Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree  
User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6360 posts, RR: 32
Posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7957 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sorry in Spanish only:

http://internacional.elpais.com/inte.../actualidad/1356556578_642632.html

Excerpts, translated by me.

1."La Casa Blanca amenaza con imponer por decreto medidas para el desarme si para finales de enero el Congreso no logra consensuar propuestas."

The White house threatens to impose by decree measures for disarmament if by the end of January Congress does not manage to agree on proposals

2. "Obama pretende que se logren acciones coordinadas con el Congreso y con las autoridades estatales. Si no se consiguen avances rápidos por ese lado, el presidente parece dispuesto a imponer algunas medidas por decreto. “Utilizaré todos los recursos de mi cargo para hacerlo”, aseguró."

Obama intends to achieve coordinated actions with Congress and with states´ authorities. If no quick advances are reached that way, the President seems intent on imposing certain measurements by decree. "I will use any means available through my office," he stated.

I have no dog in this fight. I am just wondering what impact will an American President generate by controlling guns by decree, if Congress can´t come up with something.

312 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7954 times:

Quoting AR385 (Thread starter):
I have no dog in this fight. I am just wondering what impact will an American President generate by controlling guns by decree, if Congress can´t come up with something.

If he is not very careful, he can be impeached. While the US Constitution holds only a tiny fraction of its former authority, some barriers are not to be crossed without consequence.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7565 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7943 times:

Quoting AR385 (Thread starter):
I have no dog in this fight. I am just wondering what impact will an American President generate by controlling guns by decree, if Congress can´t come up with something.

He doesn't have to worry about re-election so he can get tough and ram through the necessary measurers.


User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7565 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7935 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
If he is not very careful, he can be impeached.

Could you imagine the uproar if a President was impeached over a sensible solution to gun control, I'm pretty sure that would end up breaking the NRA and ensure that gun control issue would be finally sorted in the US.


User currently offlineAirstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2693 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7922 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 3):
I'm pretty sure that would end up breaking the NRA

You're fairly out of touch with the way things are in this country, if you think there's something that could break the NRA.

The NRA has actually gotten stronger in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, not weaker.

[Edited 2012-12-27 01:15:00]


Pancakes are delicious.
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7919 times:

The Democrats aren't that stupid. There's a reason why Biden was appointed to the commission.

User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5499 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7917 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 2):
he can get tough and ram through the necessary measurers.


The necessary measures are defined by Congress. He can request certain things, but it is up to Congress to pass those measures.

Say what you want to say about partisanship, but, here in the US, there is bipartisan support for gun rights. Both Democrats and Republicans are on the record as strong supporters of The Second Amendment.

Any executive order or regulation pushed through the BATFE (the most probably course of action) will be vacated by the Court system if it runs afoul of legislation and The Second Amendment.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 3):
Could you imagine the uproar if a President was impeached over a sensible solution to gun control,


No, the president would not be impeached for imposing "a sensible solution to gun control", he would be impeached for exceeding his power as the chief executive by circumventing the constitutional process. The question is: is that an impeachable offense?

[Edited 2012-12-27 00:20:33]


When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8184 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 7886 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
While the US Constitution holds only a tiny fraction of its former authority, some barriers are not to be crossed without consequence.

True enough but executive orders have always been a very grey area in Constitutional law, and past Presidents have got away with extraordinary extensions of executive power as a means of implementing policy change, sometimes with the help of Congress, but other times without.

The internment of Japanese and German Americans in WWII under FDR, the desegregation of schools under Ike, racial integration of the armed forces under Truman - all of these were huge extensions of power under executive order that were neither successfully challenged in Court or thwarted by the Constitutional authority granted to the Congress.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5499 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 7863 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 7):
True enough but executive orders have always been a very grey area in Constitutional law, and past Presidents have got away with extraordinary extensions of executive power as a means of implementing policy change, sometimes with the help of Congress, but other times without.

While true, I can't see Congress standing for an infringement into The Second Amendment. Again, there is strong, bipartisan support for gun rights.

I guess it really depends on the measures he decrees and how far he pushes the anti-gun agenda without congressional approval.

Either way, you can depend that any executive order or regulation will be sitting in front of the Supreme Court pretty quick.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2890 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 7862 times:

Quoting Airstud (Reply 4):
The NRA has actually gotten stronger in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, not weaker.

Then its only a matter of time, because....

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/worl...-gun-laws-poll-20121227-2bx3b.html

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 3):
Could you imagine the uproar if a President was impeached over a sensible solution to gun control, I'm pretty sure that would end up breaking the NRA and ensure that gun control issue would be finally sorted in the US.

Never say never, crazier things have happened !



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineJakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1255 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 7866 times:

Being a gun owner myself, you can say I'm biased. With that said, I have been pondering both pro and anti-gun stances since the school shooting. Where did everything go wrong? What can be done to stop it from occurring again? What are our options?

Questions I've asked myself over and over again, and slowly developed my own realistic answers which would have to happen.

The first question: why not just outright ban guns?

The simple answer, you can't. The more complex answer, you are virtually asking for the entire restructuring of America. The first step that would have to happen is people who comply with the laws would turn in their guns. You have to follow this up by going after registered owners who have not turned in their weapons. Then comes the very hard truth; be forced by authorities for being allowed to search your house for any guns, regardless if you were an owner or not. If you are going to ban guns, they must all be confiscated, which means a house to house, building to building search. There are no other ways around this; it would have to be done.

If the searching wasn't bad enough, the entire boarder of Mexico and Canada would have to be shut down and every single import shipping container would have to be checked to prevent the already huge illegal arms trade. We already have difficulty enough just trying to stop the drugs and illegal crossings, so good luck getting the political will for a virtual customs blockade.

So what do we do to prevent this tragedy from happening again?

Realistically, we can't. You can't stop lunacy or evil. It's everywhere, every continent, every country, down to every city. Unless you want to completely wipe out the human race or figure out a drug that devoids us of emotions, the only responsible answer I can think of is free reign on concealed carry. What I mean by "free reign" is if you are licensed and have been trained to discreetly carry a gun, you are allowed to carry anywhere, anytime, regardless of circumstance. Of course, a yearly refresher course on training as well as a conversation with a police officer or some other authority figure to verify you are sane and are still able to carry your person would be required.

As sadistic as this may come, you can't stop the attempt, but you can minimize the losses.



Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7565 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7772 times:

Quoting Airstud (Reply 4):
The NRA has actually gotten stronger in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, not weaker.

