Biden hints at Obama executive order (concerning guns)

Page 16 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
I think we are missing a key point here. While the 2nd amendment preserves the right to keep and bear arms, it does not restrict the government from restricting the sales/trade/transfer of ammuntion and that is the key to how the gov't could effectively regulate guns. So if you can not purchase say ammo or the components to create/reload ammo, well now you have a very expensive club.

There is a presidence for restricting types of ammo, and that means the government could restrict rounds that fit these large capacity magazines. Or they could make it so onerous/expensive by taxing and documentation to purchase ammo that it would effectively achieve the same effect as a assault weapon ban.

So the government is going to restrict ammunition for every gun that has detachable magazines available? Because that's what they'd have to do to implement that idea. They'd basically be restricting the ten most popular calibers and would affect users who don't even own assault weapons/hi-cap magazines.

In short, that would be WAY too much of a political shitstorm and would never pass in the current climate. Besides, under the Heller decision handguns are protected because they are the "overwhelming choice of Americans for self defense". If they start banning ammo for 75% of the handguns on the market they might as well be banning gasoline, and it could be argued that such a ban infringes on the 2nd amendment.
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
Probably the most likely scenario. Ironically Rush Limbaugh laid out almost the same scenario today.

For the record I don't pay attention to any popular media on any side of the spectrum. I consider myself an independent and libertarian.
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
What we really need after this all blows over are gun owners to start discretely disposing of these mass murdering fucktards before they strike to protect their own rights...

Overhear someone talking about shooting up a school with a assault rifle? Make their ashes disappear off the face of the earth in the back of a cement mixer to protect both gun rights and innocent lives.

Use a large ceramic furnace to make sure even DNA is destroyed.

Bonus points if the cement mixer lays a slab for a school or a movie theater the next day.

Sadly many on the left in power WANT these tragedies to happen. Half the shit they propose immediately is shit they've wanted for 20 years that has nothing to do with what happened. That bitch Feinstein is more concerned about her precious precious ban than she is about people being murdered.

It's the equivalent of some teenager killing people street racing a Honda Civic and people calling for a ban on dangerous high performance sports cars and banning Corvettes that, "look, nobody needs..."
 
Last edited:

sigurros81

Platinum Member
Nov 30, 2010
2,371
0
0
The rest of the dribble in your post didn't effect the statement I quoted.

Because you lack the comprehension to think beyond your backwater fear mongering and actually put an effort into thinking logically for yourself.
 

jstern01

Senior member
Mar 25, 2010
532
0
71
So the government is going to restrict ammunition for every gun that has detachable magazines available? Because that's what they'd have to do to implement that idea. They'd basically be restricting the ten most popular calibers and would affect users who don't even own assault weapons/hi-cap magazines.

In short, that would be WAY too much of a political shitstorm and would never pass in the current climate. Besides, under the Heller decision handguns are protected because they are the "overwhelming choice of Americans for self defense". If they start banning ammo for 75% of the handguns on the market they might as well be banning gasoline, and it could be argued that such a ban infringes on the 2nd amendment.

Not really, they have in the past banned certain types of ammo and could again restrict or ban the ammo. An in restricting the supply it is completely within the gov't rights. This approach does not require Congressional approval either as the ATF has the power to do so. So if congress were to attempt to get an exemption for certain ammo, I highly suspect that the anti gun lobby could make it very difficult for those exemptions to pass.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,302
144
106
So you arent worried at all about obama, He hasn't admitted it but he would prefer that all guns be banned and no one has guns. Now obviously he wont come out and say this because the piece of shit would face resistance over this but its how he feels.

lol!!!

you just KNOW how he feels right?

wow!
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Because you lack the comprehension to think beyond your backwater fear mongering and actually put an effort into thinking logically for yourself.

No, because I can read. Sorry I called you out on your bullshit about "fearmongering", now get your little pink panties out of a wad sally.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
31,585
9,967
136
What we really need after this all blows over are gun owners to start discretely disposing of these mass murdering fucktards before they strike to protect their own rights...

Overhear someone talking about shooting up a school with a assault rifle? Make their ashes disappear off the face of the earth in the back of a cement mixer to protect both gun rights and innocent lives.

Use a large ceramic furnace to make sure even DNA is destroyed.

Bonus points if the cement mixer lays a slab for a school or a movie theater the next day.

Sadly many on the left in power WANT these tragedies to happen. Half the shit they propose immediately is shit they've wanted for 20 years that has nothing to do with what happened. That bitch Feinstein is more concerned about her precious precious ban than she is about people being murdered.

It's the equivalent of some teenager killing people street racing a Honda Civic and people calling for a ban on dangerous high performance sports cars and banning Corvettes that, "look, nobody needs..."

can you imagine the shistorm that would happen if there were a ban proposed for cars over a certain power level?

1) auto enthusiasts would flip shit
2) every car beyond the restriction would instantly become more valuable

gee, that's not happening at all with firearms right now...
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
can you imagine the shistorm that would happen if there were a ban proposed for cars over a certain power level?

