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

Lol, except what I said is different and true. The fear is misplaced and the priority of taking action by the President is disproportionate when compared to greater threats..

 

http://www.news-medical.net/news/20...sk-of-death-and-firearm-related-violence.aspx

 

What greater threats? The collapse of the Eurozone? The provenance of the War on Drugs?

if you feel so strongly this way, why are you here defending this issue by skirting around it?

as for you replying to yourself---

 

Misplaced fear and not a high priority? There are 32,000 gun deaths in the United States every year. 15 of the 25 worst mass shootings in the last 50 years took place in the United States (Finland is second, with two). Of the 11 deadliest shootings in the US, five have happened from 2007 onward. The U.S. averages 87 gun deaths each day as a function of gun violence, with an average of 183 injured, according to the University of Chicago Crime Lab and the Centers for Disease Control. The crime lab’s research estimates the annual cost of gun violence to society at $100 billion. The number of gun-related deaths in the U.S. since the deadly shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012, has gone beyond 1,000.

This isn't "misplaced fear." And it should be a priority.

 

Mass shooting deaths over the last 10 years is less than lightning strikes, so imagine so...but that is where the publics hysteria is. That is the springboard into the pool with your imaginary sharks displaced fear. There will always be unfortunate lives lost, but the cost benefit is moved by home defense, hunting, and the simple right to own

Another attempt of control and take away. When will it stop? Will this perverted ideology know no bounds?

I'll be right behind you..

I don't think you can go far in school or life with that attitude.

I think car negligence, o yea..I did use that phrase- take it,....the irresponsible use of speed, and/or use of alcohol at over 3 times that number is a greater concern and again if I felt the need to limit and ban something, any person of rational mind and logic would start there. Obama has the power. Start a limit of purchase and/ or ban on alcohol. Appoint a panel to study this issue, mandate vehicles must no long be capable of speed in excess of 55 mph, ban the manufacture of all sports cars with high capacity acceleration. What is the rationale with 400 horsepower? Give more credits on Prius type vehicles, impose greater tax on vehicles with faster acceleration.
These things are very quite do-able. Not fantasy bullcrap. You would still have transportation. Any reasonable driver would agree. No.....the take away and ban ideology is not so fun when you start looking at it thru priority and logical glasses is it?

I will also remind you that prioritizing is a good thing, especially when assessing actual threats...which brings us to the I won't kill you but I don't have to save you thing. It's still death. It's still manslaughter. The numbers don't lie. If you really cared about the children, which you don't.,.. It makes sense to prioritize what you would be willing to take away and limit first. 30000 people is a lot, but over 100000 is even more. If I'm doing my math right, we can save much more lives by doing what I suggested. It is not fantasy. It is within executive ability if ordered....I don't believe in limiting and banning with regards to a bill of right any further, but all I ask is to start where it necessitates starting FIRST if you will apply that in the name of saving lives....

 

What is a greater priority? Something that causes over 100,000 deaths which can be acted on.

It is certainly misplaced fear when mass shooting causes less deaths in the last 10 years than lightning strikes.

What should be a higher priority of banning and limiting should be the call. Again, I don't believe in taking things away or limiting, but the call to action needs to be applied to the greater threat to children and adults alike. Otherwise, these actions suspect and spit on the grave of the deceased children.

 

You must have glanced too quickly at the names, that was me responding to ROXTXIA, my evil twin doppelgänger...

 

What greater threat---cardiac arrest? Prescription drug abuse? Do you want a fat tax, and binding DEA regulations? I'm on board with you on that, and it's not like me arguing for stricter gun laws disallows me from arguing for those other things (in fact it sharpens my ability to do so).

 

This argument makes no sense. Essentially, if you applied it to government, as I have mentioned countless times, you couldn't work to solve one issue until you solved every issue.

Heart disease is the leading cause of death in America, should we apply a salt tax, and sugar tax? Wait, you mean to say we can fight for that and greater gun regulation? Why Mayor Bloomberg and governor Cuomo, that is simply scandalous!

The ironic thing is the Obama administration is actually doing this, emphasizing my point---

http://www.dailytech.com/Obama+Intr...edit+Help+AdvancedTech+Autos/article24192.htm

EVs are by nature slower, so yay for the good guys!

