Executive Action

[SHTF]

This does nothing to solve the problem.

Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. So, who then, does this affect?

Do you folks that are so glibly OK with this realize that you are like the frog in the slowly heating pot of water. Oh...a little bit more heat...that's OK, I guess...OK with that...a bit more heat...ouch...OK...now I'm used to that...until the frog is boiled. One degree at at time...and pretty soon we are on to registration, which is historically, right before confiscation.

Ever heard of the concept of mission creep? Same idea. A little at a time...until you've lost your rights because you weren't aware, informed and fighting for your freedoms! And don't sit there thinking oh the 2nd will protect us. Baloney. Wake up before you give up your freedoms. Folks on this site should be some of the most informed and freedom loving and fighting this.

Much blood has been spilt to give us these freedoms that we then give away again. The cycle continues...

The problem is the condition of the human heart. And this culture is doing everything it can, it seems, to steadily degrade any kind of moral compass it once had.

Bingo... Its all part of the big picture. Little at a time till they get to their goal of confiscation and complete ban. Happened in the UK if we dont protect our rights it will happen here.
Im all for keeping guns out of the hands of criminal and mentally ill people who have a propensity for violence but the laws that Obama is going to be signing into exec action plain dont do anything on either front.

 

[realunlucky]

I think he needs to get even crazier with EO so people wake up and see this abuse of governing and demand an amendment to stop it. If not both sides will continue to abuse until it's the standard for governing.

 

[jmden]

Well we do have to register to vote.

Because it is important that only those who are citizens and eligible to vote in that locality, according to the Constitution, are voting. How about, I bus a bunch of liberals to Utah from California and decide to pay them to vote on a state constitutional ammendment that says hunting is now outlawed? Without some safeguards, it's would be easy to 'buy' voters and elections, right, thwarting the will of the people? There has to be some kind of construct to minimize cheating...cheating...once again, back to the human heart issue.

The libs have done much to ensure that you don't have to show ID in states where you go to the polls, so what's the point of registration, and, which party is that going to benefit...? There is so much cheating, quite biased in regards to what party it benefits, out there in regards to this already, it's unbelievable.

 

[Floorguy]

Yes, very good use of the slippery slope fallacy.

How is it a fallacy?

 

[jmden]

I think he needs to get even crazier with EO so people wake up and see this abuse of governing and demand an amendment to stop it. If not both sides will continue to abuse until it's the standard for governing.

The other two branches of government aren't doing their constitutional jobs to 'check and balance' him, especially this weak Republican controlled congress. Unbelievable. Hmm...it's as if they aren't aware, informed and fighting for their constitutional rights/freedoms either.

 

[realunlucky]

Think they just want thier turn to rule like a king also. Scary for sure because it's so obviously outside the constitution

 

[dotman]

It would be great if he is booed at the State of the Union.

 

[WonkyWapiti]

I'll give you an example of how stupid this law really is. My Sgt. had a house fire and I initially was offering to house his firearms while he was without a home. Thanks to I-594 in Wa State which was passed last year it would make it a crime for me to hold on to his guns for him without doing a background check for each firearm.

 

[JWP58]

Punish law abiding citizens, for the acts of criminals...sounds legit.

Remember, you never let a tragedy go to waste....just ask Eric Holder (who btw signed off on Op. Gun Runner...you know an operation designed to put guns in the hands of criminals to blame the 2nd amendment)

 

[ohoopee]

It seems to me that our system of checks and balances using the three branches of Govt has worked relatively fine over the last couple hundred years. Exec actions used for such a politically hot issue seems to open up avenues for abuse. The next president may not like the number of alcohol related deaths and outlaw alcohol. I am not saying there aren't some changes needed with gun acquisition laws. I just think imposing rules on Americans should be well thought out and not done by a single person.

 

[jmden]

The relevancy of this new executive action to actually accomplish anything of real, widespread practical relevance reminds me of the foolishness of 'Gun Free Zones.'

I was just reminded of this...If 'Gun Free Zones' work so well, Obama should make the US a 'Terrorist Free Zone'. (I'd feel so much better...) What's the difference?

Talk about blindness to reality...

 

[jmez]

Feel good do nothing legislation that accomplishes nothing. Mostly unenforceable by design. We'll use that as an excuse to hire more agents to enforce the laws etc etc etc.

