Obama passes 23 executive orders on Gun control; Republicans over-react.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Blue-Sky (10348 posts) -

Republicans have consistently painted Presidential Executive orders as tyrannical laws outside the bounds of Congress but in reality he can only pass directives into how the federal agencies operate. i.e. Obama could re-schedule Marijuana on the FDA scale or not fund prosecutions in federal court but he can't legalize it.

So today he passed 23 Executive orders on gun control that Conservative opponents of Obama have called him a dictator, a tyrant, imperial, for proposing executive actions he believes would help prevent gun violence. But all these "orders" hardly change anything monumental on Guns and really affect the bureaucracy side of background checks.

While I'm personally against gun control at a federal level immediately after a tragedy, a lot of these executive orders are just plain common sense. Unfortunately they don't seem to do a whole lot in preventing gun tragedies but they're certainly not the tyrannical crusade that republicans are painting.

Here's a quick summary of them, Actual orders can be read: here.

1. Make federal info easier to obtain for background checks
2. Address Health insurance data that prevents info from being available in background checks
3. Give incentives for states that share background info
4. Direct Attorney General to double check individuals that are banned from owning guns.
5. "Propose" a law for cops to run background checks on people returning guns.
6. Publish an ATF letter for how to run background checks.
7. Launch a responsible gun ownership Campaign
8. Review safety standards for gun locks and safes.
9. Require Federal law enforcement (FBI, CIA, etc) to trace guns recovered.
10. Require Release of DOJ reports on lost/stolen guns to law enforcement
11. Nominate an ATF director.
12. Provide law enforcement, first responders and school officials with training for gun situations
13. Maximize eforcement efforts to prevent gun violence (pretty vague)
14. Direct CDC on gun research
15. Promote new gun safety technologies and challenge private sector.
16. Clarify that obamacare doesn't prohibit doctors from asking patients about their guns.
17. Clarify that No federal law prevents doctors from reporting violence to law enforcment.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19. Develop emergency response plans for schools and churches in shootouts.
20. Clarify mental health services provided under Medicaid.
21. Finalize Obamacare regulations for mental health care services
22. Commit to finalizing mental health care regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

#2 Posted by UCF_Knight (6863 posts) -
Background checks? Research? Can we impeach this dictator already?
#4 Posted by Pirate700 (46465 posts) -

In terms of laws on actual guns, it's just the laws CA already has. Nothing changes here (which is good because it's strict enough).

#5 Posted by JML897 (33133 posts) -
Wait That is what people are getting so upset about?
#6 Posted by sexyweapons (5302 posts) -
[QUOTE="UCF_Knight"]Background checks? Research? Can we impeach this dictator already?LastDay-
lol, TC's signature is win.

:lol: TC's sig goes so well with this thread.
#8 Posted by comp_atkins (32176 posts) -

Background checks? Research? Can we impeach this dictator already?UCF_Knight
seriously.. ridiculous! TYRAANY@!!!!

alex-jones.jpeg&w=600&h=280&zc=1

#9 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
Some of the vague statements there could use some clarifications on how exactly they're going to go about it. That said telling people to be more careful and reminding people of what the law says are pretty sensible and I feel people could do with a reminder on a few of those things. Also I told you guys to freaking wait before having a hissy fit.
#10 Posted by Serraph105 (28675 posts) -
The NRA was right, it was proof that Obama is coming after your guns because he hadn't come after your guns yet.
#11 Posted by UCF_Knight (6863 posts) -

[QUOTE="UCF_Knight"]Background checks? Research? Can we impeach this dictator already?comp_atkins

seriously.. ridiculous! TYRAANY@!!!!

Make sure you go to your local store and stock up on guns and ammunition! All of these executive orders not making it more difficult to purchase guns could take effect any time!

#12 Posted by DaBrainz (7721 posts) -
Obama can't legalize something but he can direct the justice department not to enforce it? Nobody has a problem with that?
#13 Posted by Rich3232 (2628 posts) -

[QUOTE="UCF_Knight"]Background checks? Research? Can we impeach this dictator already?comp_atkins

seriously.. ridiculous! TYRAANY@!!!!

alex-jones.jpeg&w=600&h=280&zc=1

1776 will occur again, aaarrrggghhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#14 Posted by Wasdie (50840 posts) -

From what I can see, he's not that interested in actually getting assault weapons and high capacity magazines banned. He knows full well that legislation won't make it through the house and maybe even the senate.

