It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Obama vows to pursue gun control ‘with or without Congress’

page: 7
37
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


I agree partly with your statement on the congress shirking it's duties. What can they do to stop EO's though, file lawsuits in an attempt to get preliminary injunctions? Hope the next president is sympathetic and remove the offending EO?

As far as laws, yeah we've got bags of laws. More are not the answer either.


WASHINGTON—For decades, the task of counting the total number of federal criminal laws has bedeviled lawyers, academics and government officials.

"You will have died and resurrected three times," and still be trying to figure out the answer, said Ronald Gainer, a retired Justice Department official. WSJ..

edit on 093pm1616pm72014 by Bassago because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Obama is the scariest president of all American history. No president has ever blatantly and consistently threatened to circumvent congress and the Constitution as much as B.O. Checks and balances means nothing and the left is rooting it on.

There is no civility.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 07:11 PM
link   
The statement "I intend to keep trying, with or without Congress" is what hypnotists would call an embedded command or suggestion. Very powerful to add this in between a threat and a historical media illusion, where they portray ALL of America as the gun wielding t3rr0rists, and only show the bad apples on the media (never the good, where a gun has save people from these psychopaths)...sensationalize them for months, use media figures like Pierce Morgan to embed it further...this is mass hypnotism..and it works. I won't say "wake up"...its a bit cliché. Learn about mass hypnotism...and you will have all of your answers...and why these guys are even shooting up the schools and Theatres.....it's not really that hard to do, if you know what you're doing. The government has so much more than we do anyway on this subject.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Please correct me if I am wrong here.

But the only LEGAL militia that is allowed is the national guard.

I am thinking the words 'state' and 'people' get mixed up.

The states can form militias, and they have.

The states are the army of the people.

The federal military is the army of the country.

If people feel that is a wrong assessment feel free to correct it.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 08:27 PM
link   
What we have here is a madman occupying the oval office. He is a pre- orchestrated, and hand groomed, internationalist owned puppet. He is executing their agenda, and is also set up to be their fall guy (most likely a double to fill in for him at the end though).

He will take all the heat, it was planned that way. However, The paid off liars in Congress will get a pass on both sides. He's just a stooge, but a very dangerous stooge he is. This is the truth, but only certain people have been granted this information.

America today? It's like an out of control bus that is rolling down a mountain full speed without any brakes, and the Lunatic behind the wheel, is Barack Obama. Or someone who looks just like him when that special time comes.


Read between the lies people, read between the lies. We should have listened to Eisenhower's and JFK's perfectly clear and present warnings, but we didn't. It's about to get very, very crazy my friends, and very soon. Stock up! ~$heopleNation



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Had to look this up for specifics though it doesn't address state militias, those are defined by the States Constitutions or laws. For anyone who is interested.
Source



10 U.S. Code § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

32 U.S. Code § 101
(1) For purposes of other laws relating to the militia, the National Guard, the Army National Guard of the United States, and the Air National Guard of the United States, the term “Territory” includes Guam and the Virgin Islands.

32 U.S. Code § 313
(a) To be eligible for original enlistment in the National Guard, a person must be at least 17 years of age and under 45, or under 64 years of age and a former member of the Regular Army, Regular Navy, Regular Air Force, or Regular Marine Corps. To be eligible for reenlistment, a person must be under 64 years of age.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 11:16 PM
link   

pyramid head
reply to post by Bassago
 


I knew he was going to say it, but I still didn't believe it when I heard it. The whole address was more vile than I could have imagined. He basically said he is going to do what he wants, congress be damned, and they stood and clapped.........
THEY ALL STOOD AND CLAPPED.
I really hope I am over-reacting, but history does not bode well for us as a nation. It is so nauseating to see the monsters lie and clap and applaud each other for an entire hour. Then they trotted out the TEN tour vet, had to turn it off, treason...treason.



The fact that Congress stood up and clapped for a man who has vowed to go around them to get what he wants done should prove to everyone that ALL of them are in bed with each other. All of them are enemies of The Constitution at this point. Moral responsibility, civic duty, honor and patriotic loyalty should never be sacrificed for politeness, statesmanship, and civility.


Furthermore, every single citizen should be outraged that the State of the Union address has turned into a sycophantic circle-jerk with the simple intention to appeal to the less intelligent or more unaware among us. I heard nothing but a cheap, disingenuous marketing effort with no substance, no vision, and no leadership. The SOTU used to be a solitary, written letter until Woodrow Wilson and his Progressive descendants resurrected it.....obviously to be used as a propaganda tool to sway the weak and easily influence the people of a rapidly declining nation. I am quickly losing the last inkling of hope I had for this great American experiment.

edit on 29-1-2014 by wills120 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by wills120
 


Very true and nauseating.
It could of been because,,,,, the E O was already Signed.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by wills120
 


Again, OK, well said, But it's a fact, Obama is A Lame Brain President, for the last 6 years, he's just been Lame and he's Blamed every one else for His Lame Administration getting Caught!
Now the Lame Obama has to do the Only thing he can to try and save what little there is. The Supreme Court will be watching.
Mostly I think he felt like saying last night.

ETD: I Really Like TEXAS!


Republican Texas Rep. Randy Weber tweeted from the House floor that President Obama is a “Socialistic dictator” while waiting for the State of the Union to begin.

“On floor of house waitin on ‘Kommandant-In-Chef’… the Socialistic dictator who’s been feeding US a line or is it ‘A-Lying?’” Weber tweeted Tuesday night at 8:09 p.m., approximately four hours before Obama’s speech was set to begin.

linky
I think many of you know as well as me, what he and others must be thinking how his 8 years will be remembered. Obamacare Did Not Come Out That great, I mean Their looking For a Bail Out!

edit on 30-1-2014 by guohua because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2014 by guohua because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:17 AM
link   

buster2010

yuppa
reply to post by game over man
 

Debating? You cal insulting,belittling and outright opinions debate? Anyway There should be NO DEBATE at all on this. Its in the constitution. It just IS. If you want to change it do it the proper way. Obama is going down the road of the tyrant in the making
and ignoring the constitution for shame.


