Setting something straight -- Obama on gun control

[draconis]

Prompted by a discussion in radarrider's LJ, I decided to do some checking to see what Obama's stance on gun control really was.

ETA: I have been told that my understanding of this information is exactly backwards. Unfortunately, the link used to support this claim did not work, so I cannot evaluate it at this time.


GoVote.com posted this snipped from the 2007 NAACP Presidential Primary Forum:

Q: How would you address gun violence that continues to be the #1 cause of death among African-American men?

A:You know, when the massacre happened at Virginia Tech, I think all of us were grief stricken and shocked by the carnage. But in this year alone, in Chicago, we've had 34 Chicago public school students gunned down and killed. And for the most part, there has been silence. We knowwhat to do. We've got to enforce the gun laws that are on the books. We've got to make sure that unscrupulous gun dealers aren't loading up vans and dumping guns in our communities, because we know they're not made in our communities. There aren't any gun manufacturers here, right here in the middle of Detroit. But what we also have to do is to make sure that we change our politics so that we care just as much about those 30-some children in Chicago who've been shot as we do the children in VirginiaTech. That's a mindset that we have to have in the White House and we don't have it right now. [emphasis added]

This does not sound to me like someone who is gung-ho to overturn the Second Amendment -- he's talking about enforcing existing laws, not making new ones -- or revoking existing rights.


The folks at OnTheIssues.org (among other) mention that Obama "Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)". However, if you look at the actual provisions of that bill (again, from GoVote.com), here is what you find:

A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. Voting YES would:

• Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime


• Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect


• Call for the dismissal of all qualified civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment by the court in which the action was brought


• Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition, and sets a minimum prison term of 15 years for violations


• Require all licensed importers, manufacturers and dealers who engage in thetransfer of handguns to provide secure gun storage or safety devices

Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S 397; vote number 2005-219 on Jul 29, 2005

Okay... technically, he voted against prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. Technically, that statement is true. However, if you actually look at the bill in question, you'll see that the lawsuits it would have shielded them from are those pertaining to product defects. Hopefully you will also see other points that would make you want such a bill opposed.

Personally, I'd have voted against this bill, and I'm glad that he did!