I was getting kind of worried about what kind of EOs he was going to pass. Though logic dictated he wasn't going to be able to pass much. Still was a little worried.

#15 Posted by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -
Am I understanding number 5 correctly. If I find a gun and want to return it to the police I can get prosecuted if I'm an ex-criminal?
#16 Posted by Kamekazi_69 (4704 posts) -

Ofcourse he proposed that. He knows banning certain weapons and clips is a losing battle. I think people are upset at the clowns on here spewing false information and forcing their standards of living down their throats, overall than the bill itselfs. Enforce gun responsibility, and research social changes and patterns in society and veto everything else.

#17 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
[QUOTE="Fightingfan"]Am I understanding number 5 correctly. If I find a gun and want to return it to the police I can get prosecuted if I'm an ex-criminal?

As I said I think the more vague ones need a better explanation. However it's probably just a background check and if you do have a history of something they decide is relevant they would probably ask you more questions.
#18 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

From what I can see, he's not that interested in actually getting assault weapons and high capacity magazines banned. He knows full well that legislation won't make it through the house and maybe even the senate.

Wasdie
I'd say he'd love to do so if he could, but knows that it's a practical impossibility with the current makeup of Congress.
#19 Posted by DevilMightCry (3498 posts) -
This may surprise ot liberals, but I am fine with Obama on this. Nothing threatening here folks.
#20 Posted by Wasdie (50840 posts) -

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

From what I can see, he's not that interested in actually getting assault weapons and high capacity magazines banned. He knows full well that legislation won't make it through the house and maybe even the senate.

nocoolnamejim

I'd say he'd love to do so if he could, but knows that it's a practical impossibility with the current makeup of Congress.

Actually I don't think he cares one bit. Biden on the other hand...

#21 Posted by Aljosa23 (26215 posts) -

ron-paul.gif.

#22 Posted by DarkLink77 (31965 posts) -

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

From what I can see, he's not that interested in actually getting assault weapons and high capacity magazines banned. He knows full well that legislation won't make it through the house and maybe even the senate.

Wasdie

I'd say he'd love to do so if he could, but knows that it's a practical impossibility with the current makeup of Congress.

Actually I don't think he cares one bit. Biden on the other hand...

^This. Also, those bans are pretty useless (and unnecessary), to be honest. It's more of a symbolic thing than anything else.
#23 Posted by Serraph105 (28675 posts) -
I may have to tune into Fox for funsies.
#24 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -

.

Aljosa23
 .
#25 Posted by Wasdie (50840 posts) -

ron-paul.gif.

Aljosa23

doom%20paul%201.png

#26 Posted by Serraph105 (28675 posts) -
[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

.

Ace6301
 .

If you add a few more colors this could pertain to gay marriage.
#27 Posted by masiisam (5721 posts) -



While I'm personally against gun control at a federal level immediately after a tragedy, a lot of these executive orders are just plain common sense. Unfortunately they don't seem to do a whole lot in preventing gun tragedies but they're certainly not the tyrannical crusade that republicans are painting.



Blue-Sky

That's just frustrating right there. All of these EO's are things that should have already been set in place. It's just sad it takes tragedyafter tragedy to bring common sense into action. I mean WTF?

#28 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -
Seems pretty fair, just don't mess w/ my 2nd amendment because of 2 psycho douchebags that had to shoot up places last year. I have a better chance of getting killed by so many other things, god damn fear culture!
#29 Posted by dercoo (12555 posts) -

I'm Ok wuth these.

Its good to see Obama does know his limits.

#30 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -

I'm Ok wuth these.

Its goo to see Obama does know his limits.

dercoo
Now if only he can stop being a hypocrite and quit drone striking the **** outta children half way across the world
#31 Posted by jimkabrhel (15440 posts) -

I'm sure that this is just to pacify the masses who are most upset about the shooting, so that the aministration can look like it's doing something, without actually doing something. And without pissing off most gun owners.

I'm sure that Obama would rather be deaing with that other fun situation, you know, the debt ceiling and sequester.

#32 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -

I'm sure that this is just to pacify the masses who are most upset about the shooting, so that the aministration can look like it's doing something, without actually doing something. And without pissing off most gun owners.

