Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns

page: 2
70
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   
obama is a traitor to the people of The United States, he already violates his oath of office, he must lack understanding of the written language of English, he cant understand "shall not be infringed", It is what it says. What is the penalty for violating his oath of office?




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Most interesting times we live in. I have been among those who has said a full on gun grab would never happen. I am starting to wonder about that now. Not only would it set off violent conflict, but it would be absolute political suicide for dems. If this were to happen, I would have to say that it would raise the likelihood of the ever talked about dictatorship.

They have to know that this type of move would ensure that a dem would not win the next election, and that this EO would be immediately thrown out. That worries me, because I just dont see a move like this being made with the intention of giving it back in 4 years.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 





An EO is about the only way Obama could get something like his draconian gun bans passed. And (if I'm not mistaken) an EO only lasts as long as his presidency. So in 4 years, not only will Obama be gone, but much of congress that goes along with this as well.


at what point does the placating stop tho? We said that last year 'oh well only 4 more years and it will change" guess what it hasnt......."oh well if he does this we will just repeal it" well it didnt work.......

Enough is enough....

The way this guy is going , and ive said this from the first term, hes setting himself up where he doesnt have to worry about getting elected again........

We have "waited it out" in this country for so long, look at where we are now.......look at what weve become and look at who is in control........

Enough is enough........these people need to go, this has to stop..........if he pushes this through, there will be a tipping point.......and i know people keep saying this.......but they are gonna have to enforce this if he does it....

And the first battle royal that takes place when he does, is going to cause a fire storm........

I hope he goes for Ted Nugents guns first...........see how that turns out for them
edit on 9-1-2013 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DelMar
reply to post by Screwed
 


I don't agree at all with handling the "gun issue" through an executive order but I think you are way out in left field with your reaction to this. You're speculating what they are going to do and panicking about. There is truly nothing any of us can do against an EO, we will have to wait and see what happens.

There's no need to post like the US is falling into civil war over the wording Biden used in his presser.



Some people just aren't going to "get it" until it is WAAAAAY too late!
If you honestly STILL do not CLEARLY see what is happening then it isn't my job to show you.
You'll see it soon enough, after it is much too late.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
walmart caves to whitehouse

One key proposal Biden is expected to put forth would force independent gun sellers to go to certified dealers like Walmart to conduct background checks on customers and process their transactions. If passed, such a law could send people who previously traded guns at shows and in their homes to Walmart stores, propelling the company's already skyrocketing gun sales even higher, experts say.


Soon if you wanna sell a gun to a neighbor you will have to get background check done at wallyworld.
I don't see this going over very well and if it does it will make a lot of people criminals over night.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


I'm simply trying to put things in perspective. Our problem is that we fight for the Constitution and in defense of the Constitution.

The progressives (Obama) don't.

It would be self-defeating to go against the very thing we are trying to protect.

Kinda like using The Dark Side to fight FOR The Force.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 
well it is just a thought after all you can not buy a full auto any more, not with out the tax stamp, but you can still apply for a full auto , just have the i's and t's dotted and crossed, pay the sum,(tax) wait to here yea or nay, and there you go, that is if you have the $$$ to buy a full auto.
Now is that against the Constitution? no it is just a tax you must pay, same as this could be on semi auto, pay tax fill out the paper work, wait, and then you to could own a semi auto.

Now what would this mean for the current owners ?

I think they would have the option of paying the tax stamp or returning for a refund to the seller.
yes i know there are other ammo's out there the mil gov uses that could be band, ie 303 30-06 but they are also used in sporting/ hunting bolt action rifles, mil also uses 357 pistol ammo or did. just thought there was no use in posting the other ammo.

edit on 9-1-2013 by bekod because: line editing
edit on 9-1-2013 by bekod because: line editing



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 
well it is just a thought after all you can not buy a full auto any more, not with out the tax stamp, but you can still apply for a full auto , just have the i's and t's dotted and crossed, pay the sum,(tax) wait to here yea or nay, and there you go, that is if you have the $$$ to buy a full auto.
Now is that against the Constitution? no it is just a tax you must pay, same as this could be on semi auto, pay tax fill out the paper work, wait, and then you to could own a semi auto.

Now what would this mean for the current owners ?

I think they would have the option of paying the tax stamp or returning for a refund to the seller.
yes i know there are other ammo's out there the mil gov uses that could be band, ie 303 30-06 but they are also used in sporting/ hunting bolt action rifles, mil also uses 357 pistol ammo or did. just thought there was no use in posting the other ammo.

edit on 9-1-2013 by bekod because: line editing
edit on 9-1-2013 by bekod because: line editing


Any condition placed on a Right, ANY CONDITION, negates the "Right".

It stops being a "Right".

In essence, it becomes an allowance of the state.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 




Most interesting times we live in. I have been among those who has said a full on gun grab would never happen. I am starting to wonder about that now.

I am glad that you have come to see it.

We should be prepared. This is NOT good.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 

How would an ordinary citizen force a judicial review? The process for challenging the constitutionality of acts of Congress is fairly established....what is the track record for overturning Executive Orders? Where was the Constitutional Challenge when they side barred the "assault shotguns" from the original Assault Weapons Ban (sunset after 10 yrs) to be declared "Destructive Devices" (same as hand grenades under the Gun Control Act) which require a special Class 3 FFL for transfer (with the extensive background check and transfer fees, etc) because they did not have a "sporting purpose" by being able to accept a magazine (fixed drum shotguns also)? Now the "non-sporting" precedent by the BATF(E no "E" back then) which is the Executive Branch will be used for ordinary assault style semi-auto rifles that can accept a magazine. Start by overturning the EO to make a so-called "non-sporting" purpose shotgun a "Destructive Device" before it is too late.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


I'm simply trying to put things in perspective. Our problem is that we fight for the Constitution and in defense of the Constitution.

The progressives (Obama) don't.

It would be self-defeating to go against the very thing we are trying to protect.

Kinda like using The Dark Side to fight FOR The Force.



Is there something in the constitution that allows for them to make executive orders in violation of the constitution?

If not then we arent violating the constitution to protect it............

Its doing EXACTLY what the constitution was designed for..........



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 

All laws are supposed to be Constitutional...and the Judicial Branch is the final arbiter of same.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


You are correct.

But I have an issue. (Not with you)

The government has been very successful ONCE AGAIN in dividing our country. We need to use reason, calm dialogue, facts, not emotions to stress our points.

We need to unite, as a country, against the draconian manipulation of Obama and the government.

We need to be what "they" don't want us to be.

United.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 

If they expanded an ammo restriction to foreign ammo then it will cover most calibres (ie. 7mm, 8mm) and some of them like 30-06 are now mostly used for civilian hunting (it was a ww2 caliber).



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

We already have INFRINGEMENT (ie the registration and payment of transfer taxes) on Full Auto Weapons and that is just for the pre-act weapons that are grandfathered. Only LE or dealers can own the "post sample" weapons./



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I heard they were considering doing FBI background checks on ammunition.

That would allow them to keep tab of just how much you are buying.

Very scary thought, then tax ammo per round on top of that.


Prove my point:



U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal said he wants legislation that would require instant background checks for the sale of gun ammunition. He is expected to take up the proposal once Congress reconvenes.

www.wfsb.com...
edit on 9/1/13 by xstealth because: added link



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by beezzer
 

We already have INFRINGEMENT (ie the registration and payment of transfer taxes) on Full Auto Weapons and that is just for the pre-act weapons that are grandfathered. Only LE or dealers can own the "post sample" weapons./


Quite true. And that needs to be fought. But we are all being pitted against one another for something that the government initiated.

We need a united front.

We need to stop "reacting" to what they do. We need to act, but act accordingly, and as a united front.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
You guys need to take a step back and really think this through.

Even if Obama was power hungry, there's no damned way he'd be so idiotic as to pass some executive order that would instill himself as a true dictator (remember all the bush nazi dictator rubbish on CT sites years ago
), or truly try to confiscate all the firearms that are already out there.

That's big time la-la land, and indicative of either a mental deficit, or doomporn to the extreme.

It simply makes no damned sense. The likelihood of something like that going well for the US, for the president, or for the rest of his cabinet is slim to none. This isn't nazi-germany, this is the US in the 2nd decade of the 21st century. Different terrain, and different strategies for influencing the world.

The most that will happen for this is either something unrelated directly to gun control (like improving the mental health system) , or perhaps making it more difficult to obtain certain guns. Biden is well known for "goofing" and not saying the correct thing. He's a funky guy whose mind thinks much faster than most, so him talking about an EO related to guns could actually have very little to do with guns.

Doesn't make sense? I dont' care. I have family who thinks/speaks like this and understand it. Dozens of things floating through their mind at once, and they're leaping out at end results, and not fully aware that their communication skills aren't bridging the gap properly. Just as some people are.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions


. . .The most that will happen for this is either something unrelated directly to gun control (like improving the mental health system) , . . .


Now that is something we actually agree on.

Gun crimes are just the symptoms of the true infliction. Mental Illness. Since the 1980's there have been drastic cuts in mental health facilities all across the US. This really needs to be examined.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
I just want to add that it's a darn shame that all my weapons got stolen.


I was in the same camp until a couple days ago. Whether the firearms get "stolen", or "lost" in a tragic boating accident on the local (very deep) aquifer didn't matter. The end result was the same.

Then, a couple days ago, it occurred to me that I was thinking about this in the wrong way. If I TRULY believe it is time to "lose" firearms, it's not. It's time to get them battle ready.






top topics



 
70
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join