BREAKING: King Obama to wave his scepter and create new gun purchase background checks

[JimBowie1958]

Lets check the NRA. We don't need firearms in this country unless it's to protect us from people WITH firearms, it's a circular argument. I think we should restrict all ownership or sales of firearms to flintlocks or muzzle loaders, because, the 2nd Amendment was written in and of that technology/era. Nothing in time that that applies modern guns and firepower, it's outside the meaning of the second amendment. I doubt Jefferson could realize this would apply to weapons like fully auto AR 15s with huge amount of rounds available to criminals or mentally ill, the NRA is living in a fantasy world of enablers.

Muzzleloader aren't even classified as firearms, so there goes that argument.

Really? Jefferson and his era knew flintlocks, muzzleloaders as current technology and were EXACTLY the arms referred to in "the Right to bare arms". Not the latest 4giga round techno semi auto deleted plutonium anti tank pistol . Please, imagine a mass shooting with someone with a flintlock rifle?

And those were the top gun tech of his time, dooofus

 

[PredFan]

Can I get one of those bazillion round anti tank pistols with the depleted uranium hollow point bullets guaranteed to pierce police issue bullet proof vests? Because we NEED that because it's in the constitution, it's not like we are abusing it or anything, it's in the constitution and all that. Yeah.

Stupid statements don't help your cause.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

How many of those unconstitutional acts were later overturned by the courts or by Congress? Answer: Almost all of them.

Obama's violations of the Constitution get smacked down by the courts in due time. It will just add another epic fail in a long line of failures and lies that made up his two terms in office.

No Reagan just answered "I don't remember" under oath. He lied in other words. 138 of his administration were indicted with many convictions of his inner circle. He was the most corrupt criminal individual to hold high office ever.

Yet you weirdos defend him.

Look, we know all of you libs are embarrassed by the current administration. You should be, but you can't seem to acknowledge it and just admit you screwed up beyond belief. Pointing fingers at past administrations is bad form, and you know that too! Suck it up and admit he is a walking, talking disaster and we can move on! You can even join in on the fun!

You are the only one 'embarrassed'. Cons live in this self-created, self-perpetuating bubble where it doesn't matter what the president does, it is the worst thing anyone has ever done since the beginning of time. LOL You don't live in reality.

And you turn cartwheels and bend over backwards to try to defend Reagan who was a career criminal.

Just as with the birther movement the attempt to 'impeach' the current president is nothing more than a pipe dream of the angry uneducated teabagger cohort.

OK. You are flirting with the "too stupid to converse with" line. Go find some intellect or we are done.

Please Barney Fife, you arguing intellect is like Sarah Palin arguing coherence. The two things don't go together. Its simple, google 'indictments under Ronal Reagan administration'. Then get to educating yourself.

I know this will destroy one of your false gods but reality is so much better than your fantasy world.

So what do criminals in his administration have to do with him personally?

Did you ever stop to think that at least the Republicans in Congress and the Justice Department didn't stonewall every investigation because of petty politics?

If anyone in the Obama administration strangled a puppy on live national TV, they would make up some excuse for it and nothing would be done.

 

[aris2chat]

all to way to the shoulder?

 

[CowboyTed]

Something does need to be done! I believe it would also be a good idea to fund mental health better.

Agree with you on Mental Health...

But reasonable gun control should be considered... Look at Sandy Hook, the mother was armed to the teeth with a son who had mental problems and she did not lock her guns... That's just neglect...

Yes the son should have got help but having guns freely available was just plain stupid... If you look after your gun(s) and treat them with respect then no problem.. neglect is a problem with unrestricted access...

 

[Dana7360]

We knew this would be coming.

Obama to announce new executive action on guns

CNN)President Barack Obama is expected to announce in the coming days a new executive action with the goal of expanding background checks on gun sales, people familiar with White House planning said.

Described as "imminent," the set of executive actions would fulfill a promise by the President to take further unilateral steps the White House says could help curb gun deaths.

Plans for the action are not yet complete, and those familiar with the process warn that unforeseen circumstances could delay an announcement. But gun control advocates are expecting the new actions to be revealed next week, ahead of Obama's annual State of the Union address, set for January 12.

The White House wouldn't comment directly on the exact timing or content of Obama's executive orders. White House spokesman Eric Schultz said that the President expected a set of recommendations on unilateral action to arrive at the beginning of the year.

He said Obama was "expressing urgency" for a list of steps he can take on his own after high-profile incidents of gun violence at the end of this year.

"It is complicated. That's why it's taken some time for our policy folks, our lawyers, and our expects to work through this and see what's possible," Schultz said.

Gun control advocates and White House officials say the focus remains on the so-called "gun show loophole," which allows certain sellers of guns -- at gun shows and elsewhere -- to avoid conducting background checks before making sales.