I'm sure that Obama would rather be deaing with that other fun situation, you know, the debt ceiling and sequester.

jimkabrhel
Oh, you mean the ACTUAL important stuff the media should be covering. ;)
#33 Posted by JML897 (33133 posts) -

Seems pretty fair, just don't mess w/ my 2nd amendment because of 2 psycho douchebags that had to shoot up places last year. I have a better chance of getting killed by so many other things, god damn fear culture!-RocBoys9489-

2? In what country?

#34 Posted by MrPraline (21331 posts) -

I'm sure that this is just to pacify the masses who are most upset about the shooting, so that the aministration can look like it's doing something, without actually doing something. And without pissing off most gun owners.

I'm sure that Obama would rather be deaing with that other fun situation, you know, the debt ceiling and sequester.

jimkabrhel
Hah. How much has the media been covering the idea of a one trillion dollar coin over there? Read a few articles about it on zerohedge. Such silliness.
#35 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -

[QUOTE="-RocBoys9489-"]Seems pretty fair, just don't mess w/ my 2nd amendment because of 2 psycho douchebags that had to shoot up places last year. I have a better chance of getting killed by so many other things, god damn fear culture!JML897

2? In what country?

James Holmes and w/ever the Sandy guy's name is. Honestly, if Obama were smart, he would propose legislation where it makes it illegal for the media to say the name/show pics of whoever committed the shootings. Fame is what drives these guys, it worked when TV stopped showing streakers at sports games. The # of cases went way down.
#36 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

I'm sure that this is just to pacify the masses who are most upset about the shooting, so that the aministration can look like it's doing something, without actually doing something. And without pissing off most gun owners.

I'm sure that Obama would rather be deaing with that other fun situation, you know, the debt ceiling and sequester.

MrPraline
Hah. How much has the media been covering the idea of a one trillion dollar coin over there? Read a few articles about it on zerohedge. Such silliness.

Obama ruled out that idea a couple of days ago. Said there was "no magic button solution" or something like that and then insisted that Congress raise the debt ceiling because "the United States is not a deadbeat nation" and "the full faith and credit of the United States is not a bargaining chip to achieve political aims" and "we pay our bills that we have already racked up".
#37 Posted by JML897 (33133 posts) -

Honestly, if Obama were smart, he would propose legislation where it makes it illegal for the media to say the name/show pics of whoever committed the shootings. -RocBoys9489-

And infringe on their first amendment rights? You're all about the second amendment but not the first one huh?

#38 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="JML897"]

[QUOTE="-RocBoys9489-"]Seems pretty fair, just don't mess w/ my 2nd amendment because of 2 psycho douchebags that had to shoot up places last year. I have a better chance of getting killed by so many other things, god damn fear culture!-RocBoys9489-

2? In what country?

James Holmes and w/ever the Sandy guy's name is. Honestly, if Obama were smart, he would propose legislation where it makes it illegal for the media to say the name/show pics of whoever committed the shootings. Fame is what drives these guys, it worked when TV stopped showing streakers at sports games. The # of cases went way down.

Maybe, but I'm thinking that what motivates people to go streaking and what motivates them to go shoot up their school may be a touch different.
#39 Posted by Leejjohno (14088 posts) -

Republicans have consistently painted Presidential Executive orders as tyrannical laws outside the bounds of Congress but in reality he can only pass directives into how the federal agencies operate. i.e. Obama could re-schedule Marijuana on the FDA scale or not fund prosecutions in federal court but he can't legalize it.

So today he passed 23 Executive orders on gun control that Conservative opponents of Obama have called him a dictator, a tyrant, imperial, for proposing executive actions he believes would help prevent gun violence. But all these "orders" hardly change anything monumental on Guns and really affect the bureaucracy side of background checks.

While I'm personally against gun control at a federal level immediately after a tragedy, a lot of these executive orders are just plain common sense. Unfortunately they don't seem to do a whole lot in preventing gun tragedies but they're certainly not the tyrannical crusade that republicans are painting.

Here's a quick summary of them, Actual orders can be read: here.

