BREAKING - Obama to use Executive actions, bypassing Congress, to force gun control measures.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

A straw purchase of a firearm is already a felony.

www.wsj.com...

I am not aware of a "straw purchase loophole."

Can you provide a link?

Might i say this, that simply playing with the idea of changing the Constitution signifys ones Desire to actually do it. If the laws weren't purposely screwed up to the extent that they are, PC rubbish would not exist as it does now. There was a purposeful intent to create the world as it is in order to subdue the People's will to their Intent and theirs only.

When the Boss that You've hired to protect You and yours, instills ill will on an entire Nation against the majority that is called 'Tyranny' i believe. That is what is taking place right now.

a reply to: awareness10

Might i say this, that simply playing with the idea of changing the Constitution signifys ones Desire to actually do it.

Are you saying that this executive action suggests changing the Constitution? How so? The supreme court, has never ruled that gun regulation is unconstitutional. They have, on the other hand, ruled that some gun laws in particular were unconstitutional.

This action, just as any law, is subject to judicial review.

Don't most, if not all states already have laws that prohibit mentally unstable individuals from possessing firearms? Is there not also a federal law?

www.ncsl.org...

Besides restricting the private sale of firearms, what exactly will the President's action change again?

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Besides restricting the private sale of firearms what exactly will the President's order change again?

Action, not order.
There is a difference and it important to make the distinction. There are some who are even calling this a law.

a reply to: Phage

No but upon observation, i would say that was their 'Intent'. Why else mention it? If the Constitution is Solid and was Meant to protect the People, why even discuss it? Would a gun with one bullet discharge make the Gov feel safer, and what of the People who employ this Gov't. What if, they decided to go against the People of USA and instill this? I believe this is why the Founding Fathers Wrote this up to begin with. To Protect the People from who they Employ in Govt. It was to protect the Citizens of USA safe from Tyranny within the Gov't. Safe from the Banking System 'which is a joke in itself, safe from all the crap 'were' witnessing now.

Edit.. Just because they've 'Never' said it doesn't mean they Never will. Was the Constitution not written for this very purpose, to protect the People of USA against bad Govt?

When i look at the World as it is now, i believe those who lived during the time when the Constitution was written would agree with me. Why should Govt have all the good sh't? Why should Gov't use all the taxpayers hard earned dollars to destroy Country after Country and get off scott free? I don't get it.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Dictaor-in-chief

Booo!

Can't do it democratically because the PEOPLE do not want it so does it like a dictator tyrant. Typical Obama, I wish his term would hurry up and end. He has been bad news for America, really bad news, a wolf in sheep's clothing, weak and abusive of American values. At least George was honest about who he is.

Not too long to go America before he is replaced. Words of comfort.

originally posted by: awareness10
a reply to: Phage
I believe this is why the Founding Fathers Wrote this up to begin with. To Protect the People from who they Employ in Govt. It was to protect the Citizens of USA safe from Tyranny within the Gov't. Safe from the Banking System 'which is a joke in itself, safe from all the crap 'were' witnessing now.

Yeah, but the US currently has the most lax gun laws in the western world... Yet, it still has the most corrupt government, most corrupt banking system and most corrupt police force out of all western nations.

The 2nd amendment is a proven flawed policy... all it does in reality is give the police and government more power over the people, since they can get away with using brutal tactics, then just claim it was necessary because the people are a legitimate threat.

What the American people believe makes them strong, is in reality actually what makes them weak.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

The only part of these measures which makes one hundred percent good sense, is the segment about mental health, and even then, it fails to perform.

Delusions of grandeur and supremacy on the part of anyone, from any background, is a mental health issue. These and many others are what lead to gun deaths. There are some delusions, some mental maladies, that render a sufferer incompetent to walk down a public street, lest they snap and just murder a person with their bare hands, and there are more of those people walking around than there damned well ought to be. A fellow ought to be able to trust that the lady two rows back from him on the bus, is not the sort to randomly shank him in the spinal cord with a hat pin. But, terrifyingly, that trust, in a nation which deals with mental health issues in such a lacklustre and pathetic manner as the US does, is going to be misplaced a great deal more of the time, than it ought to be.

Fact: As long as the type of person who would shoot ten people for no reason other than to satisfy their need to do so, is able to live amongst the population without anyone being the wiser, rather than being locked up and medicated for their safety and the safety of others, this problem will always occur. On every occasion, it is avoidable. It is not avoidable by making carriage of a pistol or rifle illegal, it cannot be avoided by making acquisition of guns through legal channels more difficult, and it will not be solved by reducing the amount of ammunition a person can purchase without an ATF investigation.