Months after the Newtown, Connecticut elementary school massacre that claimed 26 victims, the then-Democratic majority Senate rejected a similar proposal.

Congress would still need to act in order to make background checks fully universal. But advocates and administration lawyers have struck upon a provision in the law that could allow for Obama to expand the background check requirement to additional sellers.

Federal law currently requires all individuals "engaged in the business" of selling guns to obtain a license and conduct background checks on buyers. But others who only make occasional sales or are selling firearms from a personal collection are exempted from the background check requirement.

Gun control advocates say Obama could take action himself by issuing a regulation that provides expanded guidance on who falls under the "in the business" standard.

One group, the Michael Bloomberg-helmed Everytown for Gun Safety, has provided recommendations to the White House that include creating a test for assessing who must become licensed to continue selling guns. Factors would include volume and speed of sales, and whether or not the seller relies on advertising to sell guns.

The group also recommended Obama define a gun in a "personal collection" as having been in the seller's possession for at least a year.

Before leaving for his winter vacation in Hawaii, Obama met with Bloomberg at the White House to discuss gun control.

Aside from the background check provision, people familiar with Obama's plans say his new gun control announcemerent will include new funding for government agencies to better enforce existing gun laws.



Promoted Stories

Obama to announce new executive action on guns - CNNPolitics.com

Good.

The republicans won't do anything to make sure that the loopholes are closed in the background checks.

Someone has to do it.

Here in my state we the voters did it. It was on the ballot a year or so ago and it passed with a good majority, 59.3% voted to close those loopholes. Only 40% voted to keep them.

The people of our nation want better background checks. We are tired of the wrong people being able to buy a gun.

 

[aris2chat]

Something does need to be done! I believe it would also be a good idea to fund mental health better.

Agree with you on Mental Health...

But reasonable gun control should be considered... Look at Sandy Hook, the mother was armed to the teeth with a son who had mental problems and she did not lock her guns... That's just neglect...

Yes the son should have got help but having guns freely available was just plain stupid... If you look after your gun(s) and treat them with respect then no problem.. neglect is a problem with unrestricted access...

Most health insurance does cover mental health now, counseling, as well as drug addiction treatment.

 

[Dana7360]

Just what are you hiding?
You will need to take a drug test also now...

Yeah that will work in Chicago with the gangs. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

He is wanting to close the loop hole for gun show dealers...oh my!!!

There is no loophole. Y'all need to stop saying that.

There is a HUGE loophole.

Only licensed dealers have to do the check. Those who aren't licensed don't. They can sell a gun to anyone at any time without any background check.

Then there's online sales and sales through printed media. None of those have to have a background check.

But, if you're right and there is no loophole, what's the problem? If there is no loophole then there is no reason to not want the president to do anything if what he does is useless.

 

[Dana7360]

Since the contract of the Constitution allows for regulation of weapons in the USA, if you don't like the rules, don't buy a weapon...

No, not unless the government is selling or buying the guns with me.

Otherwise they are an unwanted and intrusive third party.

i am unaware of the part the Constitution that calls for regulating firearms

And no where in COTUS is anything allowing the government to regulate biological weapons, nuclear weapons or chemical weapons. Or to regulate Marijuana or opium poppies.

Even Saint Ronald understood the need for sane policies on the issue of gun proliferation:

Did Reagan support an assault-weapons ban?

The correct answer to the person you were replying to is:

The Commerce Clause in the constitution. The government clearly has the constitutional right and power to regulate commerce.

When goods or services are exchanged for money, that's commerce.

So the constitution most certainly says the government can regulate gun sales.

Which is why the courts of our nation have upheld gun regulations laws.

 

[Dana7360]

sorry for bad english
why american love to have guns?
are you afraid of something?
isnt modern age? is wild west century?
isnt people civilized?

I don't know about women but most civilized people look at men who have a bunch of guns and immediately thinks, small penis. Everyone knows that those who have a bunch of guns are over compensating for that small penis.

No those people aren't civilized.

 

[Dana7360]

Americans want comprehensive background checks

Congress has been blocking it for four years....let Obama do it

Keep repeating that,its worked so well in the past,everytime attempts are like this are made ,you clowns get your ass handed to you in elections from towns ,right up to the federal level,so ya have at it.

Got that wrong.

The loopholes were closed in my state. No politician lost their job.

That's because our politicians were too afraid of the nra to do the right thing so the people of my state did it by, petition and ballot initiative.

The initiative passed with 59.3% voting for it and only 40% voting against it.

So that shows that people do want that loophole closed. It's just that too many politicians have been blackmailed by the nra and gun nuts to do it.

I happily signed that petition to help get it on the ballot. I very happily voted in the majority for it when the election happened. I celebrated when the results were announced.

 

[skookerasbil]

Watch the January gun sales!!!


