drinkTHEkoolaid Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Asking for stock tips on a message board is like asking if one should buy an M&P or SR Lol a little humor my friend in an otherwise depressing thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) With President Barack Obama set to issue an executive order on gun regulation during a “town hall forum” on Tuesday, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) used Monday to issue a preemptive statement. Saying that President Obama is subverting the role of Congress and showing a blatant disregard to both the 2nd Amendment and millions of law-abiding gun owners throughout the United States. "Ever since he was a candidate, President Obama’s dismissiveness toward Americans who value the Second Amendment has been well-documented. He acts as if the right to bear arms is something to be tolerated, when in truth – as the Supreme Court reaffirmed in 2008 – it is fundamental. The same goes for the Constitution and its limits on executive power. "We all are pained by the recent atrocities in our country, but no change the president is reportedly considering would have prevented them. We have seen consistently that an underlying cause of these attacks has been mental illness, and we should look at ways to address this problem. We should also better enforce the laws we have on the books now to keep guns out of the hands of violent criminals. Instead, the president is again targeting law-abiding citizens, intruding further into innocent Americans' lives. At a time when the country wants the president to lead the fight against radical Islamic terror, this is yet another attempt to divide and distract from his failed policies. "While we don’t yet know the details of the plan, the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will. His proposals to restrict gun rights were debated by the United States Senate, and they were rejected. No president should be able to reverse legislative failure by executive fiat, not even incrementally. The American people deserve a president who will respect their constitutional rights – all of them. This is a dangerous level of executive overreach, and the country will not stand for it." Added: Dear Democrats/reporters, remember what you say today on the usefulness of executive actions. The future Republican president is watching. . Edited January 4, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 WHAT COULD GO WRONG? THE MAN’S A CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR* AFTER ALL: Obama ‘Confident’ Gun Executive Actions are ‘Entirely Consistent’ with Second Amendment. * No really — just ask him! http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/223099/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 WHAT COULD GO WRONG? THE MAN’S A CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR* AFTER ALL: Obama ‘Confident’ Gun Executive Actions are ‘Entirely Consistent’ with Second Amendment. * No really — just ask him! http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/223099/ I don't remember which ruling it was, but I recall a Supreme Court ruling where Obama's press secretary commented that the Constitutional Scholar in the White House disagreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 LOL.....................so this is the "big" announcement................"your last year heroics" The White HouseVerified account @WhiteHouse 1h1 hour ago FACT: Most gun owners agree with commonsense steps to help #StopGunViolence like strengthening background checks. pic.twitter.com/Lfv6yX6cCK Is #StopGunViolence dumb enough to buy this? You haven't strengthened anything. You've just restated existing law. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 LOL.....................so this is the "big" announcement................"your last year heroics" The White HouseVerified account @WhiteHouse 1h1 hour ago FACT: Most gun owners agree with commonsense steps to help #StopGunViolence like strengthening background checks. pic.twitter.com/Lfv6yX6cCK Is #StopGunViolence dumb enough to buy this? You haven't strengthened anything. You've just restated existing law. . Cool....so gun owners will now be less likely to self seek mental health services if they have depression or anxiety for fear of ending up in this mysterious list on a government database. Unintended consequences of poorly thought out decree by pen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Cool....so gun owners will now be less likely to self seek mental health services if they have depression or anxiety for fear of ending up in this mysterious list on a government database. Unintended consequences of poorly thought out decree by pen. The sad thing is that this is a well-thought-out decree by normal standards. Nice of him to stay within his constitutional authority for once, though. There's not a damn thin in that list that's anything new, just a commitment to doing better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 I saw somewhere an idea to allow friends and family to report gun owners who they feel are unfit to own a gun. Yeah that's a great idea and won't be abused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) AG LORETTA LYNCH CLARIFIES OBAMA GUN RULE. SUMMARY: “I suspect President Obama is hoping for ignorant crap like this from the media to make it look like he’s really doing something.” What actually happened: “This has always been the law if you have a Federal Firearms License, and it’s always been illegal to be selling guns for “livelihood or profit” without first obtaining an FFL. The new EOs change nothing in that regard. But we do have some guidance from the Attorney General that indicates the Administration may indeed try to prosecute marginal cases it previously would not have.” So this is not to be part of any rule change, but merely a policy decision to prosecute ‘gun dealers, hobbyists and collectors,’ under the ‘new guidance.’ Rather than change the rule, they will use the current vague rule to send ‘hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.’ Though, in this case, it’s not mere harassment, but an intent to imprison. They know if they don’t put the dampers on the growing gun culture, their dream of destroying the Second Amendment will never be realized.” http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/223114/ Edited January 5, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/1230/California-gun-law-will-allow-families-to-petition-for-gun-restraining-orders Starting on Friday, Jan. 1, Californians concerned that a family member could become violent will be able to petition courts to temporarily seize their guns. ... Probably will save some lives. Probably some women's lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/1230/California-gun-law-will-allow-families-to-petition-for-gun-restraining-orders Probably will save some lives. Probably some women's lives Know what else would save women's lives? Since you're a crusader for women's rights... Ban sharia Islam. What cause or evidence do the family members need to present to the courts? Why stop at family members, what about co workers and neighbors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Know what else would save women's lives? Since you're a crusader for women's rights... Ban sharia Islam. What cause or evidence do the family members need to present to the courts? Why stop at family members, what about co workers and neighbors? Quick! Look at Islam!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/1230/California-gun-law-will-allow-families-to-petition-for-gun-restraining-orders Probably will save some lives. Probably some women's lives Do you own guns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Do you own guns? Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Quick! Look at Islam!!!Why did you bring women into it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Why? Because if you do be glad you don't live in California. Your "friends" here could petition the courts to have your guns taken away. And if so good luck getting them back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Because if you do be glad you don't live in California. Your "friends" here could petition the courts to have your guns taken away. And if so good luck getting them back. I'm sure that if your guns are "temporarily" taken away you will then either get flagged on the mental health database or the NICS checklist as a threat. And again,what is the criteria needed to decide to take someone guns? What evidence, due process needs to be followed or just someone feeling uneasy is enough to warrant a confiscation? Why stop with families? After all your co-workers spend all day with you and I'm sure your neighbors are concerned too.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 President Obama Has Let His Emotion Get the Better of His Judgment by Charles C W Cooke FTA: And yet he’s going to use a good deal of his last year’s political capital in order to tweak a few minor rules around the edges? Why? Even if we’re generous and presume that every single one of these regulations finds its way permanently into the law, he will nevertheless have done nothing substantial to further “universal background checks”; he will have instituted none of his coveted magazine limits; and he will have banned none of the weapons that he disdains. Further, he will have set no meaningful precedents whatsoever. In other words: Even if he wins this round, he will have done precisely nothing of merit — except perhaps to have pleased his base and to have convinced the most ignorant parts of the electorate that he has finally stuck his finger into the NRA’s eye. Were these serious measures, I would be squealing. Instead, I’m amused. These are the dampest of squibs. Which is to say that Obama’s behavior is not at all rational. As far as I can see, the president has announced these initiatives for no other reason than to satisfy his burning desire to say that he did “something” to advance gun control. That he in fact did nothing of note is neither here nor there. He needs the applause line — both now, and in his retirement — and he’s determined to get it. When I say he did “nothing of note,” of course, I mean “nothing of note to advance his agenda.” As it happens, the president has done something “of note” tonight: He has hurt his own side. Were I a gun control advocate I’d be livid with him. Livid. Why? Two reasons: 1) In order to make his actions appear meaningful, Obama is going to have to pretend that they represent serious change. If he does that, though, he’ll permit his opponents to say, “look, we just did big gun control by executive order, we have other things to do, and we’re not doing it again.” That matters. The Left makes great hay out of the “we never do anything” line, and its more effective advocates use our present inertia to justify the need for experimentation. Insofar as there is any, Obama has slowed the momentum for further gun-control. This is not how you win the argument. 2) By taking this route, Obama will help to entrench America’s gun culture — and for little in return. Ceteris paribus, the United States will play host to at least another 20 million guns by the end of December 2016 — many of them so-called “assault weapons.” In addition, the country will welcome another million or so concealed carriers, and another half-million or so NRA members. Every time the president talks about gun control, these numbers increase And for what? A minor change to the way in which firearms are sold on the private market? Obama has let his emotion get the better of him here. He and his fellow travelers will likely pay a price. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/429235/obama-gun-control-executive-orders-mistake?target=author&tid=23105 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Because if you do be glad you don't live in California. Your "friends" here could petition the courts to have your guns taken away. And if so good luck getting them back. Oh well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Oh well Do you believe in the US Constitution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts