greg1647545532

Congrats and good luck, then. I'd love to have a 2-year vacation to Monterey right now eta: I only know of a couple of linguists personally. One was a Russian linguist in the 80s, not much use for that now. The other was sent to DLI to learn Spanish. I was like, Don't we already hire thousands of people who already know Spanish? But that's the military for you. He worked drug interdiction, I'll let you fill in the rest.

I'll just note that the EO is apparently only going to order the Consumer Product Safety Commission to review safety standards, not change them. Presumably there will be a list of recommendations sent to congress that will be promptly ignored. That's a realistic assessment of the situation, but I like your jumping to conclusions approach as well.

Ah, my bad. I didn't see a number anywhere. Yes, they are pushing congress for restrictions. They're going to have a hard time getting through the house. What we're left with is a bunch of executives orders implementing conservative ideas.

I know it's going to be everyone's knee-jerk reaction to oppose the president on this, but isn't this all stuff that conservatives were pushing for instead of weapons restrictions? I know he's recommending that congress reinstate an AWB, but if you just look at this list of executive orders, it's about improving the mental health system, improving background checks, encouraging armed resource officers in schools, and pushing gun safety. These are all conservative ideas, nearest I can tell. In fact, these are all ideas I've heard from either the NRA or pro-gun people in forums. I guess you can complain about the cost, especially if you make up your own numbers, but do I have to keep pointing out that you're winning?

I think the truth is somewhere in between "they can only slap you twice" and "bone waiver." I know lots of people who have been through SERE, and every single one of them hated it, like absolutely hated it when they were there, like would have run off if they could, but then 2 weeks later were glad they went. What language?

Can't answer your question, but just to give you some better talking points for the doc you do find: Cubital tunnel syndrome I recently researched the same problem and found some tips that have helped, but I still plan to follow up with a doctor.

You own a store in Illinois?

Thanks I can agree with all of that; I'm definitely frustrated with the government. Dare I say, I was happier not getting my way under Bush with a government that at least operated somewhat smoothly, than not getting my way under Obama with a government that can't do a goddamn thing right. This debate and talk of executive orders is only going to divide the country further. So I'd say I'm frustrated at the ineptitude and fuckery (as you called it), but not outraged at potential or hypothetical tyranny.

They don't, unless you're a business. Also, pawnbrokers were exempted from this via amendment, so if it passes, it will only apply to "WE BUY GOLD" type places. It's an attempt to cut down on gold theft, which makes it odd that it won't apply to pawn shops. Guessing they lobbied for that exception.

To be fair, he said that if you're not outraged then you're a sheep. Since I'm not outraged (yet), I fit his definition of a sheep (at the time, but we worked it out) If it helps, you can also picture me as an annoying, over-privileged know-it-all. It fits me pretty well.

Well that's very reasonable. It might help to keep in mind that thanks to globalization, CAD, modern technology, and the tireless efforts of lobbyists and gun-friendly courts and elected officials, you have access to the most diverse and reliable spectrum of firearms in the history of the world, short of moving to a country without a full-auto ban. It's a frickin' golden age for gun ownership right now. I'm not saying that you (as in the NRA and gun-rights activists) haven't had to work for it at certain times, but you know, you're winning.

I've always been fond of llamas.

I'm with Farkas... you're excluding a vast middle ground. I'm absolutely, vehemently against confiscation of handguns. The supreme court has ruled that the 2nd amendment directly applies to personal handgun ownership. If the government comes to take away ALL your guns, count me among your supporters. And yes, I know that there are people who are suggesting that, but it's not realistic. Instead, what's being talked about are specific restrictions, improvements to background checks, mental health databases, etc. To give an example, despite my position outlined above, if someone wanted to ban high-capacity magazines, I wouldn't care. I've read all the arguments pro and con, and my conclusion is "meh." So instead of arguing against such a provision rationally and trying to convince me, the gun-rights advocates move on to this bullshit "you can't give them an inch, slippery slope, this is how Stalin/Mao/Hitler started, it's going to be 1776 all over again" all-or-nothing rant. Whoa! I'm somewhere in the middle on all of this, but if I had to pick a side that was totally not anything like Stalin, and a side that was convinced that everyone on the other side was obviously Stalin, I'm going to pick the side that's not delusional. Every day of the week. cliffs: I'm not a sheep, but calling me a sheep is counterproductive.