[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/obamagunsalesmanoftheyearfirearmssalesmanofthecenturysadhillnews1.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[IsaacNewton]

No Reagan just answered "I don't remember" under oath. He lied in other words. 138 of his administration were indicted with many convictions of his inner circle. He was the most corrupt criminal individual to hold high office ever.

Yet you weirdos defend him.

Look, we know all of you libs are embarrassed by the current administration. You should be, but you can't seem to acknowledge it and just admit you screwed up beyond belief. Pointing fingers at past administrations is bad form, and you know that too! Suck it up and admit he is a walking, talking disaster and we can move on! You can even join in on the fun!

You are the only one 'embarrassed'. Cons live in this self-created, self-perpetuating bubble where it doesn't matter what the president does, it is the worst thing anyone has ever done since the beginning of time. LOL You don't live in reality.

And you turn cartwheels and bend over backwards to try to defend Reagan who was a career criminal.

Just as with the birther movement the attempt to 'impeach' the current president is nothing more than a pipe dream of the angry uneducated teabagger cohort.

OK. You are flirting with the "too stupid to converse with" line. Go find some intellect or we are done.

Please Barney Fife, you arguing intellect is like Sarah Palin arguing coherence. The two things don't go together. Its simple, google 'indictments under Ronal Reagan administration'. Then get to educating yourself.

I know this will destroy one of your false gods but reality is so much better than your fantasy world.

So what do criminals in his administration have to do with him personally?

Did you ever stop to think that at least the Republicans in Congress and the Justice Department didn't stonewall every investigation because of petty politics?

If anyone in the Obama administration strangled a puppy on live national TV, they would make up some excuse for it and nothing would be done.

You are just naïve to a stunning level. You do anything and everything to defend that worthless criminal Reagan and justify his treason.

He was a traitor and used the Constitution as toilet paper. The fact that you or anyone else would defend him speaks volumes about you. Your outrage about the current president is fake crap.

Reagan is a criminal and committed high crimes.

 

[Moonglow]

No Reagan just answered "I don't remember" under oath. He lied in other words. 138 of his administration were indicted with many convictions of his inner circle. He was the most corrupt criminal individual to hold high office ever.

Yet you weirdos defend him.

Look, we know all of you libs are embarrassed by the current administration. You should be, but you can't seem to acknowledge it and just admit you screwed up beyond belief. Pointing fingers at past administrations is bad form, and you know that too! Suck it up and admit he is a walking, talking disaster and we can move on! You can even join in on the fun!

You are the only one 'embarrassed'. Cons live in this self-created, self-perpetuating bubble where it doesn't matter what the president does, it is the worst thing anyone has ever done since the beginning of time. LOL You don't live in reality.

And you turn cartwheels and bend over backwards to try to defend Reagan who was a career criminal.

Just as with the birther movement the attempt to 'impeach' the current president is nothing more than a pipe dream of the angry uneducated teabagger cohort.

OK. You are flirting with the "too stupid to converse with" line. Go find some intellect or we are done.

Please Barney Fife, you arguing intellect is like Sarah Palin arguing coherence. The two things don't go together. Its simple, google 'indictments under Ronal Reagan administration'. Then get to educating yourself.

I know this will destroy one of your false gods but reality is so much better than your fantasy world.

So what do criminals in his administration have to do with him personally?

Did you ever stop to think that at least the Republicans in Congress and the Justice Department didn't stonewall every investigation because of petty politics?

If anyone in the Obama administration strangled a puppy on live national TV, they would make up some excuse for it and nothing would be done.

You damn well know that is a lie...

 

[pwjohn]

We knew this would be coming.

Obama to announce new executive action on guns

CNN)President Barack Obama is expected to announce in the coming days a new executive action with the goal of expanding background checks on gun sales, people familiar with White House planning said.

Described as "imminent," the set of executive actions would fulfill a promise by the President to take further unilateral steps the White House says could help curb gun deaths.

Plans for the action are not yet complete, and those familiar with the process warn that unforeseen circumstances could delay an announcement. But gun control advocates are expecting the new actions to be revealed next week, ahead of Obama's annual State of the Union address, set for January 12.

The White House wouldn't comment directly on the exact timing or content of Obama's executive orders. White House spokesman Eric Schultz said that the President expected a set of recommendations on unilateral action to arrive at the beginning of the year.

He said Obama was "expressing urgency" for a list of steps he can take on his own after high-profile incidents of gun violence at the end of this year.

"It is complicated. That's why it's taken some time for our policy folks, our lawyers, and our expects to work through this and see what's possible," Schultz said.

Gun control advocates and White House officials say the focus remains on the so-called "gun show loophole," which allows certain sellers of guns -- at gun shows and elsewhere -- to avoid conducting background checks before making sales.

