Executive Action

[jmden]

I dont know any of those people so could you please spell out the correlation for me?

What...? I'm sorry, but if you don't know the answer to that, that's pretty scary and makes some of my earlier points.

 

[jmden]

Reading this thread is a perfect example as to how we ended up with Obama as POTUS. Don't educate yourself and rely on others, the MSM, to tell you what you should think. People are fat, happy and taken care of by the government. What possibly could they do that wouldn't be in your best interest?

In other words, most folks are too comfortable.

 

[MuleyFever]

Muley fever what do you believe is the answer? What do you feel is reasonable and common sense

Excellent question that I dont have a real answer for. It will have to involve compromise on both sides. Society has to accept that we have the right to own guns. People need to accept that some regulations are needed beyond what we have now. Gun violence will not end and that is the price of freedom. Deaths happen every day because of the freedoms we enjoy, its a part of life in this country. Somewhere in there we can find a way past this. Will we though, I am not optimistic. The hardline on either side is not the answer though.

 

[MuleyFever]

What...? I'm sorry, but if you don't know the answer to that, that's pretty scary and makes some of my earlier points.

What, you cant? Its easy to say one thing is the same as another, or will lead to another. Harder to prove it though huh?

 

[hunting1]

Reading this thread is a perfect example as to how we ended up with Obama as POTUS. Don't educate yourself and rely on others, the MSM, to tell you what you should think. People are fat, happy and taken care of by the government. What possibly could they do that wouldn't be in your best interest?

This! I can't believe how anyone believes this will do anything to stop violence? I bet you same great libs thought Obamacare would be great too...

 

[5MilesBack]

The hardline on either side is not the answer though.

So now you think that supporting and keeping the Constitution is "hardline"? How young are you?

I'll just put it this way.......I'm willing to give my life to support the Constitutional rights, freedoms, and liberties that it guarantees.......and not just for me and my family, but for you and yours as well. Are you or any other person willing to give their life to try and take them away?

 

[gelton]

"Regulations" "Compromises" "Reasonable"....are all the antithesis of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

Pretty straightforward and simple to me. Also, this executive action wouldnt have done anything to stop any of these mass shootings. Just a way to get more people in the government database, ask the Australians how it went once they registered.

Next thing you know, it will be illegal to carry or defend yourselves with knives...oh wait, that already happened:

State Supreme Court: Paring knives not protected by 2nd Amendment

SEATTLE (AP) - A divided Washington Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a Seattle law prohibiting people from carrying fixed-blade knives such as kitchen utensils for self-defense does not conflict with the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

http://keprtv.com/news/local/state-...ves-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment-12-31-2015

Not very reasonable, or is it?

 

[5MilesBack]

The problem is the government is already closing the third side of the pen, and there are people sitting inside drinking the koolaide saying "Come on in, I don't see any problems with this". The worst part is.......there are people on the right that are blinded to this as well. Truly sad state of affairs.

 

[jmden]

What, you cant? Its easy to say one thing is the same as another, or will lead to another. Harder to prove it though huh?

MuleyFever, OK. Just to be as clear as possible, and any informed citizen should understand this, unless what you are asking is being misunderstood by me which is quite possible, here's what I think is the answer to your question. The 'people' I'm referring to, that speak out of both sides of their mouth about Islam and don't even realize it, on one hand calling it a peaceful religion and on the other telling us not to incite them (makes alot of sense...) are a large portion of liberal politicians and those that follow them. We all make mistakes, but this is an egregious strategic error and demonstrates a lack of understanding of reality of this world we live in.

Telling us that we should continue to compromise on the 2nd Amendment issue indicates, 1) you don't have a historical view of what compromise and regulations have already been put in place, and 2) you're argument is like the folks that tell us not to do anything to incite or offend Islam. Islam makes zero compromises and will fight to destroy anything in it's path.

There is no way to compromise with that, just like there's no way any more to compromise with anti-2nd Amendment folks. We must be informed and work together within the political process to fight against some of the egregious restrictions, such as those mentioned above in NY. In their quest to remain comfortable, many will never realize that, or in actuality, some remain willfully ignorant. Many incorrectly think it somehow honorable, I guess, to compromise further on this issue, but they fail to see the historical perspective, or don't want to see what compromise has already taken place. When will you say 'no more'? The anti-2nd folks are 'in our bedrooms', as in the story I mentioned earlier, because of too much compromise already. We are supposed to continue to bend over backwards to accommodate Islam in this country to be politically correct. Bending over backwards until our necks are resting on the chopping block. Please get a history lesson.