   You don't say

Quote:
The USA Today/Gallup Poll found 54 per cent have a favourable opinion of the NRA, down six points from 2005, but generally in line with a series of polls done from 1993-2000.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/worl...-20121227-2bx3b.html#ixzz2GFjYlbWp


User currently offlineJoePatroni707 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 493 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7730 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
If he is not very careful, he can be impeached

I think Obama is pretty much impeachment proof. If he is impeached we would be stuck with Biden who is far worse.


User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2114 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7702 times:

Quoting Airstud (Reply 4):
The NRA has actually gotten stronger in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, not weaker.

Let me first say that I have no idea whether that's the case or not. I don't have the necessary insight.

However, on a more general note - when institutions radicalise, they appear to get stronger on first sight because they have a firmer grip on their core constituents, many of whom may be radicals themselves. People rally around the institution, and it appears to be on the upsurge. What really happens, however, is that the more numerous and probably more important people at the fringes turn away from the institution because they're increasingly alienated. They aren't vocal about the process however, in part because the institution appears to gain traction (see above). This can be called radicalisation bias. Again, I don't know whether it applies in the current situation, but it could well apply in the case of the NRA.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7657 times:

Quoting AR385 (Thread starter):
The White house threatens to impose by decree measures for disarmament if by the end of January Congress does not manage to agree on proposals

The story is a bogus scare hoax.

The White House (assuming they mean the President) does not have such power.

There are a lot of things the President can do. Ordering gun control isn't one of them.

The Federal Assualt Weapons Ban was passed in 1994 and stayed in effect for 10 years. That is the thing I hear most often as being re-implemented. However, the President cannot impose that by decree. It will take the Congress to pass a law to make it happen.

So far, no bill to re-authorize that ban have reached the floor of the House for a vote. It is very unlikley to occur in the next two years.


User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3185 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7635 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 14):
Quoting AR385 (Thread starter):
The White house threatens to impose by decree measures for disarmament if by the end of January Congress does not manage to agree on proposals

The story is a bogus scare hoax.

The White House (assuming they mean the President) does not have such power.

There are a lot of things the President can do. Ordering gun control isn't one of them.

The Federal Assualt Weapons Ban was passed in 1994 and stayed in effect for 10 years. That is the thing I hear most often as being re-implemented. However, the President cannot impose that by decree. It will take the Congress to pass a law to make it happen.

So far, no bill to re-authorize that ban have reached the floor of the House for a vote. It is very unlikley to occur in the next two years.

  

Exactly what I was gonna say. While Obama doesn't specify what measures he could take, there's no evidence to suggest he'll rule by decree. I seriously doubt a person who just won reelection would jeopardize his (still to begin) second term in office.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21691 posts, RR: 55
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7620 times:

Quoting Rara (Reply 13):
However, on a more general note - when institutions radicalise, they appear to get stronger on first sight because they have a firmer grip on their core constituents, many of whom may be radicals themselves. People rally around the institution, and it appears to be on the upsurge. What really happens, however, is that the more numerous and probably more important people at the fringes turn away from the institution because they're increasingly alienated.

   See the Republican party post-2010.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7592 times:

I don't like this executive order business... seems to circumvent Congress, doesn't it? Of course, when the executive order is in favor of want you want people magically seem to be in favor of them.

Both sides have done it so I'm not singling anyone out

What are the ideas being proposed anyway?

Edit: I do think it's ironic that in other threads, I said it wouldn't be crazy for the President to push gun control in his second term, and I thought he would. I got called paranoid and berated, guess I was right

[Edited 2012-12-27 08:14:04]


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7585 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 17):
I said it wouldn't be crazy for the President to push gun control in his second term,

During the 2008 campaign, bring the Federal Assualt Weapons Ban back before Congress and getting it passed was part of the Obama platform. It was also mentioned in the 2012 platform, but not discusses much.

As far as I can tell, that is the only 'gun control' measure Obama has campaigned or proposed to have occur.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7579 times:

Quoting AR385 (Thread starter):
The White house threatens to impose by decree measures for disarmament if by the end of January Congress does not manage to agree on proposals

This is an extremely dubious allegation. Bogus even. I would love to hear this newspaper's source for this.


However...

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
If he is not very careful, he can be impeached.

Impeached? Come on man. Get real. Impeachment comes after a "high crime or misdemeanor." Performing governmental duties is inherently NOT an impeachable offense.

In any event, conviction on impeachment requires a two-thirds majority of the Senate. Which 20 democrat Senators do you think are going to vote to convict Obama?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
While the US Constitution holds only a tiny fraction of its former authority

If you're saying that the Second Amendment used not to grant an individual right to own a handgun, I agree.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7566 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 17):

I don't like this executive order business... seems to circumvent Congress

Congress's power is not absolute, and the President has the power to be the executive from the Constitution.

Btw, every president, even George Washington, issued these executive orders. Those early presidents did so while the authors of the Constitution were still living, and saw no objection because it was well understood that they were supported by the Constitution.

Also, FWIW, guns were banned in various places in the United States during and after the Second Amendment's ratification, confirming that no one at the time believed that guns were an individual right.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19954 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7526 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
If he is not very careful, he can be impeached. While the US Constitution holds only a tiny fraction of its former authority, some barriers are not to be crossed without consequence.

I will be absolutely unsurprised if Mr. Obama is impeached by the GOP-controlled House this term.

I will be shocked if he is removed by the Senate. In fact, it would be very interesting to see a GOP-controlled House impeach two out of two Democratic Presidents in a row. It would say a lot about how the GOP plays the game.

In the end, this is horse-honkey. Some basic (and I hope "common sense") restrictions on assault weapons will be put in place. Jack-booted, black-clad thugs are not going to show up at your door to take your guns, wife, kids, and dog. I rapidly tire of hearing about how Mr. Obama is going to do all these horrid, dictatorial things in his second term. He's never even mentioned guns until recent events. It's really all a straw man tactic to draw attention from the real issue, which is the Fiscal Cliff and the GOP's absolute refusal to come to the table and negotiate.

The fact is that Mr. Obama has made less sweeping use of his Presidential powers than the majority of his predecessors. Perhaps it's time he started doing exactly what the GOP is so fond of accusing him of doing.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7498 times:

As long as the senate is in the hands of democrats there will be no impeachment.

But I have no doubt that Obummer will try and use his executive privileges to restrict this critical civil right.

It definitely would confirm my thoughts about the SOB



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39907 posts, RR: 75
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7492 times:

Not surprised by any of this. Obama has been wanting disarm the American people his entire political career. Just look at his voting record as a state Senator in Illinois. Obama was simply looking for a disaster and take advantage of the situation to push legislation he has always wanted to push.


Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21691 posts, RR: 55
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7485 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 23):
Obama was simply looking for a disaster

If he was looking for a disaster, he must have missed Ft. Hood and Aurora.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
25 rfields5421 : Impeachment is solely the responsibility/ authority of the House - the Senate has nothing to do with impeachment until after the fact. The Senate is
26 Superfly : He didn't want to 'rush to judgment' in that case even though it was clear what the motive was behind that. Of course Barack Hussein Obama would neve
27 seb146 : oh, for the love of.... Because no president ever in the history of the Republic has ever issued a presidential delcaration and circumvented congress
28 D L X : Republicans didn't even get their show trial with Clinton. The Senate shut the whole thing down almost immediately when it got to them. Impeachment i
29 Post contains images Superfly : It's so obvious that Obama has an affinity for the religion the Fort Hood terrorist belonged to. In fact, Obama and his justice refused to call it a
30 Post contains images D L X : Right. Where is this shooter today? Is he free?
31 Superfly : In jail like a lot of criminals for workplace violence.
32 casinterest : And calling it terrorism makes you feel warm and comfortable at night? Was this guy any different from a postal worker that goes postal? Although evi
33 mham001 : It seems we are discussing somebodies interpretation of something which has then been re-translated. Obama never said anything about "disarmament".
34 seb146 : And another thing I want to clear up: There have been a number of mass shootings over the past four years. More over the course of the nation, but I a
35 Ken777 : Queer, isn't it., that this is the only link. How about a major news outlet in the US? My bet is that Obama knows more about the Constitution than all
36 GDB : You've really lost it this time....... I could mention the hugely accelerated erosion of Al Queda and affiliates leadership and top members under Oba
37 Post contains images connies4ever : GDB: All excellent points ! Does it strike you that the increasingly shrill responses from the far right are starting to encroach onto the turf usual
38 PHX787 : Just wanna add to this: if he is not careful, he could get impeached, AND shot at by some gun-happy southerners.
39 DocLightning : I can guarantee you that the Secret Service is absolutely prepared for such an attempt. Nobody will ever get a clear shot at the President.
40 Post contains images Mir : Which really paints gun owners as reasonable, responsible people.... -Mir
41 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : I doubt I'm in the boat you refer to, but I did post a few months ago that I was surprised the President hasn't touched the gun issue and I wouldn't
42 ouboy79 : House Impeaches...which didn't really do much to get rid of Clinton. Senate tries for removal...guess who is in charge there.
43 Post contains images EA CO AS : You DO realize that equating favorability poll results with the strength and political clout of an organization is like using jersey sales to forecas
44 Post contains images Dreadnought : Awww, you're just saying that to make me feel good...
45 Post contains images StarAC17 : Here is the question Americans have to ask themselves. Does the constitution grant the right for any citizen to carry a gun regardless of their abili
46 Revelation : Goes to show you how far people will go to slam square pegs into round holes to fit their self-invented conspiracy theories. Clearly any amount of gu
47 kpitrrat : The way I see it is along these lines: Heroin is illegal. Cocaine is illegal. Marijuana is illegal (Federally) Dog Fighting is illegal. So some exampl
48 Post contains images Superfly : Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan guns down people shouting "Allahu Akbar!" and Obama can't acknowledge it as terrorism, yet I am "behaviourally disturbed" and
49 seb146 : The only difference I know is automatic/semi-automatic weapons can take out mass amounts of people at one time. My rant was directed toward the screa
50 AF1624 : This is an argument that I often see used in gun control debates and it doesn't take the whole picture into account. Cocaine and Heroin are accessibl
51 kiwirob : What if he had shouted "I'm doing this for Jesus", would that be terrorism?
52 MD-90 : Not in a country that already has 300 million guns.
53 rfields5421 : Gun control bans cannot be 'retro-active' requiring that guns already in owner hands be turned in. There can be requirements for licensing, but those
54 Aesma : How do you ensure that having 50 people carrying doesn't mean you automatically have 1 if not more irresponsible person carrying ? I certainly wouldn
55 kiwirob : No reason why a total ban on assault type weapons couldn't be retroactive, this has been done this in other countries, so no reason for the US to be
56 Post contains images Dreadnought : I am no big fan of assault rifles (I've done military service, and I've had my fill) but my understanding is that while the AWB was in place, an AK-4
57 rfields5421 : Two reasons. There has never been the political will to pass a retroactive ban on a nationwide basis. Secondly, there is a lot of case law in the US
58 Aesma : So, the problem is just political will, nothing that can't change.
59 GDB : And has Obama actually, really, denied that Maj Hassan was NOT killing due to his opposition to US Foreign Policy? But that's not all, is it? Far fro
60 DocLightning : Where, I might point out, I'm pretty sure that there might be a few armed guards around. Didn't seem to stop it.
61 fr8mech : Then you need to start hanging around with different people. I, and other gun owners/concealed carry permit holders, have a trust for our fellow citi
62 rfields5421 : First - this was Hasan's normal workplace - where he was supposed to be at that time. His job was interviewing troops at the Readiness Processing Cen
63 cptkrell : "A free people ought to be armed." George Washington "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little safety, deserve neither liberty o
64 falstaff : Sure they are. If I wanted them I could drive less than one mile from my house and buy them from a street corner. I am sure I could buy whatever drug
65 EA CO AS : And that scarcity/price inflation actually increases the likelihood that violent means will be used to acquire them and/or protect the black market f
66 rfields5421 : No where is anyone involved in the administration proposing that. Where the stories and scare tactic posts are coming from is the gun manufactures, t
67 falstaff : Which Manufacturer? Name one US based manufacturer that is doing that and I want some proof.
68 fr8mech : I think that's the problem with it. The language tends to be vague. I read an article some time ago that mentioned that under the current (at that tim
69 FlyDeltaJets : All Obama has done since becoming president was expand gun rights. Obama has removed the ban on carrying firearms in National Parks. He allows Amtrak
70 rfields5421 : You've got to be kidding me. New stories like this thread is based upon are the best advertising the gun manufacturers and the NRA can get. Liberals
71 seb146 : As part of a well-regulated militia. And, show me where in the Constitution it says we can all carry and use semi-automatic or automatic weapons with
72 Post contains links fr8mech : Again? Just because you keep saying it does not make it true. And, I will quote, once again, from the Heller opinion: "(a) The Amendment’s prefator
73 AR385 : I´d like to clarify a few things, having read a few comments: El Pais which is the newspaper where I took the article I linked and translated a few p
74 fr8mech : Thank you for re-centering the thread. President Obama has shown a rather casual disdain for the legislative process when it suits his political or i
75 Post contains images Maverick623 : It has less to do with that and more to do with making absolutely sure that, should the President and the military chain choose to allow it, this guy
76 fr8mech : Seb implies that The Second Amendment only covers arms in existence during the ratification. I just pointed out that if we use that measure, The Firs
77 Mir : This is one of the parts of the Heller opinion that make no sense to me. The 2nd Amendment is unique among all the other amendments in "announcing a
78 Dreadnought : Then why do you, and those on the left, chose to completely ignore the 10th amendment?
79 Mir : First of all, that's a completely irrelevant point, since my comment had to do with how the text was worded. But since you brought it up, we don't -
80 DeltaMD90 : Already pointed out, but every base I've been to is completely gun free (sometimes there are exceptions to go to ranges, but that process is tedious
81 Post contains images D L X : As has been stated many times, this is revisionist history -- applying your own desires for how the text should be read in 2012 to a text that was wr
82 DeltaMD90 : Well, I think we all know that this isn't going to happen anytime soon. I am not even sure if a new gun law will make it past the Republican controll
83 seb146 : A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That
84 Superfly : If you really think about it, having the right to be armed build in to the Constitution to fight against a tyrannical government is a very liberal con
85 Revelation : So why all the apocyliptic rhetoric? I listened to Obama's speech at Newtown and he clearly understands the role he plays. I just looked up the speec
86 StarAC17 : By that logic conservatives should be 100% for legalizing drugs and wouldn't kick and scream about the eventual legalization of gay marriage. They wa
87 Post contains images scbriml : You think the framers of the 2nd Amendment didn't know the difference between a comma and a full-stop?
88 mt99 : Exactly. There are plenty of conservatives that want to overturn Roe vs Wade. Why is Heller nor up for discussion?
89 D L X : Even if your premise were correct (it is not), the answer is because liberals adapt to change, hence the name "liberal." Conservatives do not, also h
90 roswell41 : Many 'liberals' in the U.S. today are not classical liberals. They are statists, plain and simply. They want government to have more control and influ
91 DeltaMD90 : If the law was made today, it would indeed be different... but do you think (unbiasedly) it actually does mean what you say? I know the intentions ha
92 D L X : There's no way anything remotely approaching the Second Amendment could be ratified today. Yes. There were gun bans in place before, during, and afte
93 Post contains images Superfly : Exactly! That is why I became a Libertarian, not a Conservative. Actually I am correct. Spot on my friend! Many liberals I was protesting with less t
94 D L X : The words "liberal" and "conservative" did not share the meaning in 1790 as they do now. Hell, political parties did not exist in the way they do tod
95 Post contains images Superfly : Re-read my statement and let it sink in. I had specifically stated "very liberal concept" . I never stated that the framers were liberals. You do the
96 Mir : I can't agree with that interpretation - the "we need a militia" part is elsewhere in the Constitution in the powers delegated to Congress (namely, t
97 fr8mech : Read the opinion...your concern is addressed. I'm not sure that the Democrat controlled Senate would pass the bill Sen. Feinstein is proposing. What
98 itsjustme : Which begs the question, why do you need to protect your body with a weapon that fires several hundred rounds a minute? If you can't protect yourself
99 roswell41 : It's not for me to justify why I need something that is a right, the onus is on you to specifically articulate why I, a free citizen, should be denied
100 D L X : The NRA website before the election was all about getting the word out that Obama planned to take everyone's guns away. The hysteria is clear. Actual
101 Post contains images Superfly : May come in handy against the government should the government go down the path of tyranny. A militia led by Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and John Boner?
102 Mir : Not really. The opinion doesn't mention the fact that other amendments have no prefatory clauses, it only looks at whether the prefatory clause fits
103 Post contains images Superfly : So gun owners have had it wrong for the last 236 years?
104 Post contains images Maverick623 : Oh please, most of the Amendments (and nearly all of the first 10) couldn't be ratified today. The 4th-8th Amendments would weaken our national secur
105 HoMsaR : I guess you have an out by the use of the vague word "many," but this certainly does not describe "many" of the liberals I know/have seen. Hell, for
106 rfields5421 : Quoting the 'King of Situational Ethics' won't make you look smarter. Scalia is going to go down in history as one, if not THE, most biased, most per
107 itsjustme : Roswell, I'm not denying you or anyone else your right to own a firearm and that's not what I am proposing. I'm just questioning why you and others fe
108 scbriml : Seriously, this is the lamest of all the lame pro-gun arguments.
109 GDB : Ah, that other total obsession of the US right. So the termination of a pregnancy - which despite the rhetoric by your GOP knuckle draggers often is
110 D L X : What does it make you if you believe that your state-granted right to dangerous weapons is more important than protecting 6 year olds from being shot
111 seb146 : Yes. I believe the Second Amendment was written in the wake of the British forces having better and more firepower. I believe the Second Amendment wa
112 DeltaMD90 : Exactly, I'm just saying that despite its age, there is nothing that nullifies it. That is basically my whole point. We can't say we don't need milit
113 mt99 : Correct. And this option should be on the table for discussion.
114 DeltaMD90 : I'd go about it a better, more realistic way. Do you honestly think they'd get even close to the votes/support needed? There is no way
115 seb146 : Yes, but I don't think repeal it. Just make it for modern times. Keep in mind there are people who hunt so they can stay alive and people that hoard
116 DeltaMD90 : Honestly, I think this can be done without a repeal or modification. Registration, safety classes, requirement of safe storage, and a few other commo
117 Mir : Except that it's never going to happen. There's stuff that you can get done (closing the gun show loophole, registration), there's stuff that's going
118 seb146 : There are the collectors. I have no problem with them. But, there are those who believe with all their mind that Obama has already taken away all our
119 itsjustme : Your response would be entertaining, even funny if you were kidding. But you're not and that makes your response and attempt at logic a bit concernin
120 Superfly : Your lack of knowledge of the Constitution is a bit concerning. I guess our public schools stopped teaching this some time ago.
121 fr8mech : So, you would be ok if a conservative president, in the future, decided to take matters into his own hands and impose restrictions on, say, abortions