 

Great post, and thank you for it.
(1) If this is true, I have simply not met any of them, even in San Francisco. I believe that they exist, but their numbers are small. I would wager more Americans seek fully automatic weapons than want to abolish the 2nd Amendment. I really think the threat to the 2nd is truly an NRA-created boogeyman that r****ds our discussion.
(2) Thanks, and makes some sense. Fragmentation is also especially deadly when in the wrong hands though, correct? For the same reasons of "stopping power," meaning "killing power" to the deranged gunman?
(3) I hear you. 12 gauge would be my home defense choice, but I had a sawed-off 20 gauge for a long time that made me feel pretty secure. (It was sawed off past the legal limit, FWIW, so I have violated gun laws in past lives.)
(4) I could probably agree to something like that. Just closing existing loopholes is more important to me (personally) than the magazine size even.
(5) I get that, and I really appreciate that you're willing to sit here and discuss it. I learn a lot anyway, and sometimes i think we do a better job here (at our best) than our stupid politicians do.

Do keep in mind my bottom line from my previous post. I maintain it's just not a big deal. The "arms" line will move around a little over time, back and forth, but not in any big way. FOX and the NRA and the far left are getting us super stoked up over it because it sells ad time, but meh, not worth all the fuss, truly. I'm as guilty as any, since I keep posting about it!

 

Well no one think of the children?

Empirically, the debate breaks down because of well, facts.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/

 

Sorry, but LULz.

Accidental gunshot injuries of by-standers in North Carolina and Indiana gun shows.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/01/three-wounded-in-accidental-gun-show-shooting/

Still probably less dangerous than playing football, but still funny.

 

I don't find it funny in the least bit, nor does anyone who is frequently around guns. I am exponentially more likely to be hurt from a negligent discharge than I am of a mass shooting.
While the naive anti-gun crowd continues to crow about banning assault weapons that will have little effect on mass shootings, they continue to ignore the issues of morons with guns accidentally hurting or killing people.

 

Aw, #BeNotButthurt (as long as you didn't get birdshot to the backside.)

I'm glad to see you recognize me as not in "the naive anti-gun crowd," since I have definitely posted about "the issues of morons with guns accidentally hurting or killing people." Statistically it's much more likely that you or I will be hurt in such a way.

But good luck getting the NRA to let researchers actually collect good data on the issue or suggest ways or rectifying it.

Cheers. Sorry you don't find some dark humor in the (now three) major mishaps of the weekend, the weekend to celebrate guns.

 

Thought there was a good point in the opinion piece that Meet the Press used.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/an-infantile-spectacle-86311_Page2.html#ixzz2IXBrn5jW

 

I wasn't implying anyone as the naive anti-gun crowd. I reserve that for the people who know very little about guns and their opinions are formed from reading articles from their favorite biased news site.

That said, I am not one of those who are proponents of the 'wild west gun slinging everyone should be allowed to carry w/out restrictions'. Out of the dozen or so people who I know that have permits to carry, only two of them have any business carrying. Thats not to say the others are reckless and careless, I simply do not have the confidence they will perform well under pressure. I feel anyone who has permits to carry should be forced to renew quarterly, display they can accurately fire their weapons, and continuously practice with their guns. Everyone else needs to keep their guns unloaded and locked up.
If you accidentally discharge your shotgun while opening the case, you have no business carrying in public.
If you accidentally pull the trigger w/out making sure there is not a bullet in the chamber, you have no businesses selling or carrying in public.

Unfortunately, there are many many "responsible" gun owners who fall in this category.

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>In <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Texas">#Texas</a>, we have a gun registry - it is called a phone book! @<a href="https://twitter.com/dougsullivant">dougsullivant</a>: <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23NRA">#NRA</a>; <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23TGDN">#TGDN</a>; <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23TCOT">#TCOT</a>; <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23guns">#guns</a></p>&mdash; Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) <a href="https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/292511987320094720" data-datetime="2013-01-19T06:01:07+00:00">January 19, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

The anti-gun crowd can rejoice in laughter... another "mass" shooting with a military rifle.

http://news.yahoo.com/fire-chief-chaplain-1-5-nm-shooting-victims-235547981.html

 

Seriously? You think because people call for tougher regulations on guns that they find it funny when people die? Murder is hilarious, amiright?