1. Make federal info easier to obtain for background checks
2. Address Health insurance data that prevents info from being available in background checks
3. Give incentives for states that share background info
4. Direct Attorney General to double check individuals that are banned from owning guns.
5. "Propose" a law for cops to run background checks on people returning guns.
6. Publish an ATF letter for how to run background checks.
7. Launch a responsible gun ownership Campaign
8. Review safety standards for gun locks and safes.
9. Require Federal law enforcement (FBI, CIA, etc) to trace guns recovered.
10. Require Release of DOJ reports on lost/stolen guns to law enforcement
11. Nominate an ATF director.
12. Provide law enforcement, first responders and school officials with training for gun situations
13. Maximize eforcement efforts to prevent gun violence (pretty vague)
14. Direct CDC on gun research
15. Promote new gun safety technologies and challenge private sector.
16. Clarify that obamacare doesn't prohibit doctors from asking patients about their guns.
17. Clarify that No federal law prevents doctors from reporting violence to law enforcment.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19. Develop emergency response plans for schools and churches in shootouts.
20. Clarify mental health services provided under Medicaid.
21. Finalize Obamacare regulations for mental health care services
22. Commit to finalizing mental health care regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

Blue-Sky

I don't get it. Those things all seem... positive.

#40 Posted by MrPraline (21331 posts) -
[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

I'm sure that this is just to pacify the masses who are most upset about the shooting, so that the aministration can look like it's doing something, without actually doing something. And without pissing off most gun owners.

I'm sure that Obama would rather be deaing with that other fun situation, you know, the debt ceiling and sequester.

nocoolnamejim
Hah. How much has the media been covering the idea of a one trillion dollar coin over there? Read a few articles about it on zerohedge. Such silliness.

Obama ruled out that idea a couple of days ago. Said there was "no magic button solution" or something like that and then insisted that Congress raise the debt ceiling because "the United States is not a deadbeat nation" and "the full faith and credit of the United States is not a bargaining chip to achieve political aims" and "we pay our bills that we have already racked up".

Thanks. Have to agree with Obama on that one (the trillion dollar coin).
#41 Posted by Yusuke420 (2770 posts) -

[QUOTE="JML897"]

[QUOTE="-RocBoys9489-"]Seems pretty fair, just don't mess w/ my 2nd amendment because of 2 psycho douchebags that had to shoot up places last year. I have a better chance of getting killed by so many other things, god damn fear culture!-RocBoys9489-

2? In what country?

James Holmes and w/ever the Sandy guy's name is. Honestly, if Obama were smart, he would propose legislation where it makes it illegal for the media to say the name/show pics of whoever committed the shootings. Fame is what drives these guys, it worked when TV stopped showing streakers at sports games. The # of cases went way down.

Fame might have been an influnece in the James Holmes situation, but I'm pretty sure the other guy was just focused on taking as many people with him as he could. Kinda hard to enjoy being famous when you put a bullet in your brain.

#42 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -

[QUOTE="-RocBoys9489-"]Honestly, if Obama were smart, he would propose legislation where it makes it illegal for the media to say the name/show pics of whoever committed the shootings. JML897

And infringe on their first amendment rights? You're all about the second amendment but not the first one huh?

Ehhhh it's more of a gray area and not so black and white. The media still can't say WHATEVER they want.
#43 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

Republicans have consistently painted Presidential Executive orders as tyrannical laws outside the bounds of Congress but in reality he can only pass directives into how the federal agencies operate. i.e. Obama could re-schedule Marijuana on the FDA scale or not fund prosecutions in federal court but he can't legalize it.

So today he passed 23 Executive orders on gun control that Conservative opponents of Obama have called him a dictator, a tyrant, imperial, for proposing executive actions he believes would help prevent gun violence. But all these "orders" hardly change anything monumental on Guns and really affect the bureaucracy side of background checks.

While I'm personally against gun control at a federal level immediately after a tragedy, a lot of these executive orders are just plain common sense. Unfortunately they don't seem to do a whole lot in preventing gun tragedies but they're certainly not the tyrannical crusade that republicans are painting.

Here's a quick summary of them, Actual orders can be read: here.