122 windy95 : Your lack of understanding the Constitution seems to be the problem. Once again you fail to understand the intent of the 2nd amendment. And like some
123 Post contains images scbriml : Oh I understand exactly why it's there. But for the pro-gun lobby to use the "threat of a tyrannical government" as a justification for needing guns
124 rfields5421 : He can't. He doesn't have that power. If he tried, he could not enforce it. That doesn't even count the court challenges which would be filed immedia
125 DeltaMD90 : You don't need bulk ammo to do mass shootings. I'd be willing to bet that most people that go to the range shoot multiple times as much as the worst
126 Revelation : Clearly the NRA et al want to focus on the impossible, because they dislike the possible. There is no clear way to differentiate between collectors a
127 cmf : There is a system to track weapons from manufacturing down to sales with licensed dealers. It is essentially a paper system so as ineffective as can
128 DeltaMD90 : I believe in other countries they actually have collector licenses What if you are not shooting a single range? What if you have land you want to sho
129 itsjustme : After watching the President on this morning's Meet the Press, and seeing him dance around the topic of gun control (I got the impression he wouldn't
130 DeltaMD90 : I know it goes "against me" but I agree... there are some measures I disagree with but there are also some that most gun owners I know actually agree
131 PHX787 : Well I'll admit some arent but most are. Me for example. I only use my glock for hunting and for protecting my house. My dad and I are both trained t
132 rfields5421 : While I live on the edge of a major metropolitan area - and do all my local shooting at a range, most of my family don't live anywhere near a publicl
133 fr8mech : Police are already able to do that. We (a few familie, including that of 2 officers) at a game-watching party last night and the conversation after t
134 Revelation : I thought this was only for guns sold via FFLs.
135 cmf : They can track it to original owner in an incredibly inefficient way. Importantly, original owner is of little interest, it is current owner that mat
136 Mir : Make the process faster and easier (in addition to all the other benefits of keeping track of weapons sold by people other than licensed dealers that
137 fr8mech : Buying through an FFL is the only way to buy a new gun. So, you're assuming a stolen gun will be registered??? That's nice...make the background chec
138 cmf : Why all the question marks? I expect that the gun is registered to someone. That person better have reported the gun stolen, showing it was stored pr
139 Revelation : Hmm, Wiki's description of "gun show" includes: So what am I missing?
140 fr8mech : But, that's where registration breaks down. If the weapon is stolen, the trail is lost. And again, registration will not stop one crime. It will not
141 Maverick623 : I'd be hard pressed to find a cop that has a gun pulled on them every day (in fact, I can guarantee you it simply doesn't happen). And no, you don't
142 fr8mech : You're missing the "new". I can not contact a manufacturer and buy a gun from him without the proper paperwork. I'm guessing that I, a private citize
143 cmf : As has been explained so many times before. Owners must be held responsible for how they store guns. If they were not stored properly they should be
144 Mir : Here's what I want to have happen: First, make it impossible for someone who couldn't pass a background check to buy a gun legally, which means requi
145 itsjustme : Well, you can speculate all you want but speaking from experience, and the experiences of fellow officers, you're mistaken. You'd be surprised at the
146 seb146 : My point is: there is nothing we can ever do about criminals and undesireables owning guns so why do anything about it but we can sure as hell keep ki
147 cmf : Wish I had saved the link but I read the other day that 80% of weapons used in crimes are less than 3 years old. Why so defeatist? That we can't stop
148 Post contains images NAV20 : I've always felt that the Second Amendment is a clumsy, ungrammatical sentence, with commas in the wrong places, and that consequently none of us will
149 connies4ever : And I would agree. We had a (somewhat complicated) gun registry program here in Canada set up under the Liberal government of Mr Chretien. Now that w
150 L-188 : The collapse of the Canadian registry system was a great moment for our southern neighbors as it was never intended to be a crime fighting tool. It wa
151 D L X : What is itsjustme misunderstanding about the Constitution? (Before you answer, bone up on the Treason Clause and let us know how it squares with your
152 Post contains links itsjustme : And the successful murder of six people nearby, including a Federal judge and a 9 year old girl and the wounding of 13 others. What was the weapon of
153 D L X : On top of that, the man with the CCW later admitted that he wasn't sure whom to shoot, and nearly SHOT THE WRONG GUY. Fortunately, he decided not to
154 flipdewaf : I don't understand the issue of having all guns registered and ensuring that all people who wish to keep them have to do so in a safe manner, have gun
155 L-188 : DLX So you confirmed that CCW holders dont go in guns blazing?
156 D L X : I've never claimed that they did. I also do not treat them as a monolithic group.
157 flipdewaf : No, he mentioned that one did not and added that a the CCW understood that a public shooting is not solved by others having guns. Fred
158 L-188 : But at least he had the option
159 seb146 : That is how I see what is going on. We can't show skin but we can shoot to our heart's content.
160 connies4ever : I don't know, but I'll launch this idea: we have to register and insure our cars/trucks/whatever. Why should guns be any different ? I would think th
161 DeltaMD90 : What are you talking about? I can only think of the slippery slope argument. I don't see what is wrong with it honestly, and I own guns myself
162 L-188 : DeltaMD90 It's a Canadian thing. They like trying to claim they won the war of 1812. Even though it was British troops that fought it. It is sort of l
163 connies4ever : Not really. There were a lot of Canadian irregulars involved, mostly farmers, who organised independently, as well as the Mohawks & Shawnee (unde
164 L-188 : Yes it was a money pit. That is why it was dropped! I do need to read more on the 1812 war. The US made many intakes especially at the bringing of the
165 StarAC17 : [ It well may and possibly could solve them which can prevent future crime by taking criminals off the street. Regarding liberty in a lot of area it i
166 Revelation : Kind of strange how a statement that no one can show a US president actually made has drifted into a discussion of Canadian history...
167 L-188 : Tell you the truth ,at this point I prefer discussing the Canadians.
168 Post contains images cws818 : Charming Now, grow up.
169 Post contains links AR385 : http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/205...tion-on-guns#.UO5I4kuquc8.facebook
170 seb146 : I find it interesting that the same people who said "well, if the government wants to look at your e-mails and listen to your phone calls without a w
171 Post contains images Maverick623 : That is one of the most egregious examples of a strawman I have ever seen. Funny, because there are several Senators and Representatives that have go