Months after the Newtown, Connecticut elementary school massacre that claimed 26 victims, the then-Democratic majority Senate rejected a similar proposal.

Congress would still need to act in order to make background checks fully universal. But advocates and administration lawyers have struck upon a provision in the law that could allow for Obama to expand the background check requirement to additional sellers.

Federal law currently requires all individuals "engaged in the business" of selling guns to obtain a license and conduct background checks on buyers. But others who only make occasional sales or are selling firearms from a personal collection are exempted from the background check requirement.

Gun control advocates say Obama could take action himself by issuing a regulation that provides expanded guidance on who falls under the "in the business" standard.

One group, the Michael Bloomberg-helmed Everytown for Gun Safety, has provided recommendations to the White House that include creating a test for assessing who must become licensed to continue selling guns. Factors would include volume and speed of sales, and whether or not the seller relies on advertising to sell guns.

The group also recommended Obama define a gun in a "personal collection" as having been in the seller's possession for at least a year.

Before leaving for his winter vacation in Hawaii, Obama met with Bloomberg at the White House to discuss gun control.

Aside from the background check provision, people familiar with Obama's plans say his new gun control announcement will include new funding for government agencies to better enforce existing gun laws.



Promoted Stories

Obama to announce new executive action on guns - CNNPolitics.com

President o butt head should have already done this. Anything to keep you mother butfuckers from killing each other with guns.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Since the contract of the Constitution allows for regulation of weapons in the USA, if you don't like the rules, don't buy a weapon...

No, not unless the government is selling or buying the guns with me.

Otherwise they are an unwanted and intrusive third party.

i am unaware of the part the Constitution that calls for regulating firearms

And no where in COTUS is anything allowing the government to regulate biological weapons, nuclear weapons or chemical weapons. Or to regulate Marijuana or opium poppies.

Even Saint Ronald understood the need for sane policies on the issue of gun proliferation:

Did Reagan support an assault-weapons ban?

The correct answer to the person you were replying to is:

The Commerce Clause in the constitution. The government clearly has the constitutional right and power to regulate commerce.

When goods or services are exchanged for money, that's commerce.

So the constitution most certainly says the government can regulate gun sales.

Which is why the courts of our nation have upheld gun regulations laws.

Printz v. United States restricted congressional legislative authority by striking down the many provisions of the brady handgun violence prevention act

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I am a conservative but I cannot imagine why background checks would be wrong when buying weapons. Please enlighten me. It should have been made law by Congress and not an EO.

We already have background checks in place, This is just another attempt to legislate away rights. Criminals don't go through checks.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Just what are you hiding?
You will need to take a drug test also now...

Yeah that will work in Chicago with the gangs. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

He is wanting to close the loop hole for gun show dealers...oh my!!!

There is no loophole. Y'all need to stop saying that.

There is a HUGE loophole.

Only licensed dealers have to do the check. Those who aren't licensed don't. They can sell a gun to anyone at any time without any background check.

Then there's online sales and sales through printed media. None of those have to have a background check.

But, if you're right and there is no loophole, what's the problem? If there is no loophole then there is no reason to not want the president to do anything if what he does is useless.

Right. It's called, "selling private property". It's that whole freedom and liberty thing that Liberaals despise so much.

 

[skookerasbil]

Just what are you hiding?
You will need to take a drug test also now...

Yeah that will work in Chicago with the gangs. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

He is wanting to close the loop hole for gun show dealers...oh my!!!

There is no loophole. Y'all need to stop saying that.

There is a HUGE loophole.

Only licensed dealers have to do the check. Those who aren't licensed don't. They can sell a gun to anyone at any time without any background check.

Then there's online sales and sales through printed media. None of those have to have a background check.

But, if you're right and there is no loophole, what's the problem? If there is no loophole then there is no reason to not want the president to do anything if what he does is useless.

Right. It's called, "selling private property". It's that whole freedom and liberty thing that Liberaals despise so much.

LOL.....they'll come to understand it well when the SHTF and their private property is taken from them like you take candy from a baby!!! Will be on demand educational instruction!!!

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Just what are you hiding?
You will need to take a drug test also now...

Yeah that will work in Chicago with the gangs. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

He is wanting to close the loop hole for gun show dealers...oh my!!!

There is no loophole. Y'all need to stop saying that.

There is a HUGE loophole.

Only licensed dealers have to do the check. Those who aren't licensed don't. They can sell a gun to anyone at any time without any background check.

Then there's online sales and sales through printed media. None of those have to have a background check.

But, if you're right and there is no loophole, what's the problem? If there is no loophole then there is no reason to not want the president to do anything if what he does is useless.

Right. It's called, "selling private property". It's that whole freedom and liberty thing that Liberaals despise so much.

If they don't get their tax revenue Liberals lose their minds.