Like a dictator, Obama threatens unprecedented gun control by executive order

If it was only for militia, why did they allow private ownership moments after writing this bill of right? They allowed "the people" to have firearms and there was no requirement of only a well relegated militia. It has been and always will be for the people....the people....

 

Yep. I'd rather not die on my knees. ..

 

That's not the evidence I am referring to. How the founding fathers (the one who wrote the 2nd amendment) executed the 2nd amendment is evidence of what they meant when they wrote the 2nd amendment. You don't get any better evidence then that.

I am. How the founding fathers executed their own legislation as proof of the founding father's meaning of the legislation; Doesn't get more rational then that.

Do you realize you have failed to make a rational argument for your interpretation of the 2nd amendment? Actually you haven't made any argument at all. You stated your interpretation of the 2nd amendment and haven't countered the evidence that contradicts your view.

 

Goodnight everyone. Tomorrow, we will wake up to a new day. We will also wake up and see the President of the United States for the next 4 years will be Barack Obama.

Sweet dreams to all my friends on the Right.

 

You are comparing a US president who is trying to prevent further killings of school kids to two of the most ferocious dictators in the history of human civilization who were responsible for tens of millions of deaths? Nice.

 

Chris Rock may be on to something here.

 

I'm a homeowner. I actually agree...no home, no firearms. See not too hard when you come together. Also to promote education, only those with a college degree can purchase a firearm....you want a gun, get a degree. . .admit it, that would be real. Apartment invasions may go up, but we will have rocketsjudoka to explain his fuzzy math on why it's not due to threat of firearm defense, so we are all good. Everybody happy.

 

I woke up and haven't seen him yet around the house, but please take my dog..i just seen him. he is a mixed breed and he is lazy, incompetent, and annoying.

 

Bigtexx, don't worry. The results of the Obama gun violence iniative will probably be something like this. The NRA/Grand Old Tea Party will propose limiting the magazines capacity on assault weapons to 1,000 bullets per clip. Obama will win a concession of 950 per clip. It will then be proclaimed a great accomplishment in preventing massacres, reluctantly conceded to, but necessary because you have to compromise to accomplish things.

After this gun nuts will froth at the mouth that this seals their future inability to shoot deer, defend their homes. take on UN black helicopters and prevent the US
state from stealing their money by the income tax.

 

No, how about you don't forget that, since those have nothing to do with gun violence. Getting guns off of the street has the purpose of reducing gun violence, and when it also reduces armed robberies and massacres that's fantastic.

Those are the statistics that were thrown in the article that have nothing to do with gun control.

 

You do understand that Obama' executive order wouldn't negate the second amendment, right? Why are you talking about completely negating the second amendment?

People could still have and carry firearms. The executive order would not... I repeat WOULD NOT stop people from having guns. It wouldn't make it illegal to buy new guns, and ammo.

It doesn't negate the second amendment.

 

Wow, I would sign that deal and pretty much let people own whatever they wanted, but it would *never* get through our political system. You have the Santorums of the world already attacking the idea of higher education as something worthwhile.

Here's an honest political question, and I know we have NRA supporters here in the thread. Why does the 2nd amendment lead to lobbying activities that prevent any agency from collecting data on gun deaths or gun violence (as I understand it, we currently have laws against such, where the CDC can't even study the issue at all)?

That's arguably my least favorite item in the whole mess. If you don't even want to know the facts, and the data -- moreover you don't want *anybody* to know the facts and the data -- you (NRA) have lost a big part of the philosophical battle for this heart and mind.

I cannot find the link, but was listening to a long Fresh Air interviewer with a guy who's written a book on all the pro-gun legislation that's been passed over the last 20 years.

 

I saw one a movie called "sh-theads who compare reasonable firearm restrictions to the Holocaust"

It's a pretty awful movie.

 

These comparisons to Nazi germany "gun laws" are the largest fail in the history of the internet. Seriously.

How about you just compare minor gun restrictions to pretty much every democracy currently on earth except ours. That would be a sensible start, if you want to make a comparison. Pol Pot and Hitler: um, not so much.

Police in the UK needed to fire a total of 84 bullets last year... total. So let's see if the UK is suffering in totalitarian state and what we might learn from them.

 

That is a fine wonderful romantic notion but having little bearing on practicality. Even with Nazi Germany the path to avoid dictatorship in modern societies is through political action not taking up small arms. In fact looking at places like Northern Ireland armed factions of freedom fighters actually make things worse. The Republicans (Irish not American) arm themselves to fight British oppression and the pro-British militias arm themselves to fight Catholic oppression and next thing you have is gun battles in the streets of Belfast.

Really? As someone who knows military history you should know that the British army wasn't mechanized or industrialized because such things didn't exist. They were armed with muzzle loading rifles and cannons and relied on sailing ships that took more than a month to get from England to the US. The Colonists were also armed muzzle loading rifles and cannons. There were no technological advantages. Now compare that to the current day where militaries have attack helicopters, fighter bombers and most importantly rapid and sophisticated logistics and match that up against some angry civilians armed with small arms.

Just to remind you again if you think that small arms are a match to even a modern police force, let alone a military, consider how well things worked out for the Branch Davidians or MOVE.

You are one of the guys who keep on bringing up dictatorship. Really how can Obama be both simultaneously lazy and incompetent yet also engineer a dictatorship out of a democratic republic with checks and balances?

Do you personally actually believe that Obama is on the road to dictatorship.

Since you cited fuzzy math you still have not shown the exact causal link or even a consistent correlation between total crime and gun ownership. As I noted while in some places with stricter gun laws you see more crime but in many places with stricter gun laws and less gun ownership per capita you see less.

As far as guns making it easier to defend yourself yes they do but one thing that I emphasize in self-defense is that guns are not an end all of self-defense. Guns can be taken away from you and used against you. Further guns also lead to accidents. The week before Sandyhook a 2 year old was killed in Minneapolis when his 4 year old brother got hold of their father's gun, a gun that was specifically bought for self-defense.

As far as guns saving a lot of lives I am sure they have but I would like to see a stat between how many people have had their lives saved by guns versus how many have been victimized by guns. I am pretty sure for every story of a woman saving her family with a gun at least five stories of guns used for evil can be brought up.

 

Police state:
<iframe frameborder="0" width="480" height="360" src="http://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/x98buh"></iframe><br /><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x98buh_benny-hill-police-teaser-hq_shortfilms" target="_blank">Benny Hill - Police (Teaser) HQ</a> <i>by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/STARDUST72" target="_blank">STARDUST72</a></i>

 

You would think these guys had never heard of Godwin's law.

 

Just to add I haven't advocated absolute ban on guns. Universal background checks and limitations on the type of magazines and weapons though seems more than reasonable. What you hear though from the NRA et al though is demanding that no changes be made and in many cases for even more availability of weapons.

 

I have some . . .very small . . .. issues with gun control
but
I do not like the way this is being brought about
I think we need follow the process
If the process is broken then fix the process.


There is always a good reason to do the wrong thing.

I worry about the abuses of this new found power
History has shown . . once power is obtained it is rarely relinquished.
So, I worry what the NEXT ISSUE this power will be used on . . .

Rocket River