Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns

You are not hearing what I am saying. If you can pass a very rigorous background check, and have sufficient funds, you can legally purchase, own, and use a machinegun. They're rare, there are only about 120,000 of them in the entire country, but they do exist.

And for the record, while I know it is hypothetically possible to convert a legal AR-15 to full auto, I have no idea how to do so, no desire to do so, and wouldn't take you up on an offer to do it for me. That said, I am personally aware of only one crime in the history of the country committed with such a weapon, so unless I'm grossly misinformed, it doesn't seem to be a widespread problem.

 

Seems like Obama was weak as puppy pee once again. Always said Hillary should loan Obama one of her testicles, she would still have 2 and he would then have one. He could/should have summed up the whole thing with a couple of administrative interdepartmental memorandums instead of that ridiculous dog and pony show yesterday

anyone bothered to see exactly what he did or more to the point did not do ?


1. "Issue a presidential memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system."

2. "Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system."

3. "Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system."

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." Maybe he should have issued this one to Holder before Holder gave the Mexican cartels a thousand or so weapons with Fast and Furious

5. "Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun."

6. "Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers."

7. "Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign."

8. "Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission)."

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

10. "Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement."

11. "Nominate an ATF director."

12. "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations."

13. "Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime."

14. "Issue a presidential memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence."

15. "Direct the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies."

16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."

17. "Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities."

18. "Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers."

19. "Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education."

20. "Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover."

21. "Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges."

22. "Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations."

23. "Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health."

 

Obama should be ashamed of himself for using children by his side to garner support. How pathetic.

 

Is this word salad actually intended to make ANY sense?

Note: there are THOUSANDS of machine guns owned LEGALLY in the US. Heck, there is a huge bi-annual machine-gun shoot at the KNOB CREEK Gun Range in West Point, Kentucky. (I am considering going this year, in fact.)

- - - Updated - - -

One of the voices in her head?

 

Have to give some credit to Obama with his speech yesterday. An "executive action" isn't an "executive order". Obama followed the principal of law and stated his "beliefs" to assuage the liberal voting base while not trampling upon the USA constitution. Hopefully, none of his "beliefs" will ever see the light of day.

 

ARE YOU ON DRUGS? I am absolutely dead serious. I am hard-pressed to come up with any other explanation for your recent bizarre behavior.

Note: I can convert at least one rifle (a little .22, by no stretch of the imagination a "military" weapon) to full-auto with a toothpick...or just by holding the trigger a certain way.

 

Dude...Barack Obama has absolutely no shame!

 

There has never ever even been a hint that guns would be confiscated, so the fools and suckers are the ones that are listening to the NRA's fear mongering. And, we don't need MSM to create caricatures about Republicans, we're able to see and witness the nutty behavior that they are exhibiting on our own. And, the only suckers are those who go out and buy more guns, because that is what the NRA wants, after all, they don't represent the lone gun owners, they represent the gun manufacturers. If they can scare you into going out and buying 20 assault weapons and 1,000 rounds of amunition, guess who wins? Ha,ha, now you can see who the fools are.

 

Now that's a twisted sense of logic. The NRA is the one that is using Obama's children to further their sales of guns and ammunitions that the nutty gun-owners so gullibly believe.

I guess you don't have any sympathy for the 20 children that were slaughtered in Newtown, or compassion for the parents that are grieving them? Why am I not surprised.

 

No, the "nutty" gun-owners are the ones that have no shame. There are many sensible gun-owners who are ashamed of the behavior of so many gun-nuts that are freaking out over something they've only imagined.

 

Do you talk like you post? Bwahahaha!

 

Since you seem to be so against the NRA maybe you should petition the Democratic party to get rid of all the Democratic Senators that receive any thing but an F rating from the NRA

here is a interactive map you can use to start your letter writing campaign

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/12/19/us/politics/nra.html

 

I find it disgusting how he is using kids to promote his agenda.

 

I have elementary school kids, so don't tell me that I have no sympathy. The NRA is just trying to figure out a way to protect school kids. Obama is just trying to restrict law-abiding gun owners.

 

I never killed any children overseas, and neither did any of my "comrades". Maybe you should stop generalizing, unless you want to talk about all the death your socialist "brethren" have caused over the years?

- - - Updated - - -

Yea, Obama is so concerned with the middle class...that's why he bailed out big banks and does nothing to stop their inflationary subsidies that cause consumer prices to rise.

 

Why would I trust the judgment of a money-grubbing organization whose whole reason for being is to make money off gun-nuts? The only Senators that should receive an F rating are the Republicans, who take an oath to defend the Constitution and then take another oath to a nobody (Norquist) that pledges allegiance to someone above the Constitution. Another election may just do the job - get rid of all the do-nothings that have been standing in the way of progress.

