Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:37 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: 23 executive actions on gun control Back to Topics
oilpan4

Champion Author
Virginia

Posts:13,622
Points:331,550
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 2:48:46 AM

1. "Issue a presidential memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system."

2. "Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system."

3. "Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system."

--For Items 1 through 3, How can they not already be doing this?

4. "Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks."

--As long as they don't violate the Constitution in doing so.

5. "Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun."

--They have this ability already. How can they not already be doing this? Its called good police work.

6. "Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers."

-- Dealers already know how to do this. Some dealers refuse to do so.

7. "Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign."

--NRA has been all over this for years. Welcome to the party.

8. "Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission)."

--Seems pointless.

9. "Issue a presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations."

--How can they not already be doing this? Its called regular police work.

10. "Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement."

-- Now here is a good one, I have occasionally ran into the problem of police blowing off reports of stolen guns.

11. "Nominate an ATF director."

--We shouldn't need an executive order telling government to do its job.

12. "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations."

-- I have had this training and its pretty much useless. All it does is tell you to lock doors and hide while you are disarmed in side your "gun free zone" place of employment. I guess it could help you by putting people who are truly clueless between you and the shooter.
We look at these mass shootings and know that the shooters want to trap groups of people inside rooms and shoot them all.
If you lock the door and the perp has a gun they can shoot the lock off very easy with a rifle or shot gun.
This training teaches you to put your self the ideal situation for the for the shooter to kill you. Seems strange doesn't it?
I say get out side, find concealment and cover, somewhere with lots of directions to run, with lots of objects to obscure you and obstruct the flight path of bullets. No active shooter has tried to go after runners outside, because there are cops with guns out side and there are lots of rooms full of defenceless people. Which one do you think an shooter would go after?
Also if every one is locked in their offices whats to stop the perp from going from shooter to arsonist mode?

13. "Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime."

-- We have been saying this for years.

14. "Issue a presidential memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence."

15. "Direct the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies."

-- Sounds like a return of the "smart gun" push that has all but failed.

16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."

-- Normally I don't recommend lieing to your doctor.

17. "Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities."

-- They already know this.

18. "Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers."

19. "Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education."

20. "Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover."

21. "Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges."

22. "Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations."

23. "Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health."

-- 18 through 23, The title of this article should be the 6 executive actions that we should have done 14 or 15 years ago.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/obama-to-announce-gun-control-proposals-shortly/?iref=allsearch

[Edited by: oilpan4 at 1/17/2013 2:52:29 AM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,622
Points:331,550
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2013 10:26:56 PM

The main item on there that could trash the constitution is #4.
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:22,983
Points:3,318,335
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2013 7:47:23 AM

Actually it should read "23 ways to trash the Constitution".
Profile Pic
MaggieMae07
Champion Author South Dakota

Posts:31,539
Points:2,634,405
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2013 3:56:22 AM

16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."
How does he propose circumventing HIPAA laws that protect patient privacy? Even if a doctor asked such a question that information would be confidential.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,123
Points:1,518,795
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2013 9:09:37 PM

AZmike - one of the gripes is he is making such a big deal of how somehow this will make us safer adn even he admits it will have no impact at all on events like what started the big uproar.

We dont know how much it will all end up costing in more wasted tax dollars or incremental loss in freedom but not very many people in 'flyover country' trust Obama or his supporters.
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2013 5:24:17 PM

I don't get it. Conservatives are all bent out of shape from the president issuing all sorts of executive orders, all of which merely reinforce existing laws on the books.

Whats the big deal here?

Nothing i being changed by the president. Congress still has the powers it did before. Any laws changing current gun regulation still has to go through them.

What's the point in all of those conservative sherifs and state governors coming out proclaiming that they will ignore any executive orders, when all they are doing is restating existing law?
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,987
Points:2,309,585
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2013 3:31:08 PM

Wanda: <<<"Obama & the Liberal Government wants to know where all the guns are so they can take them from you!">>>

******

What guns? I don't have any... :)
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,622
Points:331,550
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2013 3:26:24 PM

"ostracize gun owners"

They are already trying to do that on the other posts. But at least for now they are making them selves look pretty stupid.
Profile Pic
Wanda127
Champion Author Florida

Posts:4,962
Points:1,509,710
Joined:May 2010
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2013 11:33:46 AM

"16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."

