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

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

Oh you haven't heard about Sandy Hook Truthers? There's always a group of deniers trying to open up a big government conspiracy following a national tragedy.

[QUOTE="MrPraline"]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.Aljosa23

[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.Blue-Sky

Oh you haven't heard about Sandy Hook Truthers? There's always a group of deniers trying to open up a big government conspiracy following a national tragedy.

Yeah, I'm against an "assault weapons" ban and such (not really worried about one actually getting passed, either), but those things hardly strike me as problematic. Just getting internal bureaucratic sh!t in order.

The only thing I didnt like is that he surrounded himself with children when making this announcement. That's just cheesy pandering. Come on, we're bigger than that. But I dont have a problem with most of the orders.

The only thing I didnt like is that he surrounded himself with children when making this announcement. That's just cheesy pandering. Come on, we're bigger than that. But I dont have a problem with most of the orders.

sonicare

Yeah, I'm against an "assault weapons" ban and such (not really worried about one actually getting passed, either), but those things hardly strike me as problematic. Just getting internal bureaucratic sh!t in order.

coolbeans90

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

The only thing I didnt like is that he surrounded himself with children when making this announcement. That's just cheesy pandering. Come on, we're bigger than that. But I dont have a problem with most of the orders.

Ace6301

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Yeah, I'm against an "assault weapons" ban and such (not really worried about one actually getting passed, either), but those things hardly strike me as problematic. Just getting internal bureaucratic sh!t in order.

nocoolnamejim

We need kraychik for this

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Yeah, I'm against an "assault weapons" ban and such (not really worried about one actually getting passed, either), but those things hardly strike me as problematic. Just getting internal bureaucratic sh!t in order.

coolbeans90

We need kraychik for this

[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? Ace6301

Then that directive discourages people from returning guns. You can't argue your way around that.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="MrPraline"]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

Sikh Temple didn't just have a second shooter. It had multiple reports of "several men in black tactical gear" doing the shooting. In fact, that was the first report out on local TV stations in the area. Those got pulled real quick once the big networks got there. There were at least 2 people who were in the temple interviewed who said that.

The only thing I didnt like is that he surrounded himself with children when making this announcement. That's just cheesy pandering. Come on, we're bigger than that. But I dont have a problem with most of the orders.

sonicare

It's not just cheesy pandering, it's disgusting. Truly dispicable. That should tell you something about him. Read into his orders.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][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? hartsickdiscipl

Then that directive discourages people from returning guns. You can't argue your way around that.

That seems pretty fair. Some are vague but I'm sure in the actual situation it'll be obvious to find out.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] 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. Ace6301

Then that directive discourages people from returning guns. You can't argue your way around that.

We'll see.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Then that directive discourages people from returning guns. You can't argue your way around that.

hartsickdiscipl

We'll see.

Won't do a thing. They are either incredibly vague or already laws.

He just wants to make it seem like he is doing something. Changes nothing.

Here is a real, Constitutional analysis of what happened-

http://www.infowars.com/infowars-analysis-of-obamas-war-on-guns/

Won't do a thing. They are either incredibly vague or already laws.

He just wants to make it seem like he is doing something. Changes nothing.

KC_Hokie

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Won't do a thing. They are either incredibly vague or already laws.

He just wants to make it seem like he is doing something. Changes nothing.

Ace6301

Won't do a thing. They are either incredibly vague or already laws.

He just wants to make it seem like he is doing something. Changes nothing.

KC_Hokie

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Won't do a thing. They are either incredibly vague or already laws.

He just wants to make it seem like he is doing something. Changes nothing.

Serraph105

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Won't do a thing. They are either incredibly vague or already laws.

He just wants to make it seem like he is doing something. Changes nothing.

Serraph105

[QUOTE="Serraph105"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Won't do a thing. They are either incredibly vague or already laws.

He just wants to make it seem like he is doing something. Changes nothing.

KC_Hokie

Liberals don't want real solutions. They just want more control. How they continue to deny this is beyond me. It must be some type of disease.

Political pragmatism wins out again....

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Serraph105"] So republicans will be cool with it, but pretend it's tyranny. Meanwhile democrats will make fun of republicans for being moronic, and generally be disappointed with the president. What else is new? hartsickdiscipl

Liberals don't want real solutions. They just want more control. How they continue to deny this is beyond me. It must be some type of disease.

Political pragmatism wins out again....

Lotus-Edge

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Serraph105"] So republicans will be cool with it, but pretend it's tyranny. Meanwhile democrats will make fun of republicans for being moronic, and generally be disappointed with the president. What else is new? hartsickdiscipl

Liberals don't want real solutions. They just want more control. How they continue to deny this is beyond me. It must be some type of disease.

Here is a real, Constitutional analysis of what happened-

http://www.infowars.com/infowars-analysis-of-obamas-war-on-guns/

hartsickdiscipl

Lol.

Obama is fantastic at political theater. When you listen to the guy talk he does make you feel better somehow. But then you read the details of his plans they are a joke and terribly ineffective.

KC_Hokie

Obama wants this country to be a police state, and for the legislative branch to not exist.Laihendi

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Obama is fantastic at political theater. When you listen to the guy talk he does make you feel better somehow. But then you read the details of his plans they are a joke and terribly ineffective.

Lotus-Edge

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Here is a real, Constitutional analysis of what happened-

http://www.infowars.com/infowars-analysis-of-obamas-war-on-guns/

Lotus-Edge

Lol.

Keep laughing scum. You and the rest of your morally bankrupt kind will regret your blindness soon.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Obama wants this country to be a police state, and for the legislative branch to not exist.DroidPhysX

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]Obama wants this country to be a police state, and for the legislative branch to not exist.Laihendi

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]Obama wants this country to be a police state, and for the legislative branch to not exist.Laihendi

[QUOTE="Lotus-Edge"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Here is a real, Constitutional analysis of what happened-

http://www.infowars.com/infowars-analysis-of-obamas-war-on-guns/

hartsickdiscipl

Lol.

Keep laughing scum. You and the rest of your morally bankrupt kind will regret your blindness soon.

Keep laughing scum. You and the rest of your morally bankrupt kind will regret your blindness soon.

hartsickdiscipl

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Rich3232"] Uhhh, it was the NRA that brought up the idea of armed guards in schools. Rich3232

The way these people act makes me wonder how I have lived my entire life without having even fired a gun. I guess I'd behave this way if someone tried to take video games away though. It'll be interesting to see how the studies for violence in video games turn out. Let's just hope they aren't as corrupt as the ones that caused hemp to become outlawed.