 

I bet you find the NRA's despicable use of Obama's children to be okay? Why am I not surprised. Hypocrisy, thy name is Republicans. Even your own "Christie" is decent enough to denounce it, but not so much the rest of the shameful Republicans.

 

To defend the actions of nutty gun-owners over the death of 20 children doesn't sound like much sympathy to me.

You mean without cutting into their profits?
What they need to do is support the new rules prescribed by the President - do background checks on everyone, not just a few honest people. Quit manufacturing assault weapons and selling them to nuts.There, if they were to do just that, we could probably cut down the number of massacres.

Obama is trying to protect innocent children everywhere against the nuts the NRA so willingly allows to own assault weapons.

 

Wow must be really frustrating for you libs to feel so passionate about this while knowing that Harry Reid won't ever even let a gun control bill get voted on. What I find weird though is all of you guys keep on and on about 20 white kids, and while I realize that was tragic, yet ignore the 200+ black kids killed every day by other black kids in places like Chicago and Detroit. Are libs racist and just not care about those black kids?

 

Pot calling the kettle black.

 

Nobody is defending the actions of the murderer that gunned down innocent school children.

An obvious gun and NRA hater. I support background checks for everyone. They have a system in place now that they can use. I do not support banning anything. History and statistics show that banning does nothing to thwart crime. Also, gun violation prosecutions are down 48% under the Obama Admin. The Obama Admin is also responsible for allowing straw purchases that put thousands of guns in the hands of thugs.

Obama is restricting law-abiding citizens more than trying to actually protect children.

 

you do realize that if Obama cannot convince Harry Reid and the Senate to do anything, he has little chance of getting the GOP house to do something don't you. If you really care , you should be writing Harry Reid and trying to convince him to let the Senate at least vote on a bill. I am curious to see if the Senate Democrats care more about this than they do getting re elected. Want to make a bet that reelection trumps two dozen massacres ?

 

What makes you think they are being ignored? What about you and other Republicans? Do you not care about those kids? Your analogy doesn't even make sense.

 

Right, you are not defending the actions of Lanza because he's dead, but you are defending the rights of other nuts to continue to buy assault weapons and carry them wherever, whenever they want. Makes a lot of sense.

I don't hate guns. I support responsible gun owners. I just don't like assault weapons in the hands of regular people. There is a difference. I don't have much use for the NRA because the NRA is only interested in pushing right-wing policies.
http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20130122-OPINION-301220370

Up till now there are loop holes in gun shows and NRA and members look the other way when people who shouldn't have guns are able to get them.

Of course not, because every one needs to own an assault weapon.

Nobody is trying to ban all guns. The fact is that data is controversial as to whether banning guns cause/eliminate crime. The fact is that assault weapons allow someone like Lanza to shoot down multiple people with just a flick of his finger in minutes. The fact is that right-wingers are going on false information and spreading it.

Do gun control laws reduce crime? Do they save lives? Is it possible they even cost lives?

Justice Stephen G. Breyer, one of the dissenters in the 5-to-4 decision, surveyed a quite substantial body of empirical research on whether gun control laws do any good. Then he wrote:
“The upshot is a set of studies and counterstudies that, at most, could leave a judge uncertain about the proper policy conclusion.”

There is no question, of course, that guns figure in countless murders, suicides and accidental deaths. Over the five years ending in 1997, the Justice Department says, there was an average of 36,000 firearms-related deaths a year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/weekinreview/29liptak.html?pagewanted=all

Anyone who claims they have a need for an assault weapon is not a law-abiding citizen but more likely a nut, the more reason not to allow them to have such a weapon.

 

I'm certain you don't care but perhaps a little education is in order. I'm sure you can say competition is not a "need" and you could arguebly be correct. Still it might beneficial for you to understand there are thousands of competitive rifle shooters using those black guns with skill levels above the armies best. They're not gonna be happy when you so callously disregard the sport they've spent a lifetime perfecting and call them pshycopathic criminals.


The most popular form of organized rifle-only competitive shooting in the United States is NRA High Power Competition. There are more High Power matches held across the country than benchrest matches by a huge margin. High Power Competition encompasses primarily Service Rifle and Match Rifle, with the lesser subdiscipline of Sporting Rifle. If you think F-Class* or Benchrest shooting is tough, High Power presents another level of challenge altogether. Apart from a sling, there are no mechanical crutches in High Power--your arms and body must support the full weight of the rifle as you engage the target from a variety of positions. The vast majority of High Power matches are iron sights only**. These factors place a premium on good eyesight, training, and overall fitness.