Obama’s Planned Gun Control Regulations to be Incrementally Imposed After the Holidays

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Or believing something is not going on that actually is, thus the words delusionary denial.

No denial means knowing that something is going on but refusing to admit it to one's self. Quite a different matter.
www.urbandictionary.com...

You have conflated two different things.

Nope, delusional about denial is also a reality that can happen, and you give another good example of that, but thank you for your voice on the matter.

What a way to hand the next election to the republicans.

What could Hillery do to counter obama and still be anti gun.

Already the US is split between big city anti gun people and rural progun people that need guns.

You can not live in many areas of rural Alaska and some other states without becoming bear food if you do not carry a gun for protection.
They even use guns for fishing in Alaska to dispatch 400+pound halibut.

While I have no doubt that Obama would love to do this, I'm not buying this article. This is the same administration that's spent at least a couple of years struggling mightily to figure out a way just to legally close or weaken the so-called 'gun show loophole' through executive action, yet they supposedly believe they can get all this through an executive order? Nope, not gonna happen. Most, if not all of that, would require an act of Congress and even they know it. If they could do more through executive action, it would have already happened.

Further, even if they were to try it, such an executive overreach would not go well at all for the Dems in November, and its very likely that all of it would be rescinded and it might even stir up serious talk of some type of Constitutional amendment to ensure that it doesn't happen again.

The most likely outcome of the executive orders is that Obama will try to put a numeric limit on the term 'occasional' private gun sales, such that a person selling 50 per year, for instance, is automatically considered a dealer. He might also want to ban imports of foreign manufactured ammunition, which I think is fully within his authority, but would also likely adversely affect trade agreements with those countries. Beyond that, it won't amount to much.

a reply to: Murgatroid

So you copied the pics from the link in the op good for you. So how about actually listing all these gun control laws that Obama has passed that threatens to take away your guns.

An article from the Oathkeepers website:

"Virginia is revoking concealed handgun permit recognition with 25 states effective February 1, 2016:"

Link

From what I happen across on the Internet, there are all sorts of what I will call "back door approaches" to more and more gun control measures being implemented. It's the slow drip method. Look at what's been happening in Connecticut since the Sandy Hook massacre. Lawmakers are slowly putting the pressure on from many different directions.

Here's another article about what's on the agenda for the New Year in gun control:

After Christmas and a vacation in Hawaii, Obama will be busy

There's no doubt in my mind there are gun control think tanks employed by the White House in place which are working day and night to find ways to curb and reduce gun ownership. Ideas are floated publicly and then social media response is carefully studied.

I don't have a gun license and I don't own any guns but I know plenty of people who do. Whenever the issue of gun control is "memed" in the media I feel the same outrage that gun owners do. I grew up with the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. It was like a living, breathing, spiritual entity which governed the States. Now we have factions trying to murder it. Once most of the Baby Boomers are gone it will be much easier for them to kill it and pretend it never existed.

a reply to: tweetie

There's no doubt in my mind there are gun control think tanks employed by the White House in place which are working day and night to find ways to curb and reduce gun ownership.

What evidence do you have of this?

Is it just a hunch?

Is that hunch informed by fake, completely fabricated stories like what we have in the OP?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: tweetie

There's no doubt in my mind there are gun control think tanks employed by the White House in place which are working day and night to find ways to curb and reduce gun ownership.

What evidence do you have of this?

Is it just a hunch?

Is that hunch informed by fake, completely fabricated stories like what we have in the OP?

That statement I made has nothing to do with what is in the OP and is more than a hunch. Think tanks are used for all sorts of ventures. Isn't that common knowledge? Maybe not. I thought it was.

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: tweetie

There's no doubt in my mind there are gun control think tanks employed by the White House in place which are working day and night to find ways to curb and reduce gun ownership.

What evidence do you have of this?

Is it just a hunch?

Is that hunch informed by fake, completely fabricated stories like what we have in the OP?

That statement I made has nothing to do with what is in the OP and is more than a hunch. Think tanks are used for all sorts of ventures. Isn't that common knowledge? Maybe not. I thought it was.

I know what a think tank is and what it does. We should have all learned our lesson when Obama listened to the Heritage Foundation on healthcare.

But I want to know if you have evidence or if you are just speculating based on "more than a hunch"?

a reply to: Phage

Obama took my innocence, true story. I have sources within sources :winkyface:

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: tweetie

There's no doubt in my mind there are gun control think tanks employed by the White House in place which are working day and night to find ways to curb and reduce gun ownership.

What evidence do you have of this?

Is it just a hunch?

Is that hunch informed by fake, completely fabricated stories like what we have in the OP?

That statement I made has nothing to do with what is in the OP and is more than a hunch. Think tanks are used for all sorts of ventures. Isn't that common knowledge? Maybe not. I thought it was.

