Obama to unveil gun control plan within the hour

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I notice he was very careful in implying that Congress will be responsible for any laws passed or changed. Basically saying it's their fault if something's not done. I think the background check will pass, not too sure about the restriction on magazines. Will they "grandfather" in existing ones or make replacement mandatory? BIG can of worms just got opened.

Originally posted by xedocodex
Can any of you that are outraged about the EOs Obama is signing actually articulate exactly which EO you are upset about and why?

Or should we wait a day for the right wing media to instruct you on what you should be outraged about?

I'm not outraged over common sense gun regulations, in fact I believe there should be some regulations on gun ownership... No bans, but it should be more difficult for dangerous people to purchase and/or own guns, and gun owners should be held more accountable for the security and use of their firearms.

That said, this isn't about gun control, it is about expanding government powers. The issue is hijacked just like healthcare and many other issues to push forward agendas that expand government powers over the people.

If this administration and legislators have their way, they will regulate and control every aspect of your lives. You wont be able to do ANYTHING without first checking to see if you are in compliance with federal laws and regulations, and that all taxes, fees etc. have been paid.

Wake up!

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by beezzer
After today, I no longer own any firearms
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

If you started a thread asking how many people here had their guns just 'disappear' ...
You'd have the longest thread in ATS history I'd bet.

I lost mine in a boating accident in Virginia. We we're coming back from hunting and hit a submerged log. The whole damned boat and everything on it sank in about 200+ feet of water. Such a shame too as I had a few nice rifles - gone forever. They won't even have anything to confiscate when they kick my door in.

I see 3 major problems with this approach:

1) Gun ownership will become a subjective determination made by administrators based on the sharing of health care records.

2) If #1 above is implemented, it will only drive people in general away from seeking help to deal with their issues. If you're afraid to tell your doc what's on your mind for fear it will be recorded and shared with the government, is that a good thing?

Expanding "See Something, Say Something" to the healthcare community is a horrible idea. Doctors will start reporting every little comment patients make to cover their butts down the road.

3) It's focused on guns right now, but this opens the door for other thing ("Hey... it worked for guns, let's expand this to home loans", etc. etc.

I'm starting to think this really isn't about guns, but rather an attack on privacy.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Just how much of the duties laid out to the Congress of the United States is okay, by your thinking, for the Executive branch to take unto itself and claim for it's own before a problem is seen here??

His decrees enhance law in some places...but create NEW POLICY in others and radically CHANGE POLICY in yet more. The President, under our system, has sweeping power granted his Office in matters of foreign policy, trade and the conduct of war declared by Congress. Well skip all the declaration crap since no President since Nixon has given that more than passing lip service anyway....

That doesn't mean we gleefully watch as the LAST of the powers are simply seized by the executive branch. What New York state did was at least legal and proper. It may die in court challenge, but New York STATE can do what it did.... It's STATE SYSTEM doesn't say it can't. THE FEDERAL system is a whole different animal on every level.

Obama cannot..in SPIRIT if not absolute black letter, DO what he's trying to do. Not without essentially redefining the system we have for Government in this nation. Congress has to LET this happen. Will they? That's the question now.

I understand generally where your going with this
Less fed, more state in these affairs.
There is also a issue though.
Enemy both foreign and domestic. If someone is shooting up the place, that is a domestic enemy to the people..and so by function, the fed must react when it becomes a problem.
The solution then would be to try and chokehold the setup without violation of the amendments in question..in this case, the second amendment.

And for the most part, the 2nd is left in tact. you have the right to bear arms, but it doesn't say you have the right to an extended clip, flamethrowers, fully automatic assult weapons, etc. Frankly, if the government wanted to play hardball, they could legally ban all things except for say a musket. The second we said a citizen cannot own a scud missile launcher is the second we admitted it is a sliding scale..

Don't think I am anti-gun btw...professional fence sitter on this subject. Just looking at it objectively.

Unless all the states unanimously pass the same bans exactly, and the same legal enforcement, then its all ineffective, and the domestic enemy remains effective...which then requires something from the fed.
This is sort of their job..protect the people from the enemy...

Tomorrow you will still have your Saturday night special to shoot bottles or whatnot. so, the 2nd amendment hasn't been effected here.

What solution would you do?

Personally, I would give every citizen a free revolver and a mandatory gun safety class. I do actually believe a armed nation is a polite nation...especially since we are already armed (pandoras box is already opened..no closing it now, and the second amendment has wedged it to make sure it doesn't close). So, the government needs to work within the structure relevant to the situation

After listening to Obama's comments and looking through his action list I am quite certain that he is just doing these things to calm the anti gun crowd now. He is making it look like he is doing something while actually doing nothing at all. All his actions are doing is strengthening existing laws, which is what many of us said needed to be done.

Putting the ball in Congress' court was the right thing to do, and I am glad that he did not attempt to skirt the lawmaking process by executive order. I highly doubt that a new assault weapons ban will be approved by Congress. With every passing day the emotion from the tragedy fades, and logical thought becomes more clear. The facts that this tragedy happened in a state where there is already an assault weapons ban is proof enough that they don't work.

Then lets do something about it!

I look at the coming gun bans with hope. Not because I want to ban guns...I don't. But this an issue that just may.....just maybe will galvanize the people.

This could be the catalyst we need for lasting change! Lets take advantage of it!

Originally posted by beezzer
After today, I no longer own any firearms

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

All gun owners need to call the cops out to your house and report your guns stolen. This will divert their asses.
Be funny as hell to watch the statistics go up.

I'm gonna do it and don't even own a gun.

I know longer have to give a crap about the laws of the U.S.

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
I'm starting to think this really isn't about guns, but rather an attack on privacy.

Actually, on this I am agreeing with you a bit. Not about the gun thing mind you, but rather the many years of government justifying creeping into your personal life more and more...typically lead by the "for the children" cry..be it registering sex offenders, drug dealers, now talk of violent criminals, gun owners, etc etc etc..let the door open for one, and you let them control all of you.

Local law enforcement already has the details on all of the above...the public outcry for registering and identification over and above what is already in place is impractical, ineffective, and used only for the invasion mindset. Its the new pop culture though...cloud networking (let my app face recognize this person in front of me and get all the labels the internet can offer about him/her). We are becoming our own worst enemy through fear fetish demanded by the people itself.

The one part that does raise my eyebrow about all of this is that they seem to want to make sure and label mental health issue people...and day after day we "find" more mental health issues..be it more people are actually a bit off their rocker, or we classify a rather normal if eccentric behavior pattern as a mental health problem...

Originally posted by kaylaluv
reply to post by Golf66

 

What did Obama lie about in his speech, and what is your proof?

I don't think I said he lied in this speech... I said, he does lie and that is why even though he disgusts me ( all I want to see when his face appears on screen is a pink mist) I listen to him because it is good training. I said he is either a pathological liar or a puppet based on my past analysis. He is also the textbook case of a narcissist.

If you are interested in Kinesics or behavioral symptoms analysis (body language) at all you will discover that it is an art not a science. It is like the polygraph not allowed in court as proof of anything. It is a tool for interrogators and investigators to determine when someone is telling a lie so that they can know where to look for the truth.

He was so well rehearsed for this moment I saw no indicators of deception at all - usually he has at least a couple and when he gets off script they are more obvious. This, indicates to me that this moment has been planned for a long time.

If you want to go back to my past threads - like in the debates (off script) I laid out a bunch of technical definitions and examples of how his tells were betraying his lies.

OMG, Fox News just admitted that these Executive Actions are not controversial at all.

And Conservatives nation wide have no idea what to think...Fox News...their precious Fox News, just endorsed Obama's actions.

Originally posted by SpaDe_
After listening to Obama's comments and looking through his action list I am quite certain that he is just doing these things to calm the anti gun crowd now. He is making it look like he is doing something while actually doing nothing at all. All his actions are doing is strengthening existing laws, which is what many of us said needed to be done.

Putting the ball in Congress' court was the right thing to do, and I am glad that he did not attempt to skirt the lawmaking process by executive order. I highly doubt that a new assault weapons ban will be approved by Congress. With every passing day the emotion from the tragedy fades, and logical thought becomes more clear. The facts that this tragedy happened in a state where there is already an assault weapons ban is proof enough that they don't work.

edit on 1/16/2013 by SpaDe_ because: (no reason given)

Ya, this was a token gesture, but really, what could he do?
Think a wise man once said, if both sides are angry with you, then your doing it right.
anti gun will suggest this isn't even lipstick on the pig, pro gun folks..well, you see what they are like now...so ya, everyone angry...means he hit that middle of the road mark.

Originally posted by xedocodex
OMG, Fox News just admitted that these Executive Actions are not controversial at all.