It WILL be solved, by root and branch rebuilding and thousand fold expansion of mental healthcare infrastructure in the States, creating and maintaining a solid reporting system for mental health problems and those who suffer from them, and by making psychological evaluation a yearly part of the life of EVERY single human being living in the States. It should not be possible for a person who suffers a mental health malfunction so serious as to eventually lead to murder, without that person having first been identified as a risk and removed from the streets until effective treatment has been administered.

You can fiddle with the rules, the paperwork, and all that malarkey as much as you like, but there is no solving this problem without first looking to the source, and that source is not the guns, or legitimate gun owners, but the people whose neurochemistry is so utterly skewed that they could unload a thirty round rifle mag into a kindergarten and laugh about it. The only variable that matters here, the only variable that actually has any bearing on the rate at which these things occur, is the variable of mental health, and so unless steps are taken to identify EVERY person with a developing mental health condition, and remove those on the brink WELL before they actually act so that they can be treated rather than blooded, NOTHING WILL IMPROVE!

But by all means, bash the inanimate object, and abuse the rights enshrined in the founding document of an entire nation. That has always worked out for the best. Honestly, what a crap show. Obama dropped the ball big time here. He had a chance to force the mental healthcare provision level to outstanding heights of efficacy and scale, to change the way mental healthcare provision is funded, delivered, and administered, and what did he do instead? Basically induced panic buying and another round of "in b4 gun ban" sales.

Meanwhile, somewhere, someone who ought to be in a straight jacket is thumbing rounds into a magazine, oiling and cleaning his or her weapon, and thinking about the best way to cause as much damage as possible before eating a round or two of the sheriffs ammunition for lunch.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Thankyou for your reply.

What do you suggest would be the right thing to do in order to fix this? People are very divided on this, they don't trust their Gov't at all for the most part. And there seems to be no solidified solution to this. People could have a referendum? of some type but even then, the People wouldn't trust in the results simply because they've lied before aka The Elections. There must be some kind of Solution where The People are in full Control in order for them to even trust what's going on in Gov't. And in order for that to happen, they'll need to kick out everyone in power and reassign them. No one i believe, would be better equipped to do so than 'The People of USA.' The ones who hire people to do the job correctly not corruptly.

a reply to: awareness10

. There must be some kind of Solution where The People are in full Control in order for them to even trust what's going on in Gov't.

Which people?
But I'm not sure where you get the idea that most people trust the government. You see that's what our Constitution is for. It tell the government what it can do, not what we can do. Maybe it's different on your side of the pond.

a reply to: Phage

But i did not say that i thought most people trusted the Gov't?

a reply to: awareness10
No. I guess you didn't. I apologize once again.

But my point was that no one should ever, ever trust their government. It doesn't matter who is in what office.

a reply to: Phage

We are in agreement then? Yes!! 'smile'. Thankyou for that.

a reply to: Phage

I don't trust the anti gun groups when it comes to "mental health" diagnoses. There are folks in there that think even wanting to own a gun is crazy. Diagnosing someone with a mental disorder is slippery slope reasoning for taking a gun away or not allowing them to buy one. I don't like aggressive bosses or anyone who throws their weight around, so maybe I would be wedged in the ODD group. Yes, we need to get the guns away from the crazy people. I just don't trust their definition of "crazy"

How much would you like to bet You could be shoehorned in to one of these catagories?

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: awareness10

Might i say this, that simply playing with the idea of changing the Constitution signifys ones Desire to actually do it.

Are you saying that this executive action suggests changing the Constitution? How so? The supreme court, has never ruled that gun regulation is unconstitutional. They have, on the other hand, ruled that some gun laws in particular were unconstitutional.

This action, just as any law, is subject to judicial review.

Shall Not Be Infringed.

I guess you forgot about that part.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I agree with mental health checks because mass shooters are all bat crazy. I also agree with gun safety technology. I'm all for safety and I see no wrong in researching it. I know a family who has guns, loaded, all over their house and always has. The kids are taught to respect the gun, how to use it, etc. But they are the minority and there are plenty of families who hide their weapons from everyone, kids included, but even the ones who know about the gun still hurt themselves or their friends.

If only the mother of the Sandy Hook shooting had better gun safety technology, and a brain.

Hundreds of millions of households have guns in them. People with kids that respect firearms aren't the minority in my opinion.

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Dictaor-in-chief

Booo!

Can't do it democratically because the PEOPLE do not want it so does it like a dictator tyrant. Typical Obama, I wish his term would hurry up and end. He has been bad news for America, really bad news, a wolf in sheep's clothing, weak and abusive of American values. At least George was honest about who he is.

Not too long to go America before he is replaced. Words of comfort.

Very true, but how much damage he'll do in his last two years is what Americans were most concerned about. One year to go and he's getting worse and worse.

originally posted by: DAVID64
How much would you like to bet You could be shoehorned in to one of these catagories?

en.wikipedia.org...

I'm sure they could find mental disorders in 90% of the population if they wanted to...

At least the rest of the bill aren't bad ideas.