President Obama's 23 orders concerning firearms

[OrByte]

Its not on the list of the 23, Check the article and it clearly mentions this along with banning "assault weapons"

People should still be worried about what he tries to do because he has made his views on this issue well known. Why would he say he wants those things? Because he wants them banned

what you are saying doesn't mean anything.

People would be wise to not take positions and attitudes like yours seriously.

 

[OrByte]

By not even addressing one single cause of previous mass shootings.

If you gave a definitive list of exactly what causes mass shootings then I'd say lets address it specifically

absent such hard, concrete data, you give it your best, most reasoned, sensible response and go from there.

Notice, no 2nd amendment rights were harmed in the making of that list of 23 executive orders.

 

[OrByte]

ha!!

 

[fskimospy]

The left bashes the NRA for saying "Good Guy with a gun" but then praises Obama for using one of it's suggestions.

And you bash Obama's suggestions while advocating for 'good guys with guns'.

Armed guards at schools is one of the worst ideas of Obama's 23 EO's. Then again, you're the guy who made the dumb comment in this thread to begin with.

 

[monovillage]

Why didn't he do these things 4 years ago instead of waiting till now and standing on the graves of children to do them? Could it be that he wanted to wait till after his election? Could it be that he was a bit worried that a push for these gun control items might cost him and his political allies an election? Could it be that this is/was a cynical political ploy?

Why yes, yes it is and it's pretty routine for Obama and his lickspittle supporters to act this way.

 

[fskimospy]

Why didn't he do these things 4 years ago instead of waiting till now and standing on the graves of children to do them? Could it be that he wanted to wait till after his election? Could it be that he was a bit worried that a push for these gun control items might cost him and his political allies an election? Could it be that this is/was a cynical political ploy? Why yes, yes it is and it's pretty routine for Obama and his lickspittle supporters to act this way.

Can you guys make up your minds? Half of the time it's OMG HE'S TAKING AWAY OUR GUNS. FU OBAMA.

Then he does this and it's OMG WHY NOT SOONER. FU OBAMA.

I genuinely cannot think of any policy Obama might enact that will not send you into a blind rage. ODS at its finest.

 

[schneiderguy]

Good for him, I see nothing objectionable in that list.

 

[Matt1970]

And you bash Obama's suggestions while advocating for 'good guys with guns'.

Armed guards at schools is one of the worst ideas of Obama's 23 EO's. Then again, you're the guy who made the dumb comment in this thread to begin with.

Once again your ignorance of my views leaves you having to make shit up about what I have said. A “Good guy with a gun” may be a way to end the situation but that is the last ditch effort and if truly needed then we have failed.

If you think the mass shootings are blamed on mental illness, just remember we have had mentally ill people since day one, and they weren’t picking up guns and murdering kids in schools. Ban all the high capacity magazines you want and lock up all the mentally ill people and the mass killings will still not end.

 

[highland145]

I, for one, am very happy he's tackled and called out the violence from hollywood and the video game industry.

 

[NoStateofMind]

This one is rich.

9. "Issue a presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations."

He had to have had a smirk on his face when writing that one. Of course you can only trace it up to Eric Holder and after that you will hear nothing but crickets. Bastard.

 

[NoStateofMind]

I, for one, am very happy he's tackled and called out the violence from hollywood and the video game industry.

yeah, I mean look at us all. We are so violent from our young days shooting monsters in a video game on up until now when we assault people daily. Heck everytime I sideswipe someone on the road I yell out the window "Blame GTA"!. 🙄

 

[drebo]

Nooooo, America is doomed.


haha

SO instead of anything useful, we just get a bunch of useless bullshit that wastes all of our time. Great.

 

[Matt1970]

I, for one, am very happy he's tackled and called out the violence from hollywood and the video game industry.

While I don't blame video games that's closer to the mark than blaming it on mental illness.

 

[Ausm]

]Here's the funny thing, this is exactly what the NRA calls for: enforcing existing laws more stringently[/B].

Meaning that they're not really serious when they propose something. It's all distractions for them.

Then why is the NRA going out of their fricking minds?

 

[styroe]

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/obama-to-announce-gun-control-proposals-shortly/?hpt=hp_c1

I don't see anything in the list that takes rights away from law abiding citizens.

They seem sensible to me and should have been enacted long ago.

I wish he would do more stuff like this on other issues.

I agree with a great deal with them. However, one of the is enormously ambiguous.

4. "Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks."

Define dangerous people and we will talk. Is Julian Assange dangerous? Is the Dali Lama Dangerous? Is Jesus dangerous? Am I dangerous?

 

[highland145]

yeah, I mean look at us all. We are so violent from our young days shooting monsters in a video game on up until now when we assault people daily. Heck everytime I sideswipe someone on the road I yell out the window "Blame GTA"!. 🙄

While I don't blame video games that's closer to the mark than blaming it on mental illness.

Man, you guys are spot on.:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[*kjm]

Not that I support Obama in any way, but most of those seem agreeable. But sadly even if I can agree with some of them, none of them would have stopped the CT shooting had they been in place beforehand, so in the end, it's still nothing more than political chest beating. They weren't his guns, and the mother who owned them wasn't convicted or committed and would still have had them.

I do agree with the ones for educating the public on gun violence and keeping guns away from family members who you know to have "issues". That might have struck a nerve with the shooter's mother to keep a tighter watch on her weapons. Provided they don't completely spin any kind of "reeducation" campaign to brainwash people into demonizing guns like Eric Holder's grand plan.

Obama may say he wants a weapons ban but hes going to leave that to congress where he knows it doesn't have a chance in hell at passing.

It's the only reason Bush W "supported" the ban. Not really, but he gets to say he did while knowing it will never get to his desk and play both sides of the fence.

A couple of those 23 though are questionable. Allowing AG Eric Holder to classify new groups of people to who shouldn't have guns and submit them to the check system so "nobody falls through the cracks"... we know how his dumb ass feels about guns, he could arbitrarily say any group of people he wants. Anybody of any religion, state, opposing political party, etc could be considered "dangerous" on a whim and added to the NICS block list.

It's easy to say something easily agreeable on like "only mentally ill people shouldn't have access to guns" until you realize they can just change the criteria of "mentally ill" to fit anyone they want. :sneaky:

It's like how you can call anyone a terrorist and due process goes out the window.

It was just an excuse to spend like a whore and then the next time something happens they will say Obummer gave his all..... look at the costs and what its going for:'(

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/least-45-billion-new-spending-gun-control_696120.html

 

[Bowfinger]

Why didn't he do these things 4 years ago instead of waiting till now and standing on the graves of children to do them? Could it be that he wanted to wait till after his election? Could it be that he was a bit worried that a push for these gun control items might cost him and his political allies an election? Could it be that this is/was a cynical political ploy?

Why yes, yes it is and it's pretty routine for Obama and his lickspittle supporters to act this way.

Could it be a horrific mass murder changed America's focus and priorities? Idiot.

 

[*kjm]

Man, you guys are spot on.:thumbsup::thumbsup:

“$10 million for the Centers for Disease Control to conduct further research, including investigating the relationship between video games, media images, and violence.”

They should pay them $1000 for what they found out😎

 

[*kjm]

Could it be a horrific mass murder changed America's focus and priorities? Idiot.

Truth hurt much "idiot".

 

[Ausm]

Could it be a horrific mass murder changed America's focus and priorities? Idiot.

Yeah and it only took a half dozen or so to do it!

 

[highland145]

I agree with a great deal with them. However, one of the is enormously ambiguous.

4. "Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks."

Define dangerous people and we will talk. Is Julian Assange dangerous? Is the Dali Lama Dangerous? Is Jesus dangerous? Am I dangerous?

#4...agree.

Jesus was dangerous to the those under the Law, all prior to him. Since, you're under Grace or the Law, if you're believer in scripture.

Yes. I am dangerous. I'm an American and I freely use the rights I have. And I use the privileges I've earned.

Hi, Styroe, :highfive;

 

[highland145]

“$10 million for the Centers for Disease Control to conduct further research, including investigating the relationship between video games, media images, and violence.”

They should pay them $1000 for what they found out😎

You think they'll take test subjects? You know, older gamers?

 

[colonel]

While I don't blame video games that's closer to the mark than blaming it on mental illness.

However, your first response left a lot to be desired. You demontrate a blind spot when it comes to escessive violence in games. The escalation of game graphic violence is going to draw a political response just as it did with assault arms Minors buying and immersing in games that glorify violence andt the despersonalization of other human beings. All the game industry had done is use the old three monkeys -see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil since Sandy Hook. Violence in modern games is a serious issue and deserves airing but nobody wants to take a litte heat.

 

[highland145]

However, your first response left a lot to be desired. You demontrate a blind spot when it comes to escessive violence in games. The escalation of game graphic violence is going to draw a political response just as it did with assault arms Minors buying and immersing in games that glorify violence andt the despersonalization of other human beings. All the game industry had done is use the old three monkeys -see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil since Sandy Hook. Violence in modern games is a serious issue and deserves airing but nobody wants to take a litte heat.

So that's been addressed by the POTUS, right? Same with hollywood?