1) auto enthusiasts would flip shit
2) every car beyond the restriction would instantly become more valuable

gee, that's not happening at all with firearms right now...

There is a reason sand casting is on my "should probably learn to do that someday" list.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,126
126
Seems the irrational, overactive fear center is still proving to trump common sense in this thread.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
Not really, they have in the past banned certain types of ammo and could again restrict or ban the ammo. An in restricting the supply it is completely within the gov't rights. This approach does not require Congressional approval either as the ATF has the power to do so. So if congress were to attempt to get an exemption for certain ammo, I highly suspect that the anti gun lobby could make it very difficult for those exemptions to pass.

Yes, they've banned certain types of ammo. Usually niche calibers deemed to be "too dangerous". This can be seen right now in New Jersey, where they're trying to ban .50 BMG ammo. Which is dumb, because no one outside of the competitive circuit and a few hobbyists shoot .50 BMG, because its $5-7 per round.

If they started trying to ban 9mm or .40 or .45 ACP or .22 or .380, yeah, good luck with that. There'd be lawsuits up the ass and they'd alienate a TON of voters that right now are more-or-less on the sidelines.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Seems the irrational, overactive fear center is still proving to trump common sense in this thread.

Sure is, the anti-gun nut job progressives are absolutely terrorized of scary guns with high capacity magazines.
 

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
Sure is, the anti-gun nut job progressives are absolutely terrorized of scary guns with high capacity magazines.

Some people like this, the more implausible that something can actually kill them, the more they become afraid of it. Usually with things like nuke power, air travel and etc.

They are also called loonies.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
642
126
You really don't understand what that outcome would bring do you?

Every gun, magazine, and box of ammo is COMPLETELY sold out across the nation. Does that not tell you where the American public's opinion lies? You think they people are buying them by the millions to change their mind and turn them in willingly for a $50 gift card later? They know they could be illegal some day, and by buying them still in the face of that threat in those numbers they have already committed to not obeying future legislation.

It scares the shit out of me honestly. I just want to keep making money and playing video games, I'd like to avoid a civil war thank you.

If nobody cares what this piece of shit president says, and people are buying up weapons knowing he will try go make them illegal, nobody is going to care what another lefty "wise latina" on the SCOTUS thinks either.
I said it in another thread. People won't turn them in willingly. What will transpire is that the people will be offered a reward for turning in their neighbors. Gun holders will have the choice of turning them in or fighting a swat team in an attempt to retain them. Don't underestimate the power of the government. (Research how many hollow point rounds homeland security has been buying up.) The gun owners won't win. The threat to the government will be neutralized either way.

The media is already fully on board with this. They've published names of gun owners already. They're in a fight for survival too. I'm sure with the FOIA to back them up and some financial propping up from the government a willing press will be more than happy to publish every bit of information they can.

Now the progs are going to read those two paragraphs and declare it's just more right wing hysteria. They're never going to get it - ever. They don't know their history so they don't know what's been done in other countries in the past. They also will never understand that conjecturing on what might happen, running out possible scenarios, is what people that plan for the future do. Progs, like children, live in the now. Is this shit going to happen? Maybe. Maybe not.

This POS President just got elected to a second term. By a slew of people on the public dole. He has successfully delayed any form of meaningful recovery of our economy for the last four years. Can he keep it going? I'm betting yes. He will be appointing at least one and as many as three to the SCOTUS before his second term is over. There are no changes that I can see on the horizon that will restore us to a representative democracy, that will restore our freedoms. We're in as deep as you can get. The scales have tipped and the power resides with those that choose not to work, came here illegally, etc., etc. It's become more profitable to not work and live off the government. The majority think that's absolutely fantastic. The new American dream. Viva la revolucion! Without a shot fired.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,063
48,073
136
You are right, boomerang. That was an impressively insane rant.

So considering you view the death of America/fascism/etc to be inevitable and all, can you give us at least a general timetable of what is going to happen? I just want to know when we can tell you that you're full of shit. Or is this going to be another one of those nebulous predictions of doom that is always just around the corner but never happens?
 

ElMonoDelMar

Golden Member
Apr 29, 2004
1,163
338
136
You are right, boomerang. That was an impressively insane rant.

So considering you view the death of America/fascism/etc to be inevitable and all, can you give us at least a general timetable of what is going to happen? I just want to know when we can tell you that you're full of shit. Or is this going to be another one of those nebulous predictions of doom that is always just around the corner but never happens?

Don't you see?!?! The gov't has been buying hollow points. The end is nigh!
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,063
48,073
136
Don't you see?!?! The gov't has been buying hollow points. The end is nigh!

