Obama weighs 19 executive actions on gun control, faces resistance

reply to post by dominicus


How would they know if you have a firearm though?

I mean I bought a few before. Filled out all the paperwork (not hand guns but rifles) for background check and all. Does that show that you bought one or just that you were checked to buy one? Either way I sold them to people I used to work with, I do not have proof of this. How do I prove I no longer have the rifles if it even shows that I do have them somehow?

Raist

reply to post by Raist

Not sure how they are going to put this mess in effect. Im hearing thtat there will be alot of phone calls telling the gov that their guns are missing or were stolen.

We'll see in less than 24 hours

Originally posted by dc4lifeskater
I think obama should be impeached, charged with treason and put to death and made an example of. .

pssst


the executive actions haven't been announced yet

lol

reply to post by dominicus


I sold my AK-47 and SKS. They were fun and cool to own but I needed the money. I guess I should have gotten proof of sale. I have not been in contact with the guys I sold them to, so I do not know where they are now.

I guess that is an oppsy on my part.

Raist

So...........Do you have anything to add to make this your thread, or did you just want to regurgitate a couple links from Google and type out a few sentences recapping the links? ..........

Welp that's what happens when careless Americans don't give a damn about their rights.

I think they all forget that little "by consent of the governed" part...sigh

So, the big question is..... what is everyone going to do if they ban assault weapons tomorrow? What about all of the thousands of people who have just recently purchased a gun this year? I'm very curious to see what is going to happen tomorrow.

Originally posted by kaylaluv


None of these seem like impeachable offenses to me - they just seem like common sense. I saw somewhere that another possible executive action is to allow schools to use some of the federal education grants to go for more security for schools. Wow - isn't that horrible.

edit on 15-1-2013 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)

Maybe they need to worry more about the actual education taking place inside of the building. We have people graduating who cannot read or write. I work with two teenage girls who cannot write well, cannot make change, or add and subtract.

I think Obama's drone wars are grounds for impeachment, and many other things as well.

Originally posted by Golf66
Seriously, the POTUS has no shame - like the religious people who go door to door with children in tow so that people are more likely to be polite and engaging he is to roll out his new gun control "ideas" using a bunch of children as a backdrop.

Maybe he's using them as human shields.

Originally posted by kaylaluv
You guys do know the difference between an executive action and an executive order, right? An executive action is anything the president can do legally and constitutionally that doesn't require congressional approval. The items I see listed in the OP's article are not horrific.

It's unclear how many of the 19 options the president would eventually take up. Those options could include more aggressively enforcing existing gun laws, beefing up national research on guns and ordering stricter action against people who lie on gun sale background checks.

They could include ordering tougher penalties for gun-trafficking offenses and ordering federal agencies to make data on gun crimes more readily available.

Read more: www.foxnews.com...

None of these seem like impeachable offenses to me - they just seem like common sense. I saw somewhere that another possible executive action is to allow schools to use some of the federal education grants to go for more security for schools. Wow - isn't that horrible.

edit on 15-1-2013 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)

Please don't post facts...the gun nuts need someone to be mad at.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

no - it is a congress given right.

Not really. The 2nd Amendment is merely a protection of a right. It doesn't actually grant anything, and neither does Congress. You would have the right to own a firearm even if there were no 2nd Amendment, because there are no laws on the books prohibiting you from doing so. The only thing Congress can do is restrict and regulate that right.

reply to post by WaterBottle

gun nuts

We keep hearing from anti-gun legislators (notice how I didn't refer to them as 'nuts') how we don't need an 'assault weapon' to hunt animals. They are either disingenuous or very misinformed. If you google search 'hunting wild hogs' you will find a lot of videos of people hunting wild hogs. The preferred weapons are AK's and AR15 style rifles. They are often fitted with night vision sights.
Wild hogs are a terrible pest in the southern US, and most states have no bag limits on them and urge hunters to kill them.

'Nuts', eh? What kind of 'nuts' have a vehicle in their motorcade with a pop-up minigun that fires 6,000 rounds per minute? Our President has one in his motorcade. Why the need for 6,000 rpm??? TALK ABOUT INDISCRIMINATELY SPRAYING BULLETS! Do you think that would be safe along the average Presidential motorcade route???

These proposed bans will not change the criminal mind.

reply to post by butcherguy


When I say gun nuts it does not mean the person has 400 guns. It means the crazy attitude that comes along with some gun owners.

Like these two.




There are a ton of these types out there, a bunch on ATS too and any other predominately right wing fringe forum.

Not all pro-gun people are gun nuts. Not all gun owners are gun nuts.

reply to post by WaterBottle

Not all gun owners are gun nuts.

Thank you for clarifying. Some people could read it as being anyone promoting the Second Amendment.

reply to post by Raist

There will be a record of you being checked on the NICS system and a copy of your yellow form (4473) will be kept with the FFL who is subject to BATFE inspection.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by Raist

 

There will be a record of you being checked on the NICS system and a copy of your yellow form (4473) will be kept with the FFL who is subject to BATFE inspection.

As soon as they raid the FFL's for their paperwork, they will have their list of what houses to raid to find weapons.

you can do alot more damage without a gun with a free online recipe book, a trip to the local hardware store and $20.00. So i guess ban everything?

The biggest problem i see in all this is the fact that many people look down on others when they do not agree with their actions or thought process. Just look at how easy someone gets labeled as a nut by another and what does that do to someone that really has a problem severe enough to act out.

Just look at adam it is reported that he took such violent action because he was labeled as being inferior and his life was about to dramatically change. So what was so hard to accept about going to a place to get some help. I can tell you that i think that a major factor the problem he had getting help was the stigma of being labeled crazy.

I can tell you that if i had not had a chance to get to know the kind people that have been committed i would still have the same train of thought on the subject that people like this are contagious and there is something different about them that will never be equal to the rest of the flock. This way of looking down on mental illness is mainstream. If you have doubts about what i'm saying here then i implore you to go and volunteer at your local mhmr.

As for the long haired pissed off guy in that video he is a trained by our military and he is among a group of people that will not stand by while politicians threaten to take away all guns.

Originally posted by vor78
The 2nd Amendment is merely a protection of a right. It doesn't actually grant anything, and neither does Congress. You would have the right to own a firearm even if there were no 2nd Amendment, because there are no laws on the books prohibiting you from doing so. The only thing Congress can do is restrict and regulate that right.

You mean "infringe" upon said right? Funny, I thought that part was covered.