It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Obama urges new gun law push at CBC Foundation dinner

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 23 2013 @ 12:03 AM

I see. So in other words this thread is going to consist of a group of tea baggers wailing about how nasty Obama is and repeating every known half-assed falsehood that they've ever heard and probably misunderstood. I have better things to do with my time. Good luck with making your tinfoil hats and then watching out for the black helicopters.

In the 70's we had this gun debate once before.

Media was tightly controlled then,
we didn't have the internet,
and everyone voluntarily disarmed.

They took rifle class out of the high schools.
Then they took boxing out as well.

But here we are, it's 2013, and something the do-goody-goodies thought was a dead issue
is back.

And this time they are loosing the debate hard.
Like, no knee pads, skinned up on the concrete hard.

But we love do-goody-goodies,
and we don't want to shatter their fragile world view.
At least,
not too quickly.

So we stay quiet, and we watch.

And this is what is brought, shallow dis-info and fear-baiting.
Ok, that means they are ready for another round.

Here it is.

The way the main stream media won the debate back in the 70's
was through hyperbole.
During an evening talk show, a person dressed like an authority figure would wax impatient and
sarcastically ask "Do you think people should have Bazooka's too!? Tanks!??!"
and the studio audience would laugh, and that would be the end of it.

But this isn't the Television era anymore,
and I get to have a say in the discussion this round.

It was true then, and it's still true now.

"Yes, the gorram second Amendment means we get to have freaking Tanks AND bazookas if we want them."

My neighborhood should be able to buy a Chinook, or a freaking AA battery if they want.

What? You think I'm crazy.
What about all these terrorist threats.
I sure the hell don't want FEMA to go New Orleans on me
in the event of a disaster.
But my neighborhood fire department I trust.

And why the hell should the mounted heavy machine guns,
anti aircraft missiles, and old fighter Jets get sold
to countries filled with our enemies anyway.

That #ing # should me MINE!

edit on 23-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 23 2013 @ 12:04 AM

reply to post by WWJFKD

This thread started off in the school yard I'm afraid. And I'm walking away from it now. Apologies but I have no patience with threads like this. They just turn into a succession of bilious posts that throw insults at Obama and then accuse him of high crimes and misdemeanors based on little if any evidence. I tip my hat to you sir and walk off.

posted on Sep, 23 2013 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by WWJFKD

The only people that will safe if you disarm the citizens will be a tyrannical government and criminals. That is why the founding fathers install the 2 amendment so the citizens could prevent both from destroying our culture.
That is why the Oaths of ALL Government, Military and Law Enforcement Personnel includes the statement: "To protect the U.S. Constitution against all enemies Foreign and Domestic".
The Fathers knew that power of Government is a corruptive temptation that is almost impossible to resist. Look at our history of Crocked Politicians at all levels from School Boards to Governors, Senators and Presidents.
So let those that have taken the Oath, both active and now civilians that knew it was for life, be a warning to those that would attempt to destroy our country.
God has Blessed America with Patriots of all religions, creeds, colors and nationalities that now call themselves Americans and will uphold their Oath.

posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 05:37 AM
reply to post by WWJFKD

Some food for thought. Saw this on TV this morning...........hope it doesn't happen. Heck I hope the link works. Link is about the UN gun treaty.
Could someone fix these smiley guys ...............they just look all messed up.
edit on 25-9-2013 by Tarzan the apeman. because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 03:42 PM
History lesson time...

Impeachment (Article II Section 4) is not a crime based offense. Its based on an abuse of power / position.

example: Obama issuing recess appointments even though Congress was in session.

High Crimes and Misemeanors -
- Determined / Defined by Congress.

What "crimes / Misdemanors " falls under that -

A high crime is one that can only be done by someone in a unique position of authority, which is political in character, who does things to circumvent justice. The phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" when used together was a common phrase at the time the U.S. Constitution was written and did not mean any stringent or difficult criteria for determining guilt. It meant the opposite. The phrase was historically used to cover a very broad range of crimes.

- Executive Orders -
Applies only to the Executive branch of government and is not law.

- Obama has gone down this road in an effort to bypass Congress on legislation / actions. He even commented on it during his first term stating it would easer / tempted to do it.

International Treaties the US signs onto -
The President is the chief diplomat for the US and has the authurity to initiate treaties.

Congress must ratify the treaty in order for it to become a part of the US Federal body of law. The Executive cannot ignore the legislature by using executive orders to implement all / parts of a treaty, which is exactly what he has done.

The Constitution is the highest law in the land. Foreign treaties that the US signs onto cannot bestow additional authority on the Government.

The US Supreme Court, in a ruling from the Head Money Case, established foreign treaties one step below the Constituion.

It established foreign treaties, once ratified, as a part of the US Federal Body of Law.

This means an affected citizen / entity has a right to challenge the treaty in a Court of Law.

It also allows Congress to modify, once ratified, the treaty based on domestic laws. Congress can refuse to ratify the treaty outright as well.

Judicial rulings -
Obama and the Executive branch has done that time and time again.

So yes, Obama has committed high crimes and mideamors and is grounds for Impeachment. The Cabinet secretaries should be held accountible as well and should be impeached.

I am curious what Obama could have done for this country by actually being the President instead of crisscrossing the nation giving campaign speeched or demonizing anyone who does not agree with him.
edit on 26-9-2013 by Xcathdra because: spelling etc

edit on 26-9-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-9-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-9-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 06:17 PM
Obama can go to hell WUA the rhe rest of the gun grab bers

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in