As I heard it our idiot Prime Minister told Obama that lots of guns were confiscated from law-obeying people after the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, and Obama thinks this is a grand idea.
As is usual from these massacre cases the wrong conclusion is drawn. They think that by removing guns they make everyone safe. They are impervious to the idea that the people at Port Arthur that day were already gun free, and that was the problem. Being gun free didn’t help them be safe; it killed them.
The more obvious conclusion, evident to anyone not conditioned to hate guns, is that if one person in that crowd that day in 1996 had had a gun to shoot back, the massacre would have stopped.
Anti-gun people like Obama can’t see that the bad people will never hand in their guns to the government, so only the people who would hand them in are those who do what the government tells them. I don’t believe that would make for a safer America. Obama is also hypocritical in that he may not carry a gun himself (maybe), but he surrounds himself with a bunch of people who do carry guns to protect him. Clearly he believes in the ability of guns to protect against violence. In what sense does he not believe in guns that everyone else should not have the same right of protection? He seems to be another of those who thinks that the Rules he favors are for other people.
An account of the Port Arthur massacre: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_%28Australia%29
Bugs Bunny: "I speak softly, but I carry a big stick."
Yosemite Sam: "Oh yeah? Well I speak LOUD! and I carry a BIGGER stick! and I use it, too!" BAM!