172 Post contains links TheCommodore : You'd think that wouldn't you, as any rational person would. But apparently there's a problem, with that line of thinking ? Anyway..... From Today's
173 DeltaMD90 : A few months ago I was called an NRA nut and cook for thinking the President would enact gun control this term... hmm. I hadn't subscribed to any NRA
174 flipdewaf : Then registration would be good as it would not villify the 99.9% (probably higher than that). Fred
175 DeltaMD90 : Yes and I am not opposed to that
176 StarAC17 : What is wrong with requiring gun owner to register their firearms I don't see how that violates the constitution in any way. Look at the Swiss they h
177 L-188 : Star registration leads to confisxation.....history is repleat with examples.
178 DeltaMD90 : Yeah, I remember when the government took our cars away... should never have had them registered!
179 Post contains images ER757 : My car and dog are both registered, no one has ever confiscated them
180 Ken777 : If you look at free speech you see that it is not totally free. Make various types of comments against another person and you can start spending mone
181 Mir : I don't recall car registration information being used for nefarious purposes. -Mir
182 Post contains images n318ea : Never has a Governor of New York called for up to confiscation or Senator from Kalifornia proposing basically the same either. It has been a constant
183 seb146 : How so? That is exactly what has happened. Not only that, but the Congresspeople who the right claim are trying to take away every gun are actually j
184 Dreadnought : I was in a couple of gun stores over the weekend, and there is a massive rush for 30-round AR Clips. They were being limited to 2 per person, and the
185 bhill : The Government already has all the information it needs, for men anyway...Selective Service. And this "registration?"...no problem, perhaps it should
186 Maverick623 : I don't recall a reason why the government would ever want to eliminate the distribution of cars. And as it is, vehicle registration is nothing more
187 fr8mech : But, that would be private actors bringing lawsuits, wouldn't it? And yes, the government can and does limit free speech in certain situations where
188 tugger : I say the easiest way to do something is to require gun owners to have liability insurance for their firearms against misuse. I would impose the same
189 fr8mech : So, I buy liability insurance. My gun is stolen. I cancel my insurance on that gun. What exactly have you done? Well, you've enriched the insurance i
190 tugger : Yes, if you own it, you must insure it, you and or the insurance company is responsible for the liability involved with it. If it is stolen then it i
191 fr8mech : Because a law that forces an insurance company to maintain coverage on a stolen firearm is a defacto ban. What insurance company would enter into a c
192 mt99 : How does car insurance work after your car is stolen?
193 tugger : If ownership changes hands then the person it goes to assumes liability for said firearm, they will simply have insurance prior to obtaining it. I am
194 Post contains images fr8mech : The policy is canceled. I, the previous owner is longer responsible for the car (unless it is returned to me). The insurance company holds no liabilt
195 D L X : That explains why all the cars disappeared, and why my rush hour commute is only 30 minutes. Does this sound to anyone else like a gun owner that sim
196 mt99 : Right - and how is that different from asking gun owners to carry insurance? Same with a car.
197 fr8mech : What if the gun is stolen? I no longer have control of the firearm. I cancel my liability insurance on the firearm. The firearm is now uninsured. Or,
198 tugger : In actuality, if my suggestion is followed, they would in fact have insurance. That's the beauty of this idea. As the insurance company that last had
199 tugger : Go for it. Get that passed and see how friendly the gun industry is to your cause. And by the way how is that not getting government directly involve
200 fr8mech : Read the thread. Tugger is suggesting that insurance is maintained on the firearm even after I no longer have it in my possesion. In other words, if
201 mt99 : I still don't see how its any different on how car insurance works. But how about this, when you buy a gun (after you are certified "not crazy" via p
202 mt99 : true but this is how car insurance works - and you poo poo the idea:
203 tugger : How is a gun stolen? Did you have it properly secured, were you using it in a proper and safe fashion when it was lost and stolen? These things can a
204 Mir : Until the law gets passed, and then they won't be doing it. The rush to get ammunition while you still can is a natural consequence of the process of
205 flipdewaf : no no NO! Stop reading all the information and using it all in a balanced way. You are only supposed read the bits you like, that's how internet deba
206 fr8mech : After a car is stolen (and it is properly documented) it ceases to be insured by anyone. Not the previous owner and not the insurance company. It is
207 Post contains links fr8mech : Heller Decision. Pages 2-22.
208 mt99 : How do you know that they wouldn't? After all its not an unlimited liability. People killed by guns is miniscule - as the gun lobby claims. So out of
209 mt99 : We can always put gun laws to popular vote. Let the people decide. We put constitutional amendments for public vote all the time.
210 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : Although lobbying and big money does come into play, they are THE interest representing millions of gun owners. It's not all corrupt big business, th
211 L-188 : Well it appears Bidens meeting today was the dog and pony show we all knew it would be. If he is going to announce recommendations Tuesday they were a
212 fr8mech : Of course it is. If you say that once a firearm is insured, it remains insured, even if it is stolen, then the liability for that firearm is unlimite
213 Post contains links mt99 : Why not? Only 11,000 gun deaths happened in 2011. Alex Jones (very convincingly) told me that gun killings are negligible. Insurance companies deals
214 tugger : Not all insured things are like that. If you own a company that does blasting (or otherwise uses explosives), if explosives that you own/bought are l
215 n318ea : Why not make all CRIMINALS buy insurance. Seems they don't normally follow laws do they? How about Judges that are wuss's and give B$ sentences and Pa
216 mt99 : if you add a "lifetime insurance" charge to every gun and ammo sale - you are in fact doing that.
217 NAV20 : Agree entirely - in fact, I think a nationwide licensing system, plus a duty on everybody (individuals and gun dealers) to report all sales, and to s
218 Mir : True. But the problem is that controlling high-capacity magazines is one of the only defenses possible against mass shootings. The gunmen involved ge
219 DeltaMD90 : Yes but does "controlling" = "outright ban?" There are lots of weird exceptions too. Do you know about C&R guns? They are basically very old guns
220 NAV20 : DeltaMD90, it would be easy enough to include special clauses allowing exceptions for the odd historical type. But, for my money, Mir is dead right -
221 Mir : It doesn't have to, and I'd prefer if it didn't. If there's a practical way to allow some people to have them while still denying access to those who
222 fr8mech : Because, it's not necessary under the Constitution. If a state wants to put it to a popular vote, they can...but it is not required. I'd be intereste
223 Post contains links and images Dreadnought : Reminds me of a little montage on Youtube. A bunch of Hollywood folks "Demand a Plan" to reduce gun violence, interlaced with all of them making a lo
