Executive Action

[tipsntails7]

How are we defining mental health here? Statistics are very clear that people with mental illness are far more likely to be the victims of violent crime than the perpetrators.

Do you have a link to this? I would like to see it.

Does it break it down by diagnosis or does it lump everything together?

 

[jmez]

Most lump it together. There is a ton of information out there supporting this. IMO, anyone capable of murdering another human has serious mental illness.

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/04/mental-illness-crime.aspx

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mental+illness+and+violent+crime

 

[nflesher]

Abolish the IRS, Fed, Department of Education, EPA, Obamacare, Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, Federal Unions...
There is a whole host of other departments that need to go that I could list, but it would be redundant because they would naturally have to go away if we followed the Constitution and Bill of Rights. That's the whole point of those documents, is to limit the size and scope of the federal government. However, the true entitlements like Social Security and Medicare, where people have actually paid into them, need to be deconstructed in a responsible and moral fashion so as not to leave all the granny's twisting in the wind.

I may just right you in for President myself Hootsma. Let's add the TSA to that list as well.... To assume that any government or government official (police, mayor, senator, etc) is there to protect you is crazy. This country is on a downhill spiral because of that type of thinking. People have lost touch with the fact the you are responsible for your actions. I get so tired of this bull crap that words hurt or he had a bad child hood, or some other non-sense. I would easily opt out of paying in SS because I won't ever get it. Just infuriates me that people get a check while sitting on their ass and have no intention of going out and getting a job. There are generations of these people and they will never change. Way to many people trust a government that keeps taking your rights in the name of safety or some other bullsh*t, and the sheeple just say ok, no problem. Don't even get me started on the refugee bullsh*t!

 

[mtnwrunner]

I may just right you in for President myself Hootsma. Let's add the TSA to that list as well.... To assume that any government or government official (police, mayor, senator, etc) is there to protect you is crazy. This country is on a downhill spiral because of that type of thinking. People have lost touch with the fact the you are responsible for your actions. I get so tired of this bull crap that words hurt or he had a bad child hood, or some other non-sense. I would easily opt out of paying in SS because I won't ever get it. Just infuriates me that people get a check while sitting on their ass and have no intention of going out and getting a job. There are generations of these people and they will never change. Way to many people trust a government that keeps taking your rights in the name of safety or some other bullsh*t, and the sheeple just say ok, no problem. Don't even get me started on the refugee bullsh*t!

Ummmmm, you may be right! Since there is no one that I really like, Hootsma may get my vote at the ballot box.
Very thoughtful and intelligent thoughts from his (or hers) posts.

Randy

Randy

 

[Brandon Pattison]

Good. You don't seem to care about any other viewpoint other than your own so I'd be wasting your time. Remember, the puppet masters are liberal and conservative. I would suggest turning off your tv altogether. Doesn't mean we can't be friends though.

You are correct only to the point that I don't care about the viewpoint that think it is okay to compromise liberty.

I am glad that you are on this thread. If it weren't for you, Hootsma wouldn't probably have had the opportunity to educate so many 'sliders.

I would drink a beer with you. Warning-me and my pals usually end up in the street fighting each other and pissing blood in the morning.

 

[nflesher]

Ummmmm, you may be right! Since there is no one that I really like, Hootsma may get my vote at the ballot box.
Very thoughtful and intelligent thoughts from his (or hers) posts.

Randy

Randy

I think he/she is a lawyer or one highly intelligent individual with a good understanding of what this country was founded on and the way things should be followed and is very good at typing it out. Most of us on here feel exactly how he does, just can't put down so beautifully.

Hootsma, keep up the good stuff. I have enjoyed and learned from your post! Cheers!

 

[Hootsma]

I think he/she is a lawyer

Them there is fight'n words!!! You keep that up and you and I are going to have to step outside!

Warning-me and my pals usually end up in the street fighting each other and pissing blood in the morning.

or I'll sick Brandon on ya

 

[nflesher]

Them there is fight'n words!!! You keep that up and you and I are going to have to step outside!



or I'll sick Brandon on ya

This just keeps getting better Then again I would be ready to fight if I was called a lawyer. Keep up the good work Hootsma!

Brandon, you mean Rambo....John J

 

[airlocksniffer]

I would drink a beer with you. Warning-me and my pals usually end up in the street fighting each other and pissing blood in the morning.

Good deal. Beware yourself though, I also like to homebrew and just finished an 11% moonshine barrel aged doppelbock. Your as likely to end up passed out in your own vomit as you are pissing blood.