And Conservatives nation wide have no idea what to think...Fox News...their precious Fox News, just endorsed Obama's actions.

NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Fox News was terrifying people for weeks on how Obama was comin to getcha guns!!!

How can they be wrong...every...damn...day for the last..what, going on 7 years now?

reply to post by xedocodex


My head is literally swimming listening to the msm right now. how calm, how intelligent and assuring... calm and reassuring. The only time they get riled up is reporting anything anti agenda.

Ok I need to UNFREEZE, get up off my butt and turn off the TV!

Gee-golly, wouldn't it just be easier to have everyone checked and chipped so that after the government has given you permission to buy a gun, you won't have to go through all the checks and waits!

If they want to stay on the air they have to follow the set agenda, you would think that some of them would rebel at some point today, even by their own statistical numbers, not 100% of them should be buying into this .

reply to post by beezzer


And only one pistol with nothing higher than a 22. per pre-approved household, or should I say Penthouse.

Originally posted by antar
If they want to stay on the air they have to follow the set agenda, you would think that some of them would rebel at some point today, even by their own statistical numbers, not 100% of them should be buying into this .

Right, because Obama will shut them down if they go against him....is that what you are saying???

Because Fox News has always been so Obama friendly?

If Fox News could find something negative to report about Obama's actions today, they would...but they can't. You are clearly having a hard time processing Obama doing something that you can't find a thing wrong with either. So just create fake scenarios that suggest Fox News is being threatened to report positively.

reply to post by SaturnFX

The one part that does raise my eyebrow about all of this is that they seem to want to make sure and label mental health issue people...and day after day we "find" more mental health issues..

I wonder if dream analysis is included. Or perhaps tattoo selections?

Where does one draw this subjective line and who will be given the power to make these determinations?

answers below:

1) Wherever they want
2) Hypocrites

reply to post by SaturnFX

Enemy both foreign and domestic. If someone is shooting up the place, that is a domestic enemy to the people..and so by function, the fed must react when it becomes a problem.
The solution then would be to try and chokehold the setup without violation of the amendments in question..in this case, the second amendment.

The enemy defined here IS the American Public...as to be defined by his HHS and DOJ Secretaries..per his statement in new ways of defining mental illness and qualification to own a firearm. He's so vague in some areas and yet so specific in others ...his list of executive "proposals" (are the orders or not? His own people can't get that straight in statements right now) are everything and nothing to a very real degree. It not quite the worst he could have done ...but we can see it from where this stands.

And for the most part, the 2nd is left in tact. you have the right to bear arms, but it doesn't say you have the right to an extended clip, flamethrowers, fully automatic assult weapons, etc. Frankly, if the government wanted to play hardball, they could legally ban all things except for say a musket. The second we said a citizen cannot own a scud missile launcher is the second we admitted it is a sliding scale..

The National Firearms Acr of 1934 is what said I can't own Flamethrowers, Machine guns, Mortars or Artillery WITHOUT A PERMIT. Even that, in it's extreme regulation of it's time did NOT attempt to BAN anything. They knew better and could read that SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED' part. The answer was a difficult and lengthy permit process for "Military" style weaponry and arms. I can buy an M-2 Heavy Machine Gun TODAY if I choose to...and pass the permits. Obama is OUTLAWING things. That IS going where no President has ever gone before on this.
(Read Clinton's AWB closely... The sunset provision is the BIG one but he had other things to stay on the right side of Constitutional with his)

Don't think I am anti-gun btw...professional fence sitter on this subject. Just looking at it objectively.

Fair enough. Everyone has equal right to their opinions...and disagreement among the same.

Unless all the states unanimously pass the same bans exactly, and the same legal enforcement, then its all ineffective, and the domestic enemy remains effective...which then requires something from the fed.
This is sort of their job..protect the people from the enemy...

Oh .. Wrong.. I wish it were the case. The only states to be 'safe' from this kind of crap will be the states to not only pass things to COUNTER IT but then have the balls to enforce it AGAINST the Feds in active ways. Texas has said they will...but we'll see in the actual real world events. I doubt it....

The national drinking age is 21. The age to buy a rifle is 18. Federal. It's not FORCED on the states...except those that want ANY Highway funding returned to them ...or want ANY support in gun related enforcement and regulation. Money makes the nation go..and TAKING it from the states is how the Feds force compliance. This will be no different for 98% of the states. Texas may blaze the path for others to follow....If Perry can find guts somewhere.