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

We already have responsible gun regulation. If anything, need more car regulation or greater alcohol regulation. Or eating regulation

 

precisely.

 

poor liltexxx


Republicans Extinguish Right-Wing’s Calls To Impeach Obama

Republicans have characterized Obama’s executive actions preventing gun violence as “a power grab,”, pledged to introduce legislation nullifying his orders, and even floatedimpeaching the President for allegedly overstepping his Constitutional powers.

On Wednesday night, former Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey offered a reality check for alarmed conservatives. Appearing on Fox News’ Hannity, Mukasey clarified that no court would find Obama’s gun violence prevention initiatives unconstitutional:

MUKASEY: I don’t think it’s unconstitutional in the sense that I don’t think it’s something you could get a court to find unconstitutional. We could have a debate about whether it’s consistent with the constitution or not, but there is a limited number of things that will get you into court to have that decided, and I don’t think any of the things you’ve enumerated are among them.

Reagan’s solicitor general Charles Fried also poured cold water on GOP comparisons of Obama to dictators and tyrants, noting many of the provisions are calls to action or carry out existing law: “These are either standard exercises of presidential power, or even more benignly, standard examples of the power of the president to exhort the public or state officials to be aware of certain problems and to address them,” he said.

 

edit. nm wrong thread.

 

Except there isn't some big lobbying group though handcuffing the Federal enforcement agency in charge of guns from actually enforcing those regulations. Anyway as noted cars, alcohol and food are very regulated.

 

You and Batman would have loved Hitler.

 

Obama = Hitler? Elaborate...

 

That comment had nothing to do with comparing Obama to Hitler.

It had to do with the fact that both posters like the idea of being ruled by decree.

 

Comparing Obama to Hitler is hitting MEME status now . . .

Rocket River

 

By the way, there's nothing unprecedented or dictatorial about the Exec Orders.

 

If that is true, Guns are very regulated as well. Anyone can grab an alcohol provided they are just of age, get a car,...and commit maximum carnage. Where is the control? Where is the limits to combine this? Where is the cry to takeaway? Where is the demand to limit speed abilities of vehicles? Where is the limit to purchase alcohol?

 

Or if a succeeding, opposite party President overrides executive orders...

 

The sooner people realize arguing for regulation in other fields is a red herring, the better the dialogue will be.

If you can argue how regulating weapons precludes further regulation in these fields, please do so.

Otherwise, your argument amounts to a temper tantrum---"it not fair!"

 

Sigh..
Let me know when guns have to be registered, users licensed, owners required to carry insurance and restricter plates required to limit their power.

 

It's right there with the NRA demand that each weapon require a fingerprint ID so only the rightful owner could fire the weapon.

 

The idea to take away and impose greater control due to deaths in one area and not in another makes zero sense, especially when the threat to the public is greater in the other area.

 

In other words, you dont want to do anything from car negligence and alcohol abuse which is a greater threat to the public and children. You would not want any tightening of rules and control the government can impose to counter the magnitude of the preventable deaths to our children on the highways. That is no priority and no logic if you care about children's lives...

If you want to prioritize actual threats with logic you would understand.

 

Doing something in one field does not preclude action in another. Using your chain of logic, no one would do anything without doing everything. That's just a nonsensical and impractical argument that disguises the fact that you don't have any substantiated arguments to deploy.

 

Who said you can't ask for greater regulation on these threats and gun violence at the same time?

In fact, a person who would ask for more regulation on guns is probably the same person asking for more traffic regulations, more regulations on corporations, and more regulations on alcohol.

Listen to yourself. Car negligence?

 

Return sigh....Let me know when car speed peaks at 55mph, that limits on alcohol purchased or explicit bans on alcohol is implemented, and that DWI one strike and your out laws are passed.