 

[2blade]

In Article I Section I of the Constitution it is clear that all legislative powers reside in Congress. The Executive Branch has the responsibility to execute the laws passed by Congress. An Executive Order is not legislation it is an order issued by the President to enforce laws passed by Congress. While Executive Orders are not mentioned in the Constitution it has been a precedent for a President to issue Executive Orders that he deems to be necessary and proper.

The “Necessary and Proper” clause in the Constitution found in Article I Section 8 was not intended to give the President the authority to do whatever they felt was a good idea. This clause meant that they had the authority to pass any legislation that was necessary and proper to implement the powers delegated to the United States in Article I Section 8.

The President is the Chief Administrative Officer of the Executive Branch of Government and has the authority to implement policies and procedures that are necessary for the administration of the duties and responsibilities that have been assigned to him by the Constitution. Policies and procedures passed by Congress are called laws and effect all of the people. An Executive Order is a policy or procedure issued by the President that is a regulation that applies only to employees of the Executive Branch of government.

Any Executive Order that has any effect on individuals that are not government employees is a violation of Article I Section I. Whenever the President issues an Executive Order that extends to all of the people, Congress has a responsibility to the people to veto that Executive Order.

When a President issues an unconstitutional Executive Order and Congress allows the order to stand they are violating their oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.

and there you have it, if Congress doesn't veto the order, it just proves that they are all in it together.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Owning a firearm is a constitutionally protected right. BIG difference.

The right to bear "arms" is protected by the second amendment is already infringed. Plenty of people cannot legally possess a firearm such as convicted felons. And what do you thing the founders meant by "arms"? Knives? Muskets? AR-15's? Anti-aircraft guns? Why can't I have all of these things? Why can't I have a small nuclear bomb? Or a big one? Isn't that an "arm"? I would imagine the founders would look at the weapons available with very little regulation today in this country and be flabbergasted.

I don't think every dipshit should be able to go buy whatever gun they want. Guns are tools and can be dangerous. We has hunters have all passed some form of hunters safety to prove we are responsible enough for hunting, why shouldn't gun owners/non-hunters have to prove that competency?

What will really sink the ship of firearm ownership in this country is the lack of reasoned discussion and compromise, fueled by the "cold dead hands" mentality of the NRA. Should mentally ill people be able to buy a firearm? Most of us would agree that they should not. How about somebody convicted of domestic abuse? Should I be able to buy depleted uranium ammuntion? How about a daisy cutter?

So this executive action is aimed to close the loophole of gun shows and background checks. Why does this mean King Hussein Obummer is going to fly to your house in a black helicopter, take your guns, convert you to Islam and gay marry you? The sky isn't falling. Do you really think the NRA and corporate lackeys of Congress would allow any form of regulation to even be discussed? Piss on the NRA. They give not two shits about your right to hunt with your firearm. All they care to do is scare people into buying more guns and ammo. The NRA and gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Whaledriver]

The "it seems reasonable" crowd might want to pick up a history book and do a little reading. Specifically on British gun laws. These are baby steps toward more and more gun control. Hell the feds cannot even do background checks on people properly. Example Charleston church shooting. The fact remains that criminals do not follow the law...PERIOD!! I would like to know the stats on crimes commited with gun show nondealer purchases. I quite honestly shocked that anyone on this forum would support such BS.

 

[realunlucky]

Compromise what are you offering not to try and take more

 

[jmden]

The right to bear "arms" is protected by the second amendment is already infringed. Plenty of people cannot legally possess a firearm such as convicted felons. And what do you thing the founders meant by "arms"? Knives? Muskets? AR-15's? Anti-aircraft guns? Why can't I have all of these things? Why can't I have a small nuclear bomb? Or a big one? Isn't that an "arm"? I would imagine the founders would look at the weapons available with very little regulation today in this country and be flabbergasted.

I don't think every dipshit should be able to go buy whatever gun they want. Guns are tools and can be dangerous. We has hunters have all passed some form of hunters safety to prove we are responsible enough for hunting, why shouldn't gun owners/non-hunters have to prove that competency?

What will really sink the ship of firearm ownership in this country is the lack of reasoned discussion and compromise, fueled by the "cold dead hands" mentality of the NRA. Should mentally ill people be able to buy a firearm? Most of us would agree that they should not. How about somebody convicted of domestic abuse? Should I be able to buy depleted uranium ammuntion? How about a daisy cutter?