-- Normally I don't recommend lieing to your doctor."

Unless you are mentality ill Dr.'s have no right to know if you have Guns in your home.

Obama & the Liberal Government wants to know where all the guns are so they can take them from you!
Profile Pic
xrdc
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:6,990
Points:668,275
Joined:Apr 2008
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2013 11:03:29 AM


More evidence of the intention of the Left to disarm and/or ostracize gun owners:

Democrats' First Gun Bill Ordered Confiscation of Firearms!

If we don't fight these jerks we deserve to lose our freedoms.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,123
Points:1,518,795
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 20, 2013 5:46:12 PM

Works for Obama and his funding sources.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,050
Points:2,978,470
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 20, 2013 3:00:00 PM

<<Instead of worrying about Obama taking your guns you better worry about your State game warden. He can and will confiscate your weapon(s). Plus he doesn't need a warrant to check your home or vehicle.>>

Under what exception to the constitutional requirement for a warrant based upon probable cause?
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,060
Points:3,443,820
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 20, 2013 11:55:31 AM

gocatgo said: "Plus he doesn't need a warrant to check your home or vehicle."

--vehicle, maybe. Home? Uhh.. I think you're dead wrong on that one. That would be a SERIOUS violation of the constitution.
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,494
Points:3,130,435
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 20, 2013 12:19:02 AM


.Obama: "I Don't Believe People Should Be Able To Own Guns"

Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 20, 2013 12:12:49 AM

gocat, I do not need to be a mind reader. Obama's own words from his past tell you his true feelings.

"I don't believe people should be allowed to own guns"
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,494
Points:3,130,435
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 19, 2013 11:00:22 PM



nstrdnvstr, perhaps they thought that only Mexicans would be killed, so it was an acceptable risk.

They didn't shut the operation down until an American was killed.



[Edited by: Panama19 at 1/19/2013 11:02:23 PM EST]
Profile Pic
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:40,744
Points:4,580,380
Joined:May 2001
Message Posted: Jan 19, 2013 6:12:46 PM

Panama, they also apparently didn't think it would be dangerous to give assault weapons to Mexican drug lords.

Maybe they should explain that to the families of the dead Mexicans and border patrol agent.
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,494
Points:3,130,435
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 19, 2013 3:53:42 PM


The one that concerns me the most is:

"4. Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks."

Does anyone remember that threat assessment by the Homeland Security Dept. that called out evangelicals, Tea Party members and veterans as potential threats to be watched?

And now we see Holder put in a position of determining who are dangerous people not able to own guns?

The man who didn't think that New Black Panther thugs threatening white voters in front of a polling place was a crime, or that the Voting Rights Act was intended to protect white people?

Really?


[Edited by: Panama19 at 1/19/2013 3:54:56 PM EST]
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,015
Points:3,129,510
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 19, 2013 1:15:15 PM

Afs, "against that as well" against a Reagan idea? Wow that's a new one on me. "He thinks he is the real story", no I think the Sandy Hook is the real story. "Btw he can't take our guns", I agree 100% unless he becomes a game warden. I doubt if you are a certified mind reader so I call into question your ability to know what anyone thinks especially the Prez.

sgm, "he thinks he can take our guns and that is the real story". Can you back that up with a quote from Obama saying he will take our guns? This topic seems to be a gathering place for mind readers. The real "schizoid arguments" are being made by those crying "their coming to get our guns". Been hearing that old tale for decades.

Instead of worrying about Obama taking your guns you better worry about your State game warden. He can and will confiscate your weapon(s). Plus he doesn't need a warrant to check your home or vehicle.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,060
Points:3,443,820
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 19, 2013 12:40:11 PM

Oilpan posted: "9. "Issue a presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations."

--And what about State, County, Local, Regional and Special police forces?? (Special cops are, for example, railroad cops or university cops) Shouldn't they be doing traces on guns recovered in law enforcement actions? I'm sure the Feds had better already be doing traces, unless the guns were F&F guns. That would be more bad publicity for our idiot in chief.

