 at 1.33.22 PM
1. Honduras: 90.4 (per 100,000)
2. Venezuela: 53.7
3. Belize: 44.7
4. El Salvador: 41.2
5. Guatemala: 39.9
6. Jamaica: 39.3
7. Swaziland: 33.8
8. Saint Kitts and Nevis: 33.6
9. South Africa: 31.0
10. Colombia: 30.8

–. United States: 4.99

With numbers like these, does the Presdient really want to compare the U.S.’s murder rate to the rest of the world’s? While the U.S.’s numbers of murders committed using guns is slightly higher than other countries, clearly guns are not the problem for people murdering each other or else many of those other countries with strict gun control laws (Venezuela: 53.7) wouldn’t have murder rates so ridiculously high. Clearly gun control isn’t curbing their murder rate. Hmm, I wonder if more good guys with guns would help there?

And before a gun grabber says that some of those other countries’ own governments are responsible for many of those killings of their own people I will remind you that that is precisely the reason why our 2nd Amendment was written and is so very necessary.

Now back to the comment President Obama made about “The difference is, is that these guys can stack up a bunch of ammunition in their houses”. While his comments appear stupid to any half-educated person, he means what he is saying and it is no accident that he’s saying it. He is trying to put doubt into weaker minds out there that an average American should not be ALLOWED to own or “stack up a bunch” of ammo in their house.

By making less-educated, lazy voters who are only concerned with who’s in the top 10 on American Idol fear that their neighbor is doing something wrong by simply purchasing a completely legal retail item available in any normal retail store, Obama is creating doubt in the minds of the easily-duped voter and is further creating a culture of ignorant people to side with him in his bid to enact stiffer, unconstitutional gun control laws. Then he can appear to be “compromising” by agreeing to ONLY make people register to purchase ammunition rather than to completely ban us from “stacking up a bunch”.

Does President Obama appear stupid? Yes. And maybe he is. But somebody calling the shots from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue knows what they’re doing and since their attack on guns has failed miserably, they are shifting their focus to our ammo. Stack up a bunch in your houses, boys and girls!


  • David Mallet

    Paul, I own eight firearms, have spent 40 years trained in constitutional law … and I’m a firm believer in the crystal clear interpretation of the Second Amendment. But your article above is a misinformed rant that distorts facts and makes a tasteless verbal attack on the President. First, although I disagree with President Obama’s position on guns, your diatribe about his supposed ‘excitement’ about mass murder is … a hysterical and misguided response. You’re projecting something akin to paranoia based on the President’s contrary position about firearms. I don’t agree with his position, either, but to accuse him of becoming excited about deaths, about faking tears, about being more concerned about his legacy … is ignorance at its worst. Your article is rife with pejorative words about the stupidity of voters, about the President’s lack of understanding about the US Constitution (he is, after all, a trained constitutional expert, as I am, though we disagree about the Second Amendment.) Taking a personal whack at someone who disagrees with you … you’ll lose those rational people sitting on the fence about firearms issues.

    But where your bias and ignorance really reveal itself is in your cherry picking of statistics. Those countries you listed that have horrific per capita murders by firearms are all Third World countries in which gangs, drugs, graft, corruption and violence permeate the entire strata of society. You fail to list the MANY other countries in which the homicide by firearm rate is considerably less than in the US. To anyone who understands statistics, sociology and demographics, there is a clear cut link between firearms availability and murder by firearm. The conclusion? The US has a very high murder by firearms rate because of how readily available firearms are.

    When you choose to make a specious argument based on incorrect facts, unfounded facts, incomplete facts … you destroy the argument. When you make ad hominem attacks by making false accusations and using descriptors that are mere speculation … you destroy the argument.

    I love firearms, especially handguns, I believe in the absolute right to bear arms, and I abhor virtually all gun legislation.

    You can show respect for our Commander in Chief. He’s your president, too. You can acknowledge that murder by firearms is a serious problem in our country.

    You can do those things and not have to resort to ridiculous, ignorant assertions … because all you need is one statement: The Second Amendment to the US Constitution grants the absolute right to bears arms without infringement.


    If you stick to that one fact — every citizen’s inalienable right to bear arms — you’ll gain many more converts and supporters than when you write things that are both inaccurate and offensive. We need articulate spokespeople, Paul, who write articulate, thoughtful articles.