1. Make federal info easier to obtain for background checks
2. Address Health insurance data that prevents info from being available in background checks
3. Give incentives for states that share background info
4. Direct Attorney General to double check individuals that are banned from owning guns.
5. "Propose" a law for cops to run background checks on people returning guns.
6. Publish an ATF letter for how to run background checks.
7. Launch a responsible gun ownership Campaign
8. Review safety standards for gun locks and safes.
9. Require Federal law enforcement (FBI, CIA, etc) to trace guns recovered.
10. Require Release of DOJ reports on lost/stolen guns to law enforcement
11. Nominate an ATF director.
12. Provide law enforcement, first responders and school officials with training for gun situations
13. Maximize eforcement efforts to prevent gun violence (pretty vague)
14. Direct CDC on gun research
15. Promote new gun safety technologies and challenge private sector.
16. Clarify that obamacare doesn't prohibit doctors from asking patients about their guns.
17. Clarify that No federal law prevents doctors from reporting violence to law enforcment.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19. Develop emergency response plans for schools and churches in shootouts.
20. Clarify mental health services provided under Medicaid.
21. Finalize Obamacare regulations for mental health care services
22. Commit to finalizing mental health care regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

Leejjohno

I don't get it. Those things all seem... positive.

It's a leftist plot. Don't let it fool you. Slippery slope to tyranny. This is just to soften up resistance to take away your 2nd Amendment Rights, which Obama is definitely going to do sometime in his 3rd term.
#44 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -

[QUOTE="-RocBoys9489-"][QUOTE="JML897"]

2? In what country?

Yusuke420

James Holmes and w/ever the Sandy guy's name is. Honestly, if Obama were smart, he would propose legislation where it makes it illegal for the media to say the name/show pics of whoever committed the shootings. Fame is what drives these guys, it worked when TV stopped showing streakers at sports games. The # of cases went way down.

Fame might have been an influnece in the James Holmes situation, but I'm pretty sure the other guy was just focused on taking as many people with him as he could. Kinda hard to enjoy being famous when you put a bullet in your brain.

Perhaps, but we'll never know. We can't interview the guy obviously lol
#45 Posted by Ilovegames1992 (14221 posts) -

Leader of the house makes decision, opposition disagrees.

Oh my days!!!

#46 Posted by lamprey263 (26140 posts) -
I'm waiting for a GOP member of Congress to get so opposed to gun control that they declare that the Sandy Hook massacre was an Obama conspiracy to get rid of guns, I mean the Operation Fast and Furious lead to the same thing, wouldn't surprise me if it happened again.
#47 Posted by MrPraline (21331 posts) -
I'm waiting for a GOP member of Congress to get so opposed to gun control that they declare that the Sandy Hook massacre was an Obama conspiracy to get rid of guns, I mean the Operation Fast and Furious lead to the same thing, wouldn't surprise me if it happened again.lamprey263
Obeyme is most likely capable of it. Like F&F. Not convinced Sandy Hook was a false flag, though. There's still random attacks and inexplicable events. One danger of being more open to alternative theories is that everything could eventually seem as being a set up.
#48 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -
[QUOTE="lamprey263"]I'm waiting for a GOP member of Congress to get so opposed to gun control that they declare that the Sandy Hook massacre was an Obama conspiracy to get rid of guns, I mean the Operation Fast and Furious lead to the same thing, wouldn't surprise me if it happened again.MrPraline
Obeyme is most likely capable of it. Like F&F. Not convinced Sandy Hook was a false flag, though. There's still random attacks and inexplicable events. One danger of being more open to alternative theories is that everything could eventually seem as being a set up.

:lol: You guys cwack me up
#49 Posted by MrPraline (21331 posts) -
[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="lamprey263"]I'm waiting for a GOP member of Congress to get so opposed to gun control that they declare that the Sandy Hook massacre was an Obama conspiracy to get rid of guns, I mean the Operation Fast and Furious lead to the same thing, wouldn't surprise me if it happened again.-RocBoys9489-
Obeyme is most likely capable of it. Like F&F. Not convinced Sandy Hook was a false flag, though. There's still random attacks and inexplicable events. One danger of being more open to alternative theories is that everything could eventually seem as being a set up.

:lol: You guys cwack me up

To be honest, one thing that really bothers me about Sandy Hook (and the Sikh Temple thing too) is the reported on second shooter that always seems to disappear from the news after a few hours. Who knows though.
#50 Posted by Aljosa23 (26215 posts) -

To be honest, one thing that really bothers me about Sandy Hook (and the Sikh Temple thing too) is the reported on second shooter that always seems to disappear from the news after a few hours. Who knows though.MrPraline
Probably because there is no second shooter. In chaotic events like that eye witness reports aren't always accurate, even more so in the Aurora theatre shooting where it's a dark movie theatre with the patrons in disguises.