 

[nflesher]

More laws, more freedom lost. People are so ignorant. The more laws passed, the more freedom lost. So when it becomes a felony to spit your gum in the grass, you're a felon who can't own guns. Who decides that I am crazy and has authority to take my guns? The government? Yea, that would be a great idea to send a gov rep to evaluate me and take my freedom's because I believe in what this country was founded on. How Obama has not been impeached and our congress fired is unreal to me. Voting will change nothing. The next crooks will take office and use fox or cnn or some other bullshit news cast to make you believe what they want. This is like reliving history..... Back to my cave.......WITH MY GUNS

 

[Cross]

Wow their are some liberal members on this forum

 

[Cross]

Compromise is not a solution. It is a mindset destined for destruction. You have already predetermined to give up rights, ownership, whatever it maybe.

 

[5MilesBack]

I just saw this quote from Obama's EA:

The reforms enable health care providers to report names of mentally ill patients into the background check system. Health care privacy rules prevent doctors from sharing such data without consent of their patients, but the administration rules now allow health care providers to report to the NICS "limited demographic and other necessary information about these individuals."

This is the most dangerous thing to come out of this EA. This is WAY overstepping any bounds......not just Presidential Authority bounds. Funny thing is.......I truly believe that liberals suffer from a mental defect. This should prevent any and all liberals from passing a background check. The problem is........this new authority gives unbelievable power to all health care providers. So much for ever going to the doctor again. So the question will remain......who has final authority to determine one's mental capabilities. The government could just as well by EA deem all conservatives or Christians or otherwise mentally deficient just to suit their agenda. This one is absolutely the most danger to our country as a whole. So.......when someone is deemed mentally ill, are all their other so-called rights taken away as well?

The Constitution does not give the government a right to take citizen's rights away. That's not a right, that's Tyranny.

 

[Ryan Avery]

I see where this thread is headed. Keep it civil!

https://joinnra.nra.org/join/join.aspx

 

[airlocksniffer]

Back on the original topic, not sure why if 9 firearms dealers are required to do background checks that the 10th who happens to sell at a gun show doesn't, requiring that dealer to do so is not the end of our freedom. It's a damn loophole, that's all it is. I've been hearing for nearly 8 years now that Obama is going to take my guns. Heard the same thing for the 8 years of Clinton. Meanwhile during the GWB years the largest mass surveillance program in our history is enacted by both sides of the aisle and people just shrug. Not to mention invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq under the guise of "fighting terrorism" that was really about oil. Where were the 9/11 hijackers from? Oh yeah, Saudi Arabia. What have we done about that? Oh yeah, nothing because both parties are owned by corporations. There are very few presidential candidates who think this is a problem.

Here is a novel idea: turn off your tv. Research. Look at all sides of an issue then make an informed opinion. We are not all hard left or right. I assume most of us don't like to be defined by all or nothing. There are things I agree with or disagree with from both sides. The no compromise attitude benefits no one.

 

[airlocksniffer]

What is the NRA's stance on public lands and public land hunting? I gather than Roksliders are pretty supportive of public lands and public land hunting. Seems to be nothing but crickets regarding the federal land grab or reauthorization of the LWCF from the NRA.

EDIT: For clarity.

 

[Ryan Avery]

I don't think RS posted on either of those!

 

[Trial153]

I think the NRA should be taking a stance on the federal lands issue as its bearing on the member ship is huge.

However regardless of that I don't see that issue as a bearing on what these EA's mean to our 2A right.
We are past the point of compromise. Why is that ? When the people you are compromising with have the ultimate objective to repeal of the second amendment then any compromise brings them one step closer to their goal.

 

[chas]

Driving a vehicle is a privilege. Owning a firearm is a constitutionally protected right. BIG difference.

Should we also be licensed to exercise "free speech?"

My point exactly!

 

[jm1607]

So some liberals want guns to be banned or parts of guns to be banned/restricted as a solution to mass shootings. (which is dumb)

The NRAs response is that guns don't kill people, people do. Obviously the NRA is 100% against a registry of any sort. (which is good)

What are the NRAs propositions to keep more guns out of mentally ill people and criminals hands or is it pretty much "It's the 2nd amendment, too bad, these things happen"? I thought when all the sandy hook stuff was going on the NRA was all for better/increased background checks?