It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

First round of Obama's Executive Gun Control laws announced

page: 1
40
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+20 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   

The changes will include:

A national electronic system designed to make background checks for handgun buyers simpler and faster, leaving an electronic paper trail under a law named forJames Brady, Ronald Reagan’s press secretary who was wounded in the 1981 assassination attempt on the president.
A new reporting requirement that federally licensed gun shops report any person who tries to buy two long-arm weapons near the Mexican border over a five-day period.

Tougher sentencing guidelines for straw buyers that Holder’s department pushed through procedural hoops at the U.S. Sentencing Commission earlier this year.



Link

Will come as early as next week.

So we get a national handgun registry, a "temporary" ATF program made permanent despite the ATF ending their "temporary" program prematurely due to mass outrage, and more "harsher sentencing" BS that works so well.

All without Congress. Who needs Congress anyway?

Here is the White House rejecting the ATF's long gun reporting back in March: www.stltoday.com...

The WH rejected it so why is it back now? Permanent no less.
edit on 12-7-2011 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)


+5 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   
We really have to keep an eye on this 'Obama' character.

This may be his start on a means of implementing the UN plan to disarm us.


+3 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


This is an outrage! Woulldnt the rest of the world love a disarmed america. Well come on down to the south, I wont be disarmed!



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Why would that be such a bad thing?

I have never understood the American attachment to to the right to bear arms, what positive benefits has it brought to you when compared to the many disadvantages? This is serious question, I only wish to understand. I know of plenty people in Britain who have guns and adhere to the very strict gun laws. Do you not have the same laws governing your right to arms, if not why not?


+16 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Threegirls
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Why would that be such a bad thing?

I have never understood the American attachment to to the right to bear arms, what positive benefits has it brought to you when compared to the many disadvantages? This is serious question, I only wish to understand. I know of plenty people in Britain who have guns and adhere to the very strict gun laws. Do you not have the same laws governing your right to arms, if not why not?


American’s owning guns is a very good thing.

It prevents dictators from taking over – it is the last round of defense.

Also, if a foreign country decided to invade us, they wouldn’t get very far if the majority of the population had guns.

If China decided to invade the UK – I don’t believe the UK would stand up very well against such an assault.

However, let them try to do that in America, and I promise they wouldn’t get very far.



Also – bad people will get guns…. While people who abide by the laws are restricted on obtaining them. So, if the innocent do not have a means to defend their selves against an aggressor who will get weapons no matter what, then the bad people win.

Studies have shown that cities that made it harder to get guns – crime increased drastically.
While cities that made it easier to get guns – crime dropped drastically.


+6 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
He's moving as fast as possible before the !@#$ hits the fan with "fast and furious". F and F could end his presidency sooner than expected. His ramrod approach to all major legislation speaks volumes. All of it must pass ASAP due to an as yet to be seen crisis. Then when all else fails he either ignores the law outright, DOMA, or bypasses congress altogether.

The man is all over the board with his rhetoric vs. his actions. Therefore, I can fully conclude that you can no longer believe anything that the man says. Just believe his actions.




posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
He's moving as fast as possible before the !@#$ hits the fan with "fast and furious". F and F could end his presidency sooner than expected. His ramrod approach to all major legislation speaks volumes. All of it must pass ASAP due to an as yet to be seen crisis. Then when all else fails he either ignores the law outright, DOMA, or bypasses congress altogether.

The man is all over the board with his rhetoric vs. his actions. Therefore, I can fully conclude that you can no longer believe anything that the man says. Just believe his actions.



I agree - a person's actions defines their true way of thinking, not their words.

That is a lesson many people need to learn.

Anyone can have a silver tongue, but their actions are what truly effects you and not what they say.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


The first bogie just slipped "under the radar."

I guarantee that there will be more such executive decisions before the summer is up.

I just hope that the next Administration nullifys these decisions with one of their own.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 


Hiya MentorsRiddle,

Thankyou for your reply. Your Presidents acts without consulting or regarding congress, does he not?
I suggest you are not so far from dictatorship as may be thought. We have the same problem. You have a point about invasion however even without such a defence UK has not been invaded and is not as likely to happen to UK, we have nothing anyone wants. Guns will not defend US against bio weapons or terrorists or nukes which would be the preferred method of attack it seems.

About bad people, occasionally, bad people get guns in UK and the results are horrific. How can you guarantee that you would have a gun on you for defense? Most victims of crime do not. Having guns so widely available as in US makes them easier for criminals to get. They are far more likely to use them, the crime we have in the UK is far more survivable due to lack of guns. I am not convinced therefore that you have an advantage.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
I would love to hear from the Lord Obama supporters right now.
"He won't go after gun rights" ring any bells?



