What if?

[BigOxley]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-8-2013/scapegoat-hunter---gun-control?xrs=share_fb

 

skip to 6:50

[V8 Beast]

No, Brian. Sorry, but it is absolutely the Democrats - for the past 25 years - that have been trying over and over again to get this crap in place. They are the source of my problem. And the worst part is their efforts are based on horrible understanding of the gun stats.

 

Of course its the dems, but the school shooting is going to be the edge needed to get something passed. Republicans have to be careful being pro assault rifle right now. Without them being 100% in our corner its going to be a tough one.

 

No one is sure what it is but I bet we are going to lose something. I'm ok with it being the magazines.. I'll just have to reload more. I'll take that over not being able to buy rifles any day. We can only hope it starts to lose steam somehow and soon.

[Otis Nice]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-8-2013/scapegoat-hunter---gun-control?xrs=share_fb

 

skip to 6:50

 

:dumb:

 

John Stewart is little more than a pawn. He'll say whatever gains him popularity. When he tries to take a serious politcal stance and trips over his own "facts" he laughs it off stating he's merely a comedian and his show is akin to "Weekend Update" on SNL.

 

No cares given for what he has to say.

[copperhead]

No, Brian. Sorry, but it is absolutely the Democrats - for the past 25 years - that have been trying over and over again to get this crap in place. They are the source of my problem. And the worst part is their efforts are based on horrible understanding of the gun stats.

 

No, they understand them perfectly. They simply choose to include only the stats that help their cause. Because the average person who thinks the daily show is news will believe whatever shit they are spoon fed.

[2011SVT]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-8-2013/scapegoat-hunter---gun-control?xrs=share_fb

 

skip to 6:50

 

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance." - John Philpot Curran 1790.

 

Stewart, like many clever debaters, presents us with a false choice: We must either surrender our liberties (a piece at at time or in total) or be unable to address our current problems. I do not accept that these two things are ever tied.

 

Often the first action presented by the government whether it's school shootings or terrorist attacks is to abridge the rights of the people in some way as seems expedient (suspense of Habeus Corpus, military tribunals, warrantless searches, 'assault weapons' bans). Actions which are largely ineffective in a practical sense but are erosive to our freedoms and set us up for the argument that, "well, last time we just didn't go far enough" as is being done now.

[Rob1647545496]

I am 100% for civil disobedience on a large scale regarding matters of the constitution.

 

i concur.

 

the second amendment was put in place to stop this exact thing from happening.

 

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson

 

 

and don't forget about the battle of Athens 1946

[wagner]

To put this in CR terms, the government is playing a game of just the tip when it comes to our 2nd amendment rights, and we all know how that game ends.

[sol740]

Executive orders?!?! Take off the tin foil hat, that's right wing fear-mongering! Wait a minute ...

 

http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

[RedRocket1647545505]

Executive orders?!?! Take off the tin foil hat, that's right wing fear-mongering! Wait a minute ...

 

http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

 

 

I don't foresee that happening. Granted, I'm no expert on Executive Orders or what their exact purpose is, however, I wouldn't think it involves making something the law of the land at the stroke of one person's pen. Otherwise, that kind of defeats the whole point of our entire system, amirite?

[greg1647545532]

Executive orders?!?! Take off the tin foil hat, that's right wing fear-mongering! Wait a minute ...

 

http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

 

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.

 

I don't foresee that happening. Granted, I'm no expert on Executive Orders or what their exact purpose is, however, I wouldn't think it involves making something the law of the land at the stroke of one person's pen. Otherwise, that kind of defeats the whole point of our entire system, amirite?

 

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.

[sol740]

I don't foresee that happening. Granted, I'm no expert on Executive Orders or what their exact purpose is, however, I wouldn't think it involves making something the law of the land at the stroke of one person's pen. Otherwise, that kind of defeats the whole point of our entire system, amirite?

 

I agree with you, but the climate to excuse such an action has never been more fervent in my lifetime. The very idea of executive orders was mocked a page back, so this is my flippant retort.

[greg1647545532]

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson

 

False.

 

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Misattributed

 

Falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson; first reported in Matt Carson, On A Hill They Call Capital: A Revolution Is Coming‎ (2007), p. 131. Not found prior to 2007.

 

Sorry to be that guy, but you seem like the kind of person who likes facts.

[greg1647545532]

But, this POS adminstration has moved around checks and balances before by using executive orders.

 

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

[sol740]

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.

 

Yeah unfortunately there are a ton of either patently false, or misrepresented founders quotes all over the internet. Which is odd because there are plenty of actual quotes to choose from.

[greg1647545532]

To put this in CR terms, the government is playing a game of just the tip when it comes to our 2nd amendment rights, and we all know how that game ends.

 

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?

[greg1647545532]

Yeah unfortunately there are a ton of either patently false, or misrepresented founders quotes all over the internet. Which is odd because there are plenty of actual quotes to choose from.

 

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

[greg1647545532]

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:

 

- Directing the DOJ to prosecute more "prohibited purchasers" when they attempt to buy guns. In 2009, the FBI referred 71,000 cases of thse buyers, mostly felons. U.S. attorneys prosecuted only 77 cases.

 

- Appointing a permanent ATF director. The ATF has spooked the right ever since Ruby Ridge (before, too, but that's when the real agita started), and the Senate hasn't confirmed a permanent director since 2006.

 

- Requiring federal agencies to report mental health records. The NICS Improvement Act of 2007, passed after the Virginia Tech shootings, requires this. It hardly ever happens.

 

EVERYBODY PANIC!!!

[sol740]

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

 

I think it's more an appeal to the spirit of the birth of US of America, because fireworks, bald eagles, and sexy women.

[greg1647545532]

I think it's more an appeal to the spirit of the birth of US of America, because fireworks, bald eagles, and sexy women.

 

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

[wagner]

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

 

Read away: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/obama.html

 

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?

 

How? By using an EO to cram this down the throat of this country.

 

To be dead honest I am very sick and tired of this gun control fuckery. This is just grandstanding crap being used to put off and ignore the larger issues.

 

Keep thinking what you need to ( it is obvious you are not stupid compared to many around here) I hope you sleep better at night because I am not.

[greg1647545532]

Read away: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/obama.html

 

Oh, I thought you had some in mind. I read every last one and I didn't find what you're talking about.

 

How? By using an EO to cram this down the throat of this country.

 

But the EO would be the beginning. You said we knew how it would all end.

 

To be dead honest I am very sick and tired of this gun control fuckery. This is just grandstanding crap being used to put off and ignore the larger issues.

 

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?

[sol740]

.

 

 

 

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?

 

No, any encroachment on the natural rights of citizens is of the utmost importance, if you disagree, that's fine, step aside and enjoy the rest of your day, awash in the warming glow of your benevolent leaders. This isn't some conspiracy theory Alex Jones cooked up on info wars, this is what we are being told directly from leftist leadership. Fuck them and fuck any coward that agrees with them. It's not just grandstanding, it's testing the water.

[2011SVT]

.. encroachment on the natural rights of citizens is of the utmost importance...

 

Quoted for truth.

 

From the WSJ as of 1:19 PM this afternoon. Biden talks about the growing "consensus" (as if!):

 

"Aside from banning high-capacity weapons and requiring universal background checks, the steps would also involve strengthening the background-check system, increasing research on gun-related injuries and deaths, and considering what responsibilities gun owners have to keep their firearms out of the wrong hands."

 

So let's break this down:

 

1. "banning high-capacity weapons" - AWB on steroids. 'Nuff said.

 

2. "requiring universal background checks" - Ensuring the govenment knows about all transfers and who has what? I can support this for it's good purpose of keeping the bad people from getting guns. Must be accompanied by the *absolute* requirement and proof that the record of the check and the information which could be used as defacto registration is destoyed as called for in current law. Failure to do so is a federal offense. Should also specifically say the act can *never* be expanded to include anything else.

 

3. "strengthening the background check system" - Hopefully this is about states being required to do a more thorough/timely reporting of felons/crazies into the federal database. I can support that. Block grants please.

 

4. "increasing research on gun-related injuries and deaths" - No fucking way. This is just an excuse to have government funded anti-gun groups pour out more propaganda on the taxpayer's dime. We got enough research already.

 

5. "considering what responsibilities gun owners have to keep their firearms out of the wrong hands" - I've already written here about our responsibilities as owners should be. Having the feds involved and writing "the rules"? 110% bad idea. Let's add some lawyers and special interest grouyps in. Yeah, that will fix it! Just another reach into our personal lives/business. That said, I am writing the NRA to ask them to step up the info/training available to gun owners regarding safe storage/access control and questions you should be asking a potential buyer/red flags. That's the way to do this.

[wagner]

Quoted for truth.

 

From the WSJ as of 1:19 PM this afternoon. Biden talks about the growing "consensus" (as if!):

 

"Aside from banning high-capacity weapons and requiring universal background checks, the steps would also involve strengthening the background-check system, increasing research on gun-related injuries and deaths, and considering what responsibilities gun owners have to keep their firearms out of the wrong hands."

 

So let's break this down:

 

1. "banning high-capacity weapons" - AWB on steroids. 'Nuff said.

 

2. "requiring universal background checks" - Ensuring the govenment knows about all transfers and who has what? I can support this for it's good purpose of keeping the bad people from getting guns. Must be accompanied by the *absolute* requirement and proof that the record of the check and the information which could be used as defacto registration is destoyed as called for in current law. Failure to do so is a federal offense. Should also specifically say the act can *never* be expanded to include anything else.

 

3. "strengthening the background check system" - Hopefully this is about states being required to do a more thorough/timely reporting of felons/crazies into the federal database. I can support that. Block grants please.

 

4. "increasing research on gun-related injuries and deaths" - No fucking way. This is just an excuse to have government funded anti-gun groups pour out more propaganda on the taxpayer's dime. We got enough research already.

 

5. "considering what responsibilities gun owners have to keep their firearms out of the wrong hands" - I've already written here about our responsibilities as owners should be. Having the feds involved and writing "the rules"? 110% bad idea. Let's add some lawyers and special interest grouyps in. Yeah, that will fix it! Just another reach into our personal lives/business. That said, I am writing the NRA to ask them to step up the info/training available to gun owners regarding safe storage/access control and questions you should be asking a potential buyer/red flags. That's the way to do this.

 

So where will all the money for this come from? Oh, according to the president we "don't haev a spending problem" and our debt as a country is so under control...