Oh, I thought you had some in mind. I read every last one and I didn't find what you're talking about. But the EO would be the beginning. You said we knew how it would all end. Me too! But can't you see that there's a difference between being sick of granstanding fuckery and thinking that we're on a slippery slope to a dystopian wasteland?

Sexy women!?!? I always pictured a bunch of sweaty dudes in wigs. What's wrong with me?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/01/09/what_crazy_fascist_executive_orders_might_obama_use_to_take_away_your_freedoms.html Here's some things that might be on the table for an executive order: EVERYBODY PANIC!!!

Or if something is worth saying, then why attach it to a founding father? It's a pointless appeal to authority.

With toothless bans that expire in 10 years after a minor power shift in congress? With the courts overturning handgun bans in 2 major cities? How?

Which EOs are you talking about? I'd like to educate myself.

False. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Misattributed Sorry to be that guy, but you seem like the kind of person who likes facts.

First of all, who in this thread has implied that an executive order was impossible? Secondly, I've already addressed why an executive order isn't all that scary. But there's definitely some fear-mongering here about it. Thirdly, what about post #41 in this thread, which cites an anonymous internet user who cites an unnamed staffer at an unnamed senator's office who says that Obama's hypothetical EO is going to ban all semi-automatic pistols with a mandatory 30-day turn in. You want to talk about right-wing fear-mongering? It's right there. An executive order banning anything would be overreaching, but presidents lately have been pushing the boundaries of what they can accomplish with an EO. That's not to say that it operates outside our system of checks-and-balances. The courts can block it, or congress can write laws explicitly allowing whatever weapons are banned, thus overriding the EO. Or they can go as far as impeachment. And the big one is that an executive order is only valid until the next president comes along. And as I've said upthread, a gross misuse of presidential power like this will probably guarantee that the next president is a Republican.

If we can't talk about hypotheticals, then calling for civil disobedience in response to a bill which hasn't even been introduced is also a pointless exercise, and I call shenanigans on this whole thread. Shenanigans! No, I'm saying that if collectivism isn't screwing you very hard at all, then the proper avenue for your grievances is the ballot box. Especially if it has a very good chance of succeeding. Considering that any Republican presidential candidate would campaign on repealing this hypothetical executive order (which we shouldn't even talk about since it's a pointless exercise ) and that he or she would have broad support across the country, I have a hard time with any characterization of gun owners as some oppressed minority being crushed under the thumb of a tyrannical government. For all this talk about how great the constitution is, I'm not seeing a lot of faith that it actually works. ... so it would have been even easier to outlaw with an executive order, right? Sounds like you're on my side

The courts, congress (impeachment), the next president... it would be political suicide for Democrats. My guess is that a court would put a hold on enforcement within a matter of days, then eventually overturn the order. If that didn't happen, the worst is that we'd have a 4-year ban until Republicans got back in power, and then Republicans would control the government for many years to come. You might as well ask why Bush didn't issue an executive order outlawing abortion.

Fortunately, the OP gave us some good suggestions: So, if large capacity magazines were outlawed again like they were under the 1994 ban, would you assembly them from parts kits and continue to sell/trade them? Would you put pistol grips on an SKS that wasn't grandfathered in? Your first post in this thread seemed to imply that you would.

So let's say that hypothetically what "sticks" is identical to the 1994 AWB. Having lived through that pointless exercise in wankery, and having seen it get repealed via peaceful legislative means (and NOT lead to a greater erosion of any constitutional rights), would you still risk felony charges to oppose it?