You may want to reread the constitution because you are only quoting part of it. The right to bear arms is not given to the general population but rather to a well regulated militia.

2nd Amendment

In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the applicability of the Second Amendment to the federal government. In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia”.


edit on 29-1-2014 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)


Activist judges and their invalid rulings are not a valid argument. Legislating from the bench is a way for progressive authoritarians to circumvent the law. The judiciary does not have "interpretive" powers. The reasoning for the 2nd amendment can be found in the federalist papers. Try reading those instead of the rulings of activists judges.
edit on 30-1-2014 by pyramid head because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by guohua
 


And obozo disrespects, not only the constitution, but every american citizen, regardless of race, color, or creed -

He is an obamination to our country and needs to be impeached for treason -

But so does the rest of those idiots in congress that stand for this bull#.

People keep saying "civil war" - when in reality it will be a revolution.

Despite this idiot's repeated attempts to make it a "race war".



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by wills120
 


At least you still have hope. I commend you on that.

I have none.

If there was another country to move to, I'd be gone. People here want to be slaves, they can't give away their freedoms fast enough. Unfortunately it looks like we'll have to wait until something interrupts an event has important as football to see if the people will care about their freedoms. Obviously the president proclaiming himself dictator isn't important enough.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by pyramid head
 


and I bet it's coming - thanks to the good ole usa/cia/fbi/dhs/fema.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Passed on the show, let me guess, did our fearless leader parade out The Mcdonnells and The Parkers from Sandy Hook, or was it "Joe the plumber" and a Kuwaiti debutant this time? Another 5 or 20 mall shootings won't cut it with the NRA or the American people, at least those who are paying attention. The whole thing is a big scripted lie told by backslapping elites who couldn't give a rats ass about any of it.

Without even viewing the charade, I am confident that the BS/hyperbole to rational review (of the SOTN) ratio was at minimum 3/1.

Did he mention Guantanamo?

I used to take these things seriously but the script has gone off the rails.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Stackpot
Passed on the show, let me guess, did our fearless leader parade out The Mcdonnells and The Parkers from Sandy Hook, or was it "Joe the plumber" and a Kuwaiti debutant this time?

Did he mention Guantanamo?

I used to take these things seriously but the script has gone off the rails.


No shooting victims on this one. His trot out this time was a 10 times deployed wounded veteran, a lady who lost her unemployment benefits and a pizza guy who pays his employee more than minimum wage.

Oh yeah and he's closing Gitmo again.

This one didn't even make it on to the rails. It was however extremely painful to watch.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 


Those idiots really trotted out a veteran? After all they've done to destroy the veterans and the military in this country?

I can't belie - OK - I can believe they think we're as stupid as they think we are....



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 06:17 AM
link   

muse7

Bassago

muse7
I watched the whole speech and I never once heard him say he was going to take your guns away.

Maybe this is a propaganda thread too?


And maybe you just read the title and skipped right over his quotes.


Quote where he says that he's going to take guns away?



You are dangerously foolish my friend.

If you can't weed through political talk and read between the lines then you really have no place debating anything political. He said it very clearly, he will subvert the congress in order to get his way with gun control.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 10:58 AM
link   

pyramid head
reply to post by wills120
 


At least you still have hope. I commend you on that.

I have none.

If there was another country to move to, I'd be gone. People here want to be slaves, they can't give away their freedoms fast enough. Unfortunately it looks like we'll have to wait until something interrupts an event has important as football to see if the people will care about their freedoms. Obviously the president proclaiming himself dictator isn't important enough.


Actually there is one. New Zealand. My wife and I recently qualified for immigration....it's our backup plan.

www.immigration.govt.nz...



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   

8675309jenny

muse7

Bassago

muse7
I watched the whole speech and I never once heard him say he was going to take your guns away.

Maybe this is a propaganda thread too?


And maybe you just read the title and skipped right over his quotes.


Quote where he says that he's going to take guns away?



You are dangerously foolish my friend.

If you can't weed through political talk and read between the lines then you really have no place debating anything political. He said it very clearly, he will subvert the congress in order to get his way with gun control.


Do remember tho... Obama is one man and 1/3rd of the United States Government. He fancies himself something more than he is ..and Congress is too weak, wimpy or corrupt to do anything about it.

Fine... I said Obama is 1/3rd of the Government. Congress is another 1/3rd. There is another 1/3rd still there and that's the Judiciary. They haven't been a fan of the President OR Congress in the last several years ..and especially hard core against Obama on guns ..having decided two of the most important landmark cases in U.S. History, while Obama was in office. It must burn his buns to extra crispy...but he can't take our guns without a war to do it and his side wouldn't win that one. Pure math decides that outcome before it's even started.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   

xuenchen
reply to post by buster2010
 


But then the Supreme Court said....



District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution applies to federal enclaves and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states,[1] which was addressed later by McDonald v. Chicago (2010). It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.[2]

On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Heller v. District of Columbia.[3][4] The Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional, determined that handguns are "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment, found that the Regulations Act was an unconstitutional ban, and struck down the portion of the Regulations Act that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock." "Prior to this decision the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 also restricted residents from owning handguns except for those registered prior to 1975."

District of Columbia v. Heller



Hmmm.



Guess you overlooked that the ruling only applies to a persons self defense within their home. Not packing a gun around like Wyatt Earp.



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join