So this executive action is aimed to close the loophole of gun shows and background checks. Why does this mean King Hussein Obummer is going to fly to your house in a black helicopter, take your guns, convert you to Islam and gay marry you? The sky isn't falling. Do you really think the NRA and corporate lackeys of Congress would allow any form of regulation to even be discussed? Piss on the NRA. They give not two shits about your right to hunt with your firearm. All they care to do is scare people into buying more guns and ammo. The NRA and gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank.

I think you stated yourself a pretty good case that there's been enough reasonable compromise and regulation already. There's nothing left to compromise.

It's like a guy with a gun is saying he's going to shoot you, but he's at 1000 yds, so you don't do anything. But he's walking closer...now at 800. Nothing to worry about you say. Still walking closer to you he is. Now at 500 yds. This makes you nervous. so you fire a warning shot. He slows down, which makes you feel better and more comfortable and like you've accomplished something. But in a minute he keeps coming... At what point are you going to do something about it? Well, if he comes on to my property, I'll do something about you say. When he gets there...well, he'd better not come up my front steps. On the other hand, at that point, I can have a conversation with him and we can come to a 'compromise', right? At what point are you going to fight? When he's on your doorstep? In your bedroom?

The leftists stated ultimate intentions are very clear.

Frog in a pot, buddy... Some just get more uncomfortable faster and recognize what is going on faster when the heat starts to get turned on.

Beware the idol worship of comfort. It has robbed more people in this world of their freedom. Fighting is uncomfortable. A hunter should understand being uncomfortable more than most.

Your comments on the NRA are ill-informed at best, unfortunately. What did the NRA do to you as you enjoy the freedoms that they have helped keep for you? It's like protesting against the military...as the military is used protect and preserve the US, and thereby the US Constitution, that gives you the First Amendment right to protest against the military. Makes alot of sense.

 

[Mike7]

Make no mistake, Obama and his ilk (including progressive Republicans) are only about control & getting rid of guns to various degrees, and not about safety or freedom.

If he/Obama was about solutions, then there would be no gun-free zones unless everyone going into that zone was searched, and then the venue was protected by armed guards...like say the Whitehouse or a courthouse. If he was about solutions, every law-abiding citizen in South Chicago would be encouraged to own a gun and take back their neighborhoods. If he was about solutions, then the federal government wouldn't consider every returning serviceman or woman to be a terrorist (guilty until proven innocent) and instead would change its liberal medical privacy policies regarding people involuntarily comitted to psychiatric units with schizophrenia (so these people couldn't just say, "Hey, yeah I'm sane!" on their Instant Background Check and get a gun legally without any difficulty). If he was about solutions, then the southern border would be closed, Eric Holder would be in jail, and his Justice Dept would actually prosecute people who fraudulently apply to purchase guns through the Instant Background Check System.

Here in the People's Republic of Washington we have a very pro 2nd Amendment State Constitution, but we still already have pistol registration basically, and an expensive & confusing new law on universal background checks. Registration of all weapons is always the final nail in the coffin prior to confiscation throughout history. My guess is that soon in Washington it will be so hard to keep track of all of the various laws, that a person will always be breaking something unintentionally. Once that happens, they can legally prosecute you and take away to your right to bear arms...and anarchists will undoubtedly still be in Seattle destroying private property and endangering people (if you consider police and non-anarchist people) without any consequences.

I had to laugh today when Obama yet again stated that he would curtail the 2nd Amendment if Congress wouldn't. I thought to myself, "Hey Constitutional and Historical Scholar/dumbass (with all due respect of course), the whole purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to maintain a free country and restrict Congress from disarming the people!"

 

[saint_nick3]

I'm okay with this. I also think people who own or use firearms should be licensed. We don't allow people to drive w/o a license, why should guns be any different?

/puts on flame suit

Do you have to pay to vote? Having to go to an ffl every time you privately sell a firearm is no different than a $30-50 poll tax.

 

[mtswampfox]

What percentage of the shootings have been nothing more than gang activity amongst little brown skinned thugs who occuppy our cities street corners? Nothing is ever directed to this problem. The hiarchy of these gangs has such a hold on this nations politicals it just amazes me. Not even Trump has come out against this blight. Just wish had adjusted my stock portfolio to the gunmakers. The nation has spoken with the number of ffl checks at record levels, now if we could get these same people on board to vote for their rights......