Really guys and gals although we may see different on the political side of things, we are on Rokslide because we live and breathe hunting. I always enjoy talking to people and hearing what they are about whether I agree with them or not. Hootsma, I won't insult you by calling you a lawyer but you are a smart person for sure. Sure wish more people actually gave even a little shit about something other than their Facebook feed. The apathy in this country, left and right, is sad. And if it comes down to Clinton vs Trump, I'll also write you in!!

 

[Mike21]

I just don't understand, why don't we have a law that outlaws killing people? Then we wouldn't have to worry about guns... Since there would be a law and everything.

 

[Brandon Pattison]

Good deal. Beware yourself though, I also like to homebrew and just finished an 11% moonshine barrel aged doppelbock. Your as likely to end up passed out in your own vomit as you are pissing blood.

Really guys and gals although we may see different on the political side of things, we are on Rokslide because we live and breathe hunting. I always enjoy talking to people and hearing what they are about whether I agree with them or not. Hootsma, I won't insult you by calling you a lawyer but you are a smart person for sure. Sure wish more people actually gave even a little shit about something other than their Facebook feed. The apathy in this country, left and right, is sad. And if it comes down to Clinton vs Trump, I'll also write you in!!

I'll agree with this.

 

[jmez]

I just don't understand, why don't we have a law that outlaws killing people? Then we wouldn't have to worry about guns... Since there would be a law and everything.

Roughly the same number of people are killed every single year in this country in alcohol impaired motor vehicle accidents as they are by gun related homicide.

Where is the outrage? Where are the restrictions to driving. Where are the restrictions to buying a car? Should we not limit the number of cars on the road? Should we not limit the number of hours one can drive per day or week or year? Should we not limit the number of cars one can own? Should we not limit the speed at which a car will travel? It is really pretty simple isn't it? Some common sense legislation to put into place to put a stop to this horrifying menace to society, the automobile.

 

[Roy68]

If you missed the CNN requested "Town Hall Meeting" on Guns in America following the EA mentioned in the OP. Here is the youtube link to the full show. I do not believe the POTUS was using a teleprompter. I'm not sure why the NRA is not at this meeting, and it would be nice to know why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFAK1iM9BFM

In the first few moments; "He states that there are 30,000 gun deaths a year, and 2/3 of those are suicide." In my head I calculate that to be 20,000 suicides. So out of the remaining 10,000 they are either crime related or accidental? I'm sorry, but no gun law is going to stop the suicidal. So, is the number of concern is 10,000 gun related deaths?

Taya Kyle, the widow of Kris Kyle and Kimberly Corban a rape victim have some very intelligent statements and questions. Then the POTUS starts to address these woman but then slowly distracts the conversation and attempts to sell ice to the penguins.

Later on the POTUS acknowledges that violent crime / murder rates have been declining for a long time and blames that lost fact on the media. So what is this EA about???

I think it is about the next very small step to the hidden agenda. Government OF the people with complete disregard of the Constitution & The Bill of Rights

Example:
H.R. 4269 - introduced on 12-16-15
To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text

Hootsma, I echo the others. I parallel your stance not only on the OP, but on where we should be as ... A Republic, One Nation Under God.

 

[tipsntails7]

You are correct only to the point that I don't care about the viewpoint that think it is okay to compromise liberty.

I am glad that you are on this thread. If it weren't for you, Hootsma wouldn't probably have had the opportunity to educate so many 'sliders.

I would drink a beer with you. Warning-me and my pals usually end up in the street fighting each other and pissing blood in the morning.

I think they make a pill for that peeing blood thing

 

[Brandon Pattison]

That's a different cause altogether!!

 

[Brandon Pattison]

If you missed the CNN requested "Town Hall Meeting" on Guns in America following the EA mentioned in the OP. Here is the youtube link to the full show. I do not believe the POTUS was using a teleprompter. I'm not sure why the NRA is not at this meeting, and it would be nice to know why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFAK1iM9BFM

In the first few moments; "He states that there are 30,000 gun deaths a year, and 2/3 of those are suicide." In my head I calculate that to be 20,000 suicides. So out of the remaining 10,000 they are either crime related or accidental? I'm sorry, but no gun law is going to stop the suicidal. So, is the number of concern is 10,000 gun related deaths?

Taya Kyle, the widow of Kris Kyle and Kimberly Corban a rape victim have some very intelligent statements and questions. Then the POTUS starts to address these woman but then slowly distracts the conversation and attempts to sell ice to the penguins.

Later on the POTUS acknowledges that violent crime / murder rates have been declining for a long time and blames that lost fact on the media. So what is this EA about???