224 Post contains links and images DeltaMD90 : I'd say the biggest reason is convenience. May be hard to do, but go shooting with 30 round mags then do it with 5 round mags all day. Another that h
225 fr8mech : Which is on Diane Feinstein's (D-CA) ban list. You know, 5 round, 10 round or 30 round mags...I don't think it would make much of a difference. When
226 Mir : The experience in Tucson would say otherwise. It didn't prevent that incident, of course, but it did limit the damage. -Mir
227 DeltaMD90 : Yeah, she goes way too extreme. IIRC, basically anything semi-automatic is a no-no. Didn't she carry years ago?
228 itsjustme : Well, it worked in the mass shooting involving Congresswoman Giffords. The shooter was "engaged" by a bystander with a folding chair after he had sto
229 itsjustme : I respectfully disagree. I don't see a ban on private citizens purchasing and/or possessing semiautomatic weapons as "way too extreme". One can prote
230 Dreadnought : So we should all be reduced to single-shot flintlocks? Just about every gun available the last 150 years is a semi-auto, or a revolver which is littl
231 DeltaMD90 : There's more to it that defense and hunting... plus, besides a pump action shotgun, what non-semiautomatic weapon would be good for defense??? Well I
232 fr8mech : Agreed, in the case of Tuscon, the shooter was engaged when he went to reload. There were people around who were physically able to engage the shoote
233 seb146 : But, keep in mind, there was an armed guard at Columbine. What about Aurora? Wasn't there police there? I know for a fact, having lived there so long
234 fr8mech : He was off campus and away from the initial scene of action. He drove his car to the scene and engaged a shooter at 60 yards. He managed to distract
235 ATCtower : While I pray with all my might that our government doesnt take the stance of tyrants our founding fathers guaranteed our Second Amendment rights to pr
236 seb146 : In a darkened theater. With little clue as to where the shots are coming from and how many people are between the shooter and the authorities? Or, at
237 Mir : As I said earlier on this thread (or it might have been another one - there are so many of them), I do not think that it would make a difference in a
238 itsjustme : Six .357 magnum rounds have plenty of stopping power for defense. But you're right, I don't see us agreeing on this. The officer wasn't off campus. H
239 fr8mech : Not to quibble, but he was on the other side of campus and had to leave campus to drive back onto campus. Agreed. The active shooter protocols are de
240 Post contains links KiwiRob : Everyone should have the right to buy and own a gun yeah right, if fools like this can run a gun shop Americans desirve all the massacres they can han
241 D L X : First, "the government" is the people. We elected them, and they represent us. It is not some evil anthropomorphic entity. Second, the interest the p
242 DeltaMD90 : Sigh... I argue so hard and then idiots like this ruin it for all of us. THIS is the type of crap we shouldn't tolerate, this is irresponsible behavi
243 seb146 : Anymore, though, it is how much money is pumped into elections. We, we end up with the best government corporations can buy. The NRA is pumping milli
244 DeltaMD90 : People are... I'm pretty sure it came up yesterday in Biden's discussion and will be implemented soon. But like I said, I think the gun show loophole
245 L-188 : At this point I am fully a full array of draconian measures to be proposed by Biden and Obummer to support them. With any luck congress will not pass
246 DeltaMD90 : What are they?
247 Post contains images Ken777 : I avoid FOX News so I don't worry about what I miss. So how much money did he spend and what is he going to do with another 20? Decorate his Christma
248 mt99 : Why would your gun be stolen? Guns are used to protect yourself and your home - you know = to prevent robberies., If your gun is stolen - you are not
249 Maverick623 : That fool made some serious boo-boos in his video. It wouldn't surprise me to see him arrested for making terrorist threats, and he should NOT be run
250 fr8mech : The 'gun show loophole' would have to be addressed through legislation. Yup, whenever I buy a firearm at a gunshow, I fill out the transfer form and
251 mt99 : No because a car does not prevent robberies. A gun is (supposedly) used to avoid robberies. ..
252 StarAC17 : That is a pretty big stretch to say that if a gun is stolen the owner should no longer be eligible to have one again, but you should be reporting it
253 Post contains images mt99 : Just as much as stretch as more guns = less crime argument, I can even go further. If you have a gun and ANYTHING of yours gets stolen.. you loose al
254 Ken777 : Gun regulation changes over time. SOmeone was talking about "back when" the Black Panthers were talking about the 2nd Amendment right for them to hav
255 Mir : Well, the state of Tennessee hasn't tolerated it either - they've revoked his CCW permit. The "gun show loophole" is somewhat of a misnomer - it real
256 itsjustme : That's not quibbling - that's grasping at straws. Because the officer had to drive off campus and then back on to get to where Harris was translates
257 Maverick623 : And IIRC he actually hit Harris, either in a non-vital area or in his bullet-proof vest.
258 Mir : Is it really any more lame than the argument that because laws haven't stopped one particular shooting, there's no sense in passing any of them? -Mir
259 seb146 : And that's fine, but how many guns is a person able to buy at a time at a gun show? If people have to be responsible to own a car to the point where
260 Maverick623 : False analogy. You do not have to register a car or prove anything as long as the car isn't operated on public roads.
261 itsjustme : Not true in California. Even if the vehicle isn't going to be operated, it still has to be registered as "PNO" (planned non operation).
262 itsjustme : No, of course it isn't any more lame. To quote Jon Stewart, "So if something doesn't succeed the first time, we say fuck it"? No, you keep tweaking l
263 DeltaMD90 : As many as you want... I never got the whole # of guns argument... 1 gun with ammo is just as dangerous as 7 with ammo. It's not like you can buy 10
264 itsjustme : True. Which is why the current issue at hand is "gun control" and not "crime control".
265 seb146 : Person A buys 100 guns at a gun show and sells them out of his/her house. One of those guns is used in a mass shooting or a simple robbery at a 7-11.
266 flipdewaf : Why stop there, we were discussing the meaning of "well regulated" and how this seems to not have any bearing on the constitution Sounds logical to m
267 Post contains links and images NAV20 : Thanks for lots of pretty thoughtful posts, DeltaMD90. One query about something you said earlier:- Turning that on its head, what sort of hobby shoot
268 Post contains images Maverick623 : 2. In public bodies; Any alteration made or proposed to be made in a bill or motion that adds, changes, substitutes, or omits.
269 Mir : And since I watched that segment as well, it's important to add that those laws and the enforcement thereof did have a tremendous effect on drunk dri
270 Dreadnought : There are gun clubs all over the place. I was at one a couple of months ago where someone actually brought in a mini-gun, and used it to blow away a
271 rfields5421 : Recently at the Fort Worth Gun Show - I saw a group of four or five Hispanic men buying high count magazine handguns. They were not buying any guns f