I know what a think tank is and what it does. We should have all learned our lesson when Obama listened to the Heritage Foundation on healthcare.

But I want to know if you have evidence or if you are just speculating based on "more than a hunch"?

It's just something I knew from studying "them" and how they operate. I don't use search engines very often but I looked because you're asking me for something concrete. The White House uses various think tanks, as you know, and here is one of them:

CAP

originally posted by: introvert
What evidence do you have of this?

Is it just a hunch?

Is that hunch informed by fake, completely fabricated stories like what we have in the OP?

What about those fake fabricated stories coming out of the White House?

Do you believe them?

I'm mean come on, lets be real here...

What evidence do YOU have that our leaders are actually on our side?

a reply to: Murgatroid

The stories coming out of the White House tend to be fake, but that does not mean that this one is correct. One apple being poisoned does not mean another is safe to eat.

originally posted by: vor78


The most likely outcome of the executive orders is that Obama will try to put a numeric limit on the term 'occasional' private gun sales, such that a person selling 50 per year, for instance, is automatically considered a dealer. He might also want to ban imports of foreign manufactured ammunition, which I think is fully within his authority, but would also likely adversely affect trade agreements with those countries. Beyond that, it won't amount to much.

sell 3 or more assault rifles a year in private gun sales in a year and you likely will hear from the ATF.

Sell 50 old bolt action rifles and likely you will have no problem.

Selling 5 handguns in private gun sales and you better know just who you are selling to.

the gun show loophole is not a big problem as most are guns being sold from collectors to collectors that know each other.

I live in Calif and have tried buying guns from people selling guns at NV and AZ gun shows and no one would sell to me even after i showed them my NV CCW.

a reply to: Swills

"I'm pretty sure gun manufacturers and gun shop owners make those memes and spread fear as seen in the OP to continue boosting their sales. "

...well, that... and the pesky fact that, aside from the Obama frame, the poster is historically correct.

Stalin, Mao and Hitler... did indeed, register/prohibit citizen weapons ownership, before they "purged" the "undesirable" citizens out of existence.

Study the history. Democide... it's the number 1 cause of death in the 20th century.

a reply to: dasman888

Yeah, us Australians totally got purged after our gun restrictions came in.

Seriously, argue the pro-gun standpoint from a place that isn't biased, stop throwing out names and stuff to insult the "left" or "democrats." It doesn't do the importance of the particular discussion justice.

I am ANTI-gun restriction for the US, but I think the Mao/Hitler/Stalin meme is retarded.

a reply to: ANNED

Oh I agree completely, I'm only stating the likely outcome of any executive action. As far as the 'gun show loophole', no, I don't think its nearly the problem that the antis want to make it out to be, either. Understand, I'm not totally against the basic idea of background checks on all gun sales, but as a practical matter, I think its a waste of time and effort, because its completely unenforceable with regards to private sales. The people that actually *are* causing problems aren't going to be deterred by a change in the law. They're going to continue buying, selling, and trading the very large number of firearms that they already have as a group among themselves regardless of any law that you pass.

In that respect, I'm not one of those idiots who thinks we need to 'do something' for the sake of 'doing something'. If we're going to pass a law, it needs to be limited in scope to the intended purpose and just as importantly...it needs to actually work. The antis' proposals usually fail on both counts.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

After disarming the Australian population... Nothing happened.

True.

Also: the Australian population has not been disarmed.

a reply to: rnaa

Does that mean you Americans would be fine taking on our gun control laws, then? If we haven't been disarmed, that is, you should be fine with it.

a reply to: Murgatroid

What about those fake fabricated stories coming out of the White House?

Do you believe them?

Which fake, fabricated stories are you referring to? Be specific.

I'm mean come on, lets be real here...

What evidence do YOU have that our leaders are actually on our side?

I have no evidence and I never made any claim that our leaders were on our side.

Overall, your post is very knee-jerk and reactionary. I simply asked a couple questions. Why so defensive?

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

That poster is an Australian, not an American.

While its true that Australian civilians haven't been totally disarmed, the regulations and bans on certain types of firearms would make your laws completely unacceptable here. The restrictions on handguns, for example, would never work here as the overwhelming majority of Americans support the right of civilians to own handguns. The ban on semi-automatics of all types wouldn't work, either, given their popularity and the huge number in circulation. There are, for instance, over 16 million Marlin 60s and Ruger 10/22s in public circulation in the US combined and that's just two 22 rifles. Add in all the semi-auto hunting rifles and shotguns, all the semi-auto handguns, and all the so-called 'assault rifles', and you're likely over 100 million. The tens of millions who own them wouldn't take well at all to a ban on future purchases, or, in the case of Australia, a forced 'buy back' under threat of criminal prosecution for non-compliance.

Your laws may work fine where you are, but they won't work here.