As to "22. "Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations."
This has already been covered some time ago. Mental health parity means that mental health conditions must be covered by insurers at the same reimbursement and coverage rates as physical diseases, injuries or conditions. This has already been made the law.

Also note that 19 of these "Royal Edicts" deal with guns.. the other 4 deal with mental health. Use this to get inside the heads of fool, anti-gun liberals, such as Obama and Biden. If we do the percentages, it must be 82.6% the fault of guns, and 17.4% the fault of the shooter and his disease. But does that mean that we won't eliminate the problem if we make guns illegal? Will they use machetes, knives, swords, spears, arrows, poison gas or explosives next time? And how will this affect the 99%+++ of gun owners who are perfectly legal folks and sport shooters? So we're going to take the right away from 99+% of people, to "save society" from the other <<1% who are mentally ill or criminals?
Profile Pic
RAB2010
All-Star Author Kalamazoo

Posts:649
Points:77,710
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 10:03:17 PM

Ahhh . . . the sweet sound of impeachment papers rustling. Then may come charges of treason. Perhaps followed by trial and conviction, then hanging.
Profile Pic
RAB2010
All-Star Author Kalamazoo

Posts:649
Points:77,710
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 10:01:55 PM

Vague and arguable. The man in the oval office is stirring the pot.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 9:35:16 PM

"NRA passed a law that says so."

Huh? Since when did the NRA pass laws in our country?
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,987
Points:2,309,585
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 9:26:33 PM

Obama has now decided to take on the role of the legislative branch of government, doesn't this make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Profile Pic
johntxx
Champion Author Texas

Posts:5,614
Points:1,213,670
Joined:Aug 2011
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 8:56:54 AM

"Gun Control is not about guns. It's about CONTROL!" and thanks jdhelm for the post. I needed a little chuck this morning, and definitely on point. I can envision the expression on her face--priceless..

[Edited by: johntxx at 1/18/2013 9:02:34 AM EST]
Profile Pic
jdhelm
Champion Author Iowa

Posts:16,006
Points:1,788,740
Joined:Dec 2009
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 8:21:42 AM

this story has circulated around as factual since 1999, however, it's just a story, but - has some merit right now:

-

General Cosgrove was interviewed on the radio recently.
Read his reply to the lady who interviewed him concerning guns and children.
Regardless of how you feel about gun laws you have to love this! This is one of the best comeback lines of all time.
In a portion of an ABC radio interview between a female broadcaster and General Cosgrove who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop visiting his military Headquarters.

... FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
So, General Cosgrove, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?

GENERAL COSGROVE:!
We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery and shooting.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle range.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
But you're equipping them to become violent killers.

GENERAL COSGROVE:
Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?

The radiocast went silent for 46 seconds and when it returned, this interview was over.
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,622
Points:331,550
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 4:13:44 AM

"When this subject came up, one Texas politician said it was all being handled by the BATF. The same politician snuck an amendment onto a defense spending bill that made it impossible".

I know police doing the instant FBI check hasn't always been possible. But a little police department in Maine has ran all my " FBI instant background checks" before signing the paper work allowing me to transfer or build NFA weapons.
This has been going on since the early 2000s.

"We had almost no mass murders back then, now there are more"!

The 1994 to 2004 period saw the worse 2 mass murders by shooters in the US.
Profile Pic
worryfree
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,213
Points:2,409,100
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 10:54:39 PM

The purpose of the second amendment is to guarantee any non felon citizen can have any weapon he/she wants. No limitations. Tank you very much. (satire)
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,123
Points:1,518,795
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 8:40:43 PM

Wonder why he didnt discuss his program to fix this problem too.
.
>>>If gun-control worked, the president's hometown would be safe. Instead, gangs of fatherless youths daily kill other fatherless youths. How about an executive order endorsing marriage and intact families?

We do not know how history might have been different had the parents of Newtown shooter Adam Lanza not divorced in 2009, leaving the troubled young man with his mother in a single-parent home. But if there's a thread that links the carnage at Sandy Hook with the 500-plus murders in Chicago in 2012, it's not just the use of guns to kill. It's also the absence of an intact nuclear family.

