Many pro-gun pundits and spokespersons for hunting and firearms organizations hollered a collective “I told you so!” last week when President Barack Obama said during his debate with Gov. Mitt Romney that he supported a renewed ban on the sale of certain rifles that are often mischaracterized by the general media as “assault weapons.”

When asked what his administration plans to do “to limit the availability of assault weapons,” the President turned to a time-worn and misleading assessment that “weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don’t belong on our streets.”

Such a comparison is disingenuous — because throughout American history, hunters and sportsmen have turned to modern and preferred firearms of the day for both hunting and personal protection, from flintlocks to carbines, and bolt actions to today’s AR-platform rifles.

“… what I’m trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally,” the President said.“Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my hometown of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence and they’re not using AK-47s. They’re using cheap handguns.”

With his comments on Oct. 16, was the President merely pandering for votes from those who support a return to the Clinton-era firearms restrictions, or was he actually posturing for a second term full of new anti-gun laws?

Frankly, it shouldn’t matter. At least, not as much as something else does.

Sportsmen and champions of the Second Amendment should be more concerned with what might occur within the judicial branch of government in the next 4 years than whether the President wants to see another assault weapons ban.

In his first term, President Obama named two U.S. Supreme Court Judges, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Both are widely considered as liberal leaning (translation: firearms restrictive) in their judicial philosophies, but because they replaced judges with long records of similar judicial tendencies, the essential dynamics of the court was unchanged by their appointments.

Many political observers believe the next one- or two-term president could potentially be called upon to appoint from one to three new justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Remember the Court’s 5-to-4 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, which for the first time held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms?

Early and absentee voting is already taking place in many states across the country. The constant bombardment of rhetoric will soon be over and it will be time to go to the polls and to exercise your right to vote.

See you there!

What are your thoughts about the President's
comments regarding "assault weapons"?