272 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : Um, well what is the point of gun control? I can't think of any reason besides stopping crime... As for accidental shootings, mandatory safety classe
273 itsjustme : Their last name isn't "Robertson" by any chance, is it? (You'd have to be a Duck Dynasty watcher to get that). Yeah, that was my point, in a round ab
274 Post contains images Mir : And that's how guns end up in the hands of gangs and street criminals. Why in the world haven't we done something about this yet? If there's demand (
275 DeltaMD90 : The problem I see is getting the before product legally... There are thousands of 30 round mags overseas, can there be a way to import them and allow
276 D L X : Don't you think that's kind of what happens when the _enthusiast_ don't self-police their craft?
277 roswell41 : No legislation will pass Congress. Obama will sign some type of executive order and throw his hands in the air and demonize the House Republicans. The
278 DeltaMD90 : Yeah, I was mainly talking about DC's incompetence. I think something needs to be done, but I predict not enough or too much will be done... I agree,
279 itsjustme : Historically speaking, if nothing changes, life will not go on. I agree and I've said the same thing, although not quite as tactfully as you. Simply
280 roswell41 : The government is us. They do our bidding and millions of us are tired of every heinous act being used to strip away our freedoms. The government is n
281 DeltaMD90 : Yes but just like the government is comprised of gun owners, it's also comprised with people who want measures put in place and want nothing to do wi
282 itsjustme : And millions of us are tired of it taking heinous acts before something is done to keep more heinous acts from occurring. And for the record, I never
283 roswell41 : Call me names and huff and puff all you'd like. And, 'one wouldn't think' as you do. Punish the crime, punish the perpetrator but do not indict millio
284 seb146 : 99.9999% of cars are not used in crime, but they end up in the hands of criminals or are used for crimes. Yet, everyone still has to give up their pe
285 DeltaMD90 : Um, yes, I am in favor of registration (as long as that info isn't publicly available)
286 itsjustme : Well, I am going to assume this was directed to me (you do know how to use the "quote selected text" feature, right?). And my response is, not only d
287 Post contains links and images MadameConcorde : Anonymous Responds To Obama gun control policy http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JZhHyA9z_vI Anonymous Responds To Obama gun
288 Post contains links StarAC17 : They are a group of hackers (often called hacktivists) who threaten to and have shut down websites like those of the CIA and FBI and have also hacked
289 DeltaMD90 : Oh brother. Anonymous is for gun rights like they are against it. They are not an organized group and some of its members will break off and do somet
290 Post contains images n318ea : Thank you that's the point I was trying to make. Come after me as a lawful gun who has passed Federal Background checks over someone whom is protecte
291 Maverick623 : Labeling "Anonymous" as a group with set ideals is purely the creation of big media who either: a) Failed miserably at recognizing the history behind
292 Post contains links fr8mech : So, since this is the "Gun ban by decree" thread I thought I'd post here what President Obama said today. Mods, please feel free to send me an email t
293 Ken777 : Unfortunately the Freedom of Information Act allows us to demand the information related to registrations. One publication actually published the loc
294 L-188 : And Ken777, yesterday it appears the first house to be targeted by burglars using that data was hit yesterday.
295 Maverick623 : The FOIA is easily circumvented, as it is merely a law and not a Constitutional Amendment. Just write a new law exempting certain data from the provi
296 Mir : Correlation does not equal causation. In order to make a claim that the increase in guns is responsible for a decrease in crime, you'd have to show t
297 fr8mech : That's a problem. For those with permits and those without. I agree. But, the data can't be discounted. Look at Washington D.C. and Chicago. Violent
298 cmf : It is how 6 kids in Newtown escaped. Pretty big difference to them and their relatives. Looking at the data you presented without blinders it is clea
299 Ken777 : That, I would assume, could be called a clash of freedoms. Did the home owners defend their home from the hit with their gun? That in itself opens up
300 Post contains links fr8mech : Because he conflated gun-control and gun-safety. It's not the first time I've heard it from the gun-control, er, gun-safety, er, gun-control folks...
301 cmf : I don't think he is conflating them. I am convinced he knows they are closely related but different issues. Both should be addressed, thus he mention
302 DeltaMD90 : Ok... well in that case, I change my mind. I am against registration. Sorry. Unless they change that I am not supporting it I can't believe how peopl
303 fr8mech : Let's examine that. You say you want someone properly trained. Yet, you don't want them to be trained in the usage of the firearm outside of a traini
304 Post contains links and images flymia : I am all for better background checks even at a national scale. However, if gun control laws continue to become more stringent then people who are abl
305 seb146 : Why is everyone up in arms over Obama doing things by executive order? Bush II did it how many times, including raising the debt ceiling and no one ba
306 Post contains links Dreadnought : http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/orders/ Here is a list of his executive orders. Where did he raise the debt cieling? I'm sorry, but an
307 Post contains links and images NAV20 : Did a bit more research on the Second Amendment, with specific reference to what the Founding Fathers originally intended it to achieve. We all know
308 cmf : You really make strange conclusions. I certainly do not want anyone who isn't well trained to carry outside a training environment. Hope you agree. I
309 EA CO AS : Can't, or don't wish to?
310 DeltaMD90 : I'm against it just like I would be against Bush's EOs... (I was too young at the time to even understand.) I don't like the business of whipping out
311 Post contains links iowaman : Since this thread has reached over 300 replies, please continue the discussion here: Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree #2 (by iowaman Jan 14 2013
312 itsjustme : Because the blunt truth is this forum is comprised of mostly "right thinking" members. At least they seem to be the most verbal on issues like this.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Not Gun Control posted Sat Aug 11 2012 00:24:10 by GEEZER
Should The U.S. Start A Gun Control Policy? posted Sun Jan 9 2011 17:59:35 by flyorski
Obama To Latinos: Republicans Are Our Enemy posted Thu Oct 28 2010 08:43:25 by windy95
President Obama To Supporters, "Buck Up". posted Tue Sep 28 2010 06:55:18 by dxing
Moscow To Nice In 4 Days By Train - New Service posted Wed Sep 15 2010 09:37:29 by oly720man
Obama To Visit Asia-Australia June 2010 posted Tue Jun 1 2010 23:44:51 by propilot83
Obama To Nominate Kagan To Supreme Court. posted Sun May 9 2010 19:22:29 by fxramper
Obama To Ban Recreational Fishing! posted Wed Mar 10 2010 14:28:50 by planespotting
Obama To Announce Nuke Plant Loan posted Sat Feb 13 2010 02:35:52 by flanker
Obama To Banks: We Want Our Money Back! posted Thu Jan 14 2010 08:54:53 by FuturePilot16