Neither do we know if President Obama is aware of the now-canceled cable "reality" show "All My Babies' Mamas" that was dropped from Oprah Winfrey's Oxygen network after a public outcry. The show was to follow Shawty Lo, a rapper from Atlanta who fathered 11 children by 10 mothers.<<<

Before this devolves into another race based squabble - lets look at the problem and be colorblind about it. Lets talk about people first.
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,574
Points:2,250,200
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 7:45:47 PM



‘Family’ radio host: Obama may target conservatives for gun seizures

Topics: Obama * President Barack Obama

On a Thursday American Family Radio broadcast, host Buster Wilson warned listeners that President Barack Obama now has the power to take guns away, not from all Americans, but only from conservatives, adding that he’s been openly laying the groundwork for the move since 2009.

“What if the attorney general, and listen the reason I say this might happen is because if you remember the first report put out by the Director of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, when the president became President of the United States, she put out a paper talking about the people who are the categories of people who might be homegrown terrorists,” he said.

“In that list, she put people who believe in the second coming of Jesus Christ, people who believe in pro-life issues, people who don’t believe in having illegal aliens here, they put a lot of good, decent categories of people in that paper,” Wilson added.

That’s when he unfurled his real conspiracy theory, pinpointing the fourth executive order Obama proposed on Wednesday. “Well here’s what number four says, the attorney general can put who he wants to on the list of people who are too dangerous to get guns. What if he decides radio talk show hosts who don’t believe in gay marriage, they’re dangerous, so they shouldn’t get guns? What about pastors who preach against abortion and homosexuality? They’re too dangerous get guns. That could happen.”

Wilson’s spiel is wrong at its most basic premise: The DHS does not consider Christians or conservatives to be a threat and the president hasn’t even come close to proposing gun seizures.

Far from granting the power to add Christians or anti-LGBT activists to a list of dangerous people, the president’s fourth executive order on firearms directs the attorney general to ensure the categories on the prohibited purchase list encompass individuals known to be a threat to society. Similarly, several other proposed executive orders relate to hardening the nation’s background check system, in an effort to prevent dangerous people from acquiring firearms. This is nothing new, but it is an effort to firm up existing laws.

Additionally, the 2009 DHS report Wilson mentions (PDF) does not specify Christians or anti-immigrant activists as dangerous people, but it does warn that the recession, combined with the election of the nation’s first African-American president, could cause a resurgence in right-wing extremism. In particular, it accurately warned that militia groups and white supremacist gangs have adopted the political movement as a recruiting tool.

Despite the seemingly prophetic political forecast, the author of that report was fired from the agency after it caused a media firestorm. “There’ve been no hearings about the rising white supremacist threat, but there’s been a long list of attacks over the last few years,” former DHS Analyst Daryl Johnson told Wired last August. “But they still hold hearings about Muslim extremism. It’s out of balance.”

Wilson didn’t comment on whether he truly believes the Ku Klux Klan and militia-turned-cop-killers Jerry and Joe Kane are “good, decent” folks.

Raw Story (http://s.tt/1yBwo)



[Edited by: sissurf at 1/17/2013 7:47:08 PM EST]
Profile Pic
YDraigGoch
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:7,346
Points:86,435
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 7:37:18 PM

--For Items 1 through 3, How can they not already be doing this?--

See my link below

--They have this ability already. How can they not already be doing this? Its called good police work.==

When this subject came up, one Texas politician said it was all being handled by the BATF. The same politician snuck an amendment onto a defense spending bill that made it impossible.

6. "Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers."

-- Dealers already know how to do this. Some dealers refuse to do so.

They are not required to. NRA passed a law that says so. Good dealers do it. Rogue dealers do not, and sell guns to bad guys.

I explain in detail why none odf these things are happening.

Oilpan; you and I are mostly in agreement about what works and what does not. Sadly, the very people who are supposed to represent us in the gun community have made it impossible through back door legislation. They talk about checking for mental illness, criminal backgrounds and rogue gun dealers. But they have slipped in legislation that makes all their rhetoric a falsehood.

Most of the points you listed cannot be done, because it is against the law. So frightened people on the other side, who would like to see the things you suggest, will find themselves blocked at every turn.

So they turn to other means, like gun bans, magazine bans and such.

If the NRA keeps going as they are, we will all lose our rights to keep and bear arms.