I think it is about the next very small step to the hidden agenda. Government OF the people with complete disregard of the Constitution & The Bill of Rights

Example:
H.R. 4269 - introduced on 12-16-15
To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text

Hootsma, I echo the others. I parallel your stance not only on the OP, but on where we should be as ... A Republic, One Nation Under God.

So if the house and/or senate don't/doesn't pass this (4269), can it be vetoed and passed? I'm ignorant on the judicial process.

While we're at it, at white point is an EA the law of the land, affective immediately or when, what or how? If I missed that please quote it for me.

 

[Roy68]

I seriously doubt HR 4269 will get through. However it has 90 democrats and at least 1 republican backed it at the time is as introduced. What bothers me is the number of backers and that it is another attempt to make sure that the 2A is not unlimited. In other words it would start to define / limit what "Arms" is. The EA is almost smoke and mirrors to distract from the bigger motive; that being systematically limit firearm ownership. I heard an interview with Rubio this week where he quite simply states that the Left would love to do nothing more than outlaw and confiscate privately owned firearms. I believe it was on the Glen Beck radio show.

Regarding an EA / EO my understanding is that they cannot be law. Their only weight is on that of federal government employees hired or elected. Their entent is to clarify laws that are in place. Laws that were created via the leagal process through the legislative arm.

However that is being worked around by any possible loophole that can be found. I think at times its recent use is unlawful or on the fine line.

Hootsma I believe brought it up earlier and can surely explain it better than I just did.

I added clarity to my EA definition.

 

[mtnwrunner]

I think he/she is a lawyer or one highly intelligent individual with a good understanding of what this country was founded on and the way things should be followed and is very good at typing it out. Most of us on here feel exactly how he does, just can't put down so beautifully.

Hootsma, keep up the good stuff. I have enjoyed and learned from your post! Cheers!

I could not agree more. Good post and Hootsma is welcome by my fire anytime. And what the hell, all the rest of you also. Just bring Pendleton and I ain't talkin about the blankets................

Randy

 

[Hootsma]

H.R. 4269 - introduced on 12-16-15
To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text

This bill is absolutely atrocious in regards to the 2nd amendment and it's not very well thought out:

Bans all AR type weapons but specifically allows Ruger Mini-14s. Wheres the logic in that?!

Background checks to loan a weapon.

Ban on grenade and rocket launchers.

They ban detachable stocks and define detachable stocks simply as any stock that detaches. Don't they all?!

This bill does nothing to keep anyone safer and would have done nothing to prevent any of the mass shootings (even though they represent such a small percentage of people killed with guns per year) even if the criminals were to follow this law.

You want to see the biggest buying frenzy of weapons, ammo and magazines, the likes of which this country has never seen before? Just get this bill any where near being passed and all hell will break loose at every gun store in this country. It would be totally ridiculous.

So if the house and/or senate don't/doesn't pass this (4269), can it be vetoed and passed? I'm ignorant on the judicial process.

No. It's got to get through both the house and senate before it will get to the president for signature into law. If it doesn't pass both chambers, then it won't become law. Vetoes are the presidents purview and allow the president to reject a bill presented to him. Vetoed bills can still become law, but they require a super majority (2/3 vote) in both chambers.

While we're at it, at white point is an EA the law of the land, affective immediately or when, what or how? If I missed that please quote it for me.

An Executive Action, not to be confused with an Executive Order, is a wishy washy gray area that the president uses to make statements about or clarify regulations, policies and laws and carries no legal weight.

I would assume they become 'official' once the president signs them. But, like I said, it's a wishy washy gray area.

They can't legally change the existing laws or create new laws. The Constitution doesn't specifically permit them, but they are an assumed presidential responsibility/privilege through the "grant of executive power" provided in Article II of the Constitution.

One of the gun EAs is to (emphasis added) "Remove unnecessary legal barriers preventing states from reporting relevant information to the background check system." The legal barriers mentioned are referencing certain aspects of the HIPPA law. This is a law passed by both houses of Congress and signed by Clinton in 1996. Right there, in the title, it's talking about changing a law. They are trying to get around this by having the Department of Health issue rules which expressly permit the reporting of certain parts of this HIPPA information to the NICS. It seems to me that if the president can't change existing law, then neither can the Department of Health. So, I don't really see how that's legal/constitutional.

It's going to be very interesting to see how all of this plays out.

 

[JWP58]

Wow their are some liberal members on this forum

Uh ya, most are from CO and MT...new liberal strongholds