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Threegirls
 





You have a point about invasion however even without such a defence UK has not been invaded and is not as likely to happen to UK, we have nothing anyone wants
From what I have been reading, you have been invaded (disregarding the Normans, of course) by Muslims.

I hear you're going to have sharia law in selected zones.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Threegirls
 


Lets suppose for a minute that one day your government just stopped listening to you and started doing whatever they wanted without the peoples consent. Basicaly you are a slave with a butter knife if you dont have a gun. What do you think the elite people listen to? Power. Thats is it. Take away a citizens power and you take away his authority. Take away his authority and you take away his freedom. Sounds eerily faimliar does it not? Looks, to me, like we need a (insert bannable offense here).

MOTF!
edit on 12-7-2011 by MessOnTheFED! because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Ha ha nice one Butcherguy, you have a point.... apparently.

The Brits will most likely vote BNP next time it seems, what a world!

We need a constitution which makes integration obligatory. Still don't want guns though x



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Threegirls
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 


Hiya MentorsRiddle,

Thankyou for your reply. Your Presidents acts without consulting or regarding congress, does he not?
I suggest you are not so far from dictatorship as may be thought. We have the same problem. You have a point about invasion however even without such a defence UK has not been invaded and is not as likely to happen to UK, we have nothing anyone wants. Guns will not defend US against bio weapons or terrorists or nukes which would be the preferred method of attack it seems.

About bad people, occasionally, bad people get guns in UK and the results are horrific. How can you guarantee that you would have a gun on you for defense? Most victims of crime do not. Having guns so widely available as in US makes them easier for criminals to get. They are far more likely to use them, the crime we have in the UK is far more survivable due to lack of guns. I am not convinced therefore that you have an advantage.


I agree that nukes or bio-warfare will most likley be used against the USA if such an attack did occur - however, anyone who launches an attack on the USA would be met with an equal, if not more powerful, counter attack. So it wold not be beneficial for a government to attack us this way - as most rulers are not suicidal.

No one can be 100% prepared 100% of the time - so there is no guarantee.

However, the ability to carry such a defense goes a long way.

As a matter of fact – I believe the gun control laws that we do have are what causes the majority of crime.

Let me give you an example:

Let’s say someone goes to rob a bank – four guys run into said bank armed with guns.
Modern laws prevent citizens from carrying guns into banks, stores, etc.

What if every customer, every clerk, every manager had guns strapped to their hips.

How far would those robbers get if for every gun they were pointing, three more were pointed back at them?

I believe that we should be able to walk around the street with guns strapped to our hips – and that way every person who wants to commit a crime, of any level, will have to be willing to put their lives on the line to commit such a crime.

Think about it – this would reduce robberies, school shootings, any other type of crime.

That’s just my 2 cents though.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
I would love to hear from the Lord Obama supporters right now.
"He won't go after gun rights" ring any bells?


They are still fighting the Birth Certificate fight over and over. I guess the distraction worked


They will fight to the tooth to defend BC forgery. However, they choose to leave his actions as POTUS alone. Its quite mind numbing. I guess the BC issue is just easier to defend rather than to defend the concrete and certain actions of Obama as President.

BTW. He thinks they are stupid too!



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by MessOnTheFED!
 


Er.. yep that rings true. So hows it working out for you. Your Gov listening to you much?

I do not think you will be going out to assassinate Obarmy any time soon. His plans to disarm you may be construed as self defense.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Well I don't own any guns any more I used to own lots but seem to have missplaced them. No paperwork on them anyway so it doesn't really matter does it



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Threegirls
reply to post by MessOnTheFED!
 


Er.. yep that rings true. So hows it working out for you. Your Gov listening to you much?

I do not think you will be going out to assassinate Obarmy any time soon. His plans to disarm you may be construed as self defense.


Any good polotician will try to spin things to make it seeem like it is for our own good.

But I'm reminded of a quote from a great man:

Those who would trade their liberty for security deserve neither.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 


Whoa.. this is like a world away from UK life!!! Banks should have security systems which make robbery impossible, guns should be nowhere near schools period.

What you describe sounds like a video game or the wild west, there would be carnage!! I restate my arguments, the availability of guns is the problem and adequate security is the answer to your proposition. x



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by MessOnTheFED!
 


Why suppose it?

The government isnt even in the loop anymore with executive orders and kinetic military actions.

It's pretty much POTUS run and there's no chance whatsoever the next ass in that seat will undo what this one or the last one has done.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join