And the criminals will have won.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,123
Points:1,518,795
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 5:58:34 PM

"13. "Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime."

Hey does this apply to those who knowingly allowed people to buy guns adn give them to drug dealers? Do we really want to hold them accountable and charge them with breaking the laws - starting with HOlder?

Profile Pic
noseatbelt
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:8,133
Points:212,590
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 5:36:17 PM

The citizens, of australia, didn't think their government would, or could take their guns, but guess, what it happened. I wouldn't put anything past obama, let alone believe anything he says about it.
Profile Pic
BlackGumTree
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:18,444
Points:1,459,940
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 2:54:30 PM

I will propose to Virginia delegates something along these lines:

"It shall be illegal to impede the sale of arms and/or ammunition needed by citizens to exercise their right to keep and bear arms.

Anyone convicted to impeding or attempting to impede the sale of guns and /or ammunition shall be fined $1,000, be incarcerated for 90 days and restricted from representing for the next 20 years citizens of Virginia in any elective office they can vote for.

This shall also apply to anyone or orders the violation of this legislation.

Any guns commonly used today and the ammunition and cartridges necessary shall be legal for Virginia citizens to own. This will include M-16s and AK-47s as they are co0mmonly used by today's military."

[Edited by: BlackGumTree at 1/17/2013 3:00:15 PM EST]
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,770
Points:140,090
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 12:42:11 PM

This is the first time I have read these orders and like I already suspected, its mostly babble but with a few weird Obamacare plug ins.

#4 is an open ended order to do whatever Holder dictates -- hes incompetent already, now he has "more flexibility"

They aren't going to take anyone's guns away, they are just going to make licensing so expensive that you wont be able to afford to keep them.

If you fail to pay down the road (for any reason, even if you are in a coma in the hospital) -- ATF kicks down your door and rolls your gun safe out the door.

No criminals will get their doors smashed in by ATF because they never complied with licensing -- no record, no guns in there so there isnt any.

This is your Obamanation that I didn't vote for. All these rules affect ordinary citizens. Criminals just laugh and head to their next armed robbery crime.

Did we not learn anything from the completely useless Brady Bill decades ago? We had almost no mass murders back then, now there are more!



[Edited by: e_jeepin at 1/17/2013 12:47:45 PM EST]
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 12:16:13 PM

Hmm...wonder why it did not address Hollywood movies? Think possibly because Hollywood types donate to the Democrat cause at a 20:1 rate as compared to the NRA?
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 11:52:54 AM

As I have already stated...one of the biggest problems with the emotional outpouring after a tragedy is that people really do not understand the purpose of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,050
Points:2,978,470
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 11:32:05 AM

"A Wyoming bill specifies that any federal limitation on guns would be unenforceable. It also would make it a state felony for federal agents to try to enforce restrictions."

And yet, the Supreme Court's conservative majority has already said that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited:

From District of Columbia v. Heller:

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.”

(citations omitted).

[Edited by: sgm4law at 1/17/2013 11:32:41 AM EST]
Profile Pic
jdhelm
Champion Author Iowa

Posts:16,006
Points:1,788,740
Joined:Dec 2009
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 11:23:03 AM

sheriffs and state lawmakers will ignore obama's gun control executive orders and follow the oath they took to uphold the constitution

-

"A lot of sheriffs are now standing up and saying, 'Follow the Constitution,'" said Josephine County Sheriff Gil Gilbertson, whose territory covers the timbered mountains of southwestern Oregon.

But their actual powers to defy federal law are limited. And much of the impassioned rhetoric amounts to political posturing until — and if — Congress acts.

-

In Mississippi, Gov. Phil Bryant, a Republican, urged the Legislature to make it illegal to enforce any executive order by the president that violates the Constitution.

"If someone kicks open my door and they're entering my home, I'd like as many bullets as I could to protect my children, and if I only have three, then the ability for me to protect my family is greatly diminished," Bryant said. "And what we're doing now is saying, 'We're standing against the federal government taking away our civil liberties.'"

-

Tennessee Republican state Rep. Joe Carr wants to make it a state crime for federal agents to enforce any ban on firearms or ammunition. Carr instead called for more armed guards at schools.