I find it funny when people basically say 'we're headed for fascist armageddon where we're all placed under the slave yoke of the poors/Communists/whatever'. First, it's funny in and of itself. Second though, people have been saying the exact same thing in America for literally more than a century now. The fact that they are always wrong in no way shakes their confidence that THIS TIME it's really happening.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
I find it funny when people basically say 'we're headed for fascist armageddon where we're all placed under the slave yoke of the poors/Communists/whatever'. First, it's funny in and of itself. Second though, people have been saying the exact same thing in America for literally more than a century now. The fact that they are always wrong in no way shakes their confidence that THIS TIME it's really happening.

Very true. I think it's the same instinct that makes people predict the Rapture, or 2012 armageddon. Some people are fatalistic and love drama. Honestly, as hysterical as people get, in general I don't think our day to day lives change a great deal based on who the President is, and the older I get the less I think it's worth worrying excessively about it. I certainly don't believe there is any risk whatsoever that the government will engage in some kind of massive gun roundup.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,063
48,073
136
Very true. I think it's the same instinct that makes people predict the Rapture, or 2012 armageddon. Some people are fatalistic and love drama. Honestly, as hysterical as people get, in general I don't think our day to day lives change a great deal based on who the President is, and the older I get the less I think it's worth worrying excessively about it.

Agree. While there are of course exceptions, generally federal policy has limited day to day effects. What's funny/sad is that local government has a far greater effect on people's lives but nobody votes in those elections. I guess voting on altering street sweeping days isn't as glamorous as voting on war and death and whatever, but what affects your day more?
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
Agree. While there are of course exceptions, generally federal policy has limited day to day effects. What's funny/sad is that local government has a far greater effect on people's lives but nobody votes in those elections. I guess voting on altering street sweeping days isn't as glamorous as voting on war and death and whatever, but what affects your day more?

Well obviously the outcome of Dancing with the Stars. This is much more important than our Constitutional rights. We really shouldn't be skeptical or worry about anything else.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
Well obviously the outcome of Dancing with the Stars. This is much more important than our Constitutional rights. We really shouldn't be skeptical or worry about anything else.

You can dedicate your energy however you want, but I'd suggest that anyone who fears the President taking some massive steps to restrict gun ownership is ignoring his track record and the reality of the situation as a whole. It ain't happening, and you're pinging for no legitimate reason.

I find it very difficult to understand why President Obama gets some Republicans whipped into such a paranoid frenzy on this issue when his governance has, if anything, been right of center as it relates to guns. I really do think a lot of the unwarranted fear of him relates to his race and name - it's not that people are consciously discriminating against him, but he is different from them and that makes him an unknown variable and thus scarier.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,063
48,073
136
You can dedicate your energy however you want, but I'd suggest that anyone who fears the President taking some massive steps to restrict gun ownership is ignoring his track record and the reality of the situation as a whole. It ain't happening, and you're pinging for no legitimate reason.

I find it very difficult to understand why President Obama gets some Republicans whipped into such a paranoid frenzy on this issue when his governance has, if anything, been right of center as it relates to guns. I really do think a lot of the unwarranted fear of him relates to his race and name - it's not that people are consciously discriminating against him, but he is different from them and that makes him an unknown variable and thus scarier.

Clinton was also the subject of a lot of crazed right wing paranoia. It seems to be a larger problem with a Democrat occupying the presidency.
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
You can dedicate your energy however you want, but I'd suggest that anyone who fears the President taking some massive steps to restrict gun ownership is ignoring his track record and the reality of the situation as a whole. It ain't happening, and you're pinging for no legitimate reason.

I find it very difficult to understand why President Obama gets some Republicans whipped into such a paranoid frenzy on this issue when his governance has, if anything, been right of center as it relates to guns. I really do think a lot of the unwarranted fear of him relates to his race and name - it's not that people are consciously discriminating against him, but he is different from them and that makes him an unknown variable and thus scarier.

That was before his last reelection. His track record is "having more flexibility after I can't run for re-election anymore".
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
You can dedicate your energy however you want, but I'd suggest that anyone who fears the President taking some massive steps to restrict gun ownership is ignoring his track record and the reality of the situation as a whole. It ain't happening, and you're pinging for no legitimate reason.

I find it very difficult to understand why President Obama gets some Republicans whipped into such a paranoid frenzy on this issue when his governance has, if anything, been right of center as it relates to guns. I really do think a lot of the unwarranted fear of him relates to his race and name - it's not that people are consciously discriminating against him, but he is different from them and that makes him an unknown variable and thus scarier.

Well....I never said the President is going to repeal or restrict gun ownership...hmm, nope, sure didn't.

Regarding the attempt to brand me a Republican or even better a racist...you'd be wrong on that count to.

I'd rather just be allowed to exercise my rights and form an opinion of my own that wasn't handed down to me by a political party.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
That was before his last reelection. His track record is "having more flexibility after I can't run for re-election anymore".

So you've bought the goofy NRA party line, huh?

Remember, the GOP still controls the House and the Democrats don't have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (something the Senate Republicans take advantage of every day, through wildly broader filibustering than has ever occurred in history). Even if the big, bad President wants to march into your house and snatch up all your guns (which he doesn't), he can't. I'd suggest the paranoiacs in this thread calm the eff down.