"We're tired of political antics, cheap props of using children as bait to gin up emotional attachment for an issue that quite honestly doesn't solve the problem," Carr said.

Legislative proposals to pre-empt new federal gun restrictions also have arisen in Wyoming, Utah and Alaska.

-

A Wyoming bill specifies that any federal limitation on guns would be unenforceable. It also would make it a state felony for federal agents to try to enforce restrictions.

"I think there are a lot of people who would want to take all of our guns if they could," said co-sponsor Rep. Kendell Kroeker, a Republican. "And they're only restrained by the opposition of the people, and other lawmakers who are concerned about our rights."

Republican state Sen. Larry Hicks credited Wyoming's high rate of gun ownership for a low rate of gun violence.

"Our kids grow up around firearms, and they also grow up hunting, and they know what the consequences are of taking a life," Hicks said. "We're not insulated from the real world in Wyoming."

In Utah, some Republicans are preparing legislation to exempt the state from federal gun laws — and fine any federal agents who try to seize guns. A bill in the Alaska House would make it a misdemeanor for a federal agent to enforce new restrictions on gun ownership.

-

note - there are 20 pages to this news article on Yahoo news on the link above.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,050
Points:2,978,470
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 11:12:22 AM

"BTW, he cannot take our guns...trust me. But that he THINKS he can is the real story. The Constitution and Bill of Rights guarantees that right and he knows it and so does Congress and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court."

My point is that there is a strain of conservative posts on here (as well as gun sales going through the roof) that indicate that people think that gun sales will be restricted and guns will be banned or confiscated.

In contrast with that strain, there is the strain that says Obama sucks because he isn't doing anything about guns (not that they want him to). It's a sort of schizoid set of arguments, and I hope both sides aren't being argued by the same people.

Second, he does not "THINK he can do so" -- as he has stated, quite clearly, that is not what he wants to do.

Third, HIPAA is a good idea that is sometimes stupid in its execution, creating needless barriers to the flow of information. I'm pretty sure we're all aware of this, if we've ever tried to do anything that involves exchanging health care information with different providers, or God forbid, tried to take care of health care payments information for one's spouse.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 11:04:49 AM

BTW, he cannot take our guns...trust me. But that he THINKS he can is the real story. The Constitution and Bill of Rights guarantees that right and he knows it and so does Congress and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 11:03:28 AM

sgm, because it makes our president look like his usual self...full of sound and fury signifying nothing. What exactly do his executive orders do? Please explain...because it looks like nothing that can be enforced...and nothing that the ACLU will not fight when it comes to a person's medical privacy.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,050
Points:2,978,470
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 10:59:05 AM

If it's such a non-story, how does fit in with the idiotic paranoia about "Obama's going to take our guns"?
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 10:57:58 AM

gocat, and we were against that as well.
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,015
Points:3,129,510
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 10:48:11 AM

Then of course we have the Reagan example to follow.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,762
Points:1,827,535
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 10:28:21 AM

Does this even do anything? Seems like it is nothing but window dressing to make it look like they are doing something. The problem is they know they cannot do too much because of what the Constitution represents! Wonder how many people actually know what the Constitution and Bill of Rights actually does and its intended purpose...
Profile Pic
xrdc
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:6,990
Points:668,275
Joined:Apr 2008
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 9:52:52 AM


Not 24?

Where is the executive order preventing the sale of arms by the federal government to Mexican drug cartels?

SSDD
Profile Pic
BlackGumTree
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:18,444
Points:1,459,940
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 9:28:40 AM

Obama needs to wake up to the fact that he is no longer in the legislative branch of the government; he is in the executive branch.

The duty of the executive branch is to enforce existing laws so any executive actions only pertain to the various executive departments in getting them to enforce the law which they should already be doing.

The executive branch has no business doing research on what changes need to be made; that belongs to the legislative branch as they make changes after they determine what changes should be made based on listening to what their constituents want.

It appears that Obama doesn't understand the duties of the various branches of the government.

[Edited by: BlackGumTree at 1/17/2013 9:30:39 AM EST]
Profile Pic
WES03
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,000
Points:1,770,775
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 8:55:12 AM

Eddie Eagle should visit every school.
Post a reply Back to Topics