Obama Bin Stalin threatens EO on gun grab

[catzmeow]

Fair question to you catz. Would it not been more cohesive for a divided nation to first try legislation before going for the EO on such a divisive issue?

I suspect that Obama's EO will deal specifically with the federal law enforcement agencies and will address fairly non-offensive loopholes that don't pose a threat to the 2nd amendment.

In other words, he will go through the motions of action without making major, sweeping changes. In that way, he can be responsive to the current events of the day without distracting from more pressing concerns, like the fiscal cliff.

I would say you are correct. But what about going for legislation first. I know it likely would go nowhere but what would the harm have been.

Look at the division here. Imagine it nationwide.

Which do you think should be his first priority legislatively? Gun laws or the budget?

I like it when politicians go through the motions of being responsive to their constituency without doing much. The less they do, in fact, the better.

 

[Ernie S.]

If they are unconstitutional, why haven't they been challenged in court and overturned? That's the litmus test.

Actually, 2 have been overturned by SCOTUS. Interestingly, both were from Democrat Presidents. FDR's order that resulted in Japanese Americans being held in internment camps was the first. The second was a Clinton order that refused government contracts to any company that had strike breakers on payroll.

C_K's claim, I think, was that several of Obama's actions as president were unconstitutional.

And I tend to agree, then you weren't real happy with a lot Bush did, were you?

 

[beretta304]

I suspect that Obama's EO will deal specifically with the federal law enforcement agencies and will address fairly non-offensive loopholes that don't pose a threat to the 2nd amendment.

In other words, he will go through the motions of action without making major, sweeping changes. In that way, he can be responsive to the current events of the day without distracting from more pressing concerns, like the fiscal cliff.

I would say you are correct. But what about going for legislation first. I know it likely would go nowhere but what would the harm have been.

Look at the division here. Imagine it nationwide.

Which do you think should be his first priority legislatively? Gun laws or the budget?

I like it when politicians go through the motions of being responsive to their constituency without doing much. The less they do, in fact, the better.

That is a tough call. Why can't both be done on offsetting timetables? Have we come to be a nation that can't do 2 things at once?

 

[catzmeow]

And I tend to agree, then you weren't real happy with a lot Bush did, were you?

I can think of 2 or 3 things that Obama has done that I consider concerning, but he's nowhere near Bush in terms of undermining constitutional rights. At this point, I guess it's all relative to me.

 

[catzmeow]

I would say you are correct. But what about going for legislation first. I know it likely would go nowhere but what would the harm have been.

Look at the division here. Imagine it nationwide.

Which do you think should be his first priority legislatively? Gun laws or the budget?

I like it when politicians go through the motions of being responsive to their constituency without doing much. The less they do, in fact, the better.

That is a tough call. Why can't both be done on offsetting timetables?

Because of the vast, insane partisan divide in our congress.

 

[beretta304]

Which do you think should be his first priority legislatively? Gun laws or the budget?

I like it when politicians go through the motions of being responsive to their constituency without doing much. The less they do, in fact, the better.

That is a tough call. Why can't both be done on offsetting timetables?

Because of the vast, insane partisan divide in our congress.

This way exacerbates it. We shall see but again I suspect it's much ado about nothing when all is said and done.

 

[Ernie S.]

And I tend to agree, then you weren't real happy with a lot Bush did, were you?

I can think of 2 or 3 things that Obama has done that I consider concerning, but he's nowhere near Bush in terms of undermining constitutional rights. At this point, I guess it's all relative to me.

Thanks. You've made my point. It really does come down to what you feel.

 

[lovemymutts]

JFC ,NO one is coming for your guns.Truly unbelievable that SOME people are that fucking stupid.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

Hmmm...

What sort of things could a President do about guns, in concordance with advice from the Attorney General, that would be within his constitutional powers?

Remember when Bush consulted with the DOJ about the war on terror? The next thing you knew we had waterboarding, wireless wiretaps, extraordinary renditions, an overseas prison network, and all kinds of goodies! All with the DOJ's stamp of constitutional approval.

All of a sudden? You really believe that...don't you? And, that you think it was only DOJ involvement? Who passed the Patriot Act? Oh...wait, that wasn't the DOJ...was it?

Did you all exclaim over his unconstitutional dictatorial behavior, I wonder...

Did you? Of course you did. Hypocritical? I wonder....

So...what sort of things could a President do about guns that would be within his constitutional powers?

If it's within his Constitutional powers, why would he need an EO? But, it might be wiser to ask Biden what sort of things it is a president could do about guns that would be within her/her Constitutional powers. Because, at the moment, Biden isn't giving any details and is keeping that secret.

 

[Uncensored2008]

False premise. It has not been proven he has done anything unconstitutional.

Obama has done a great many things that are unconstitutional. The Murder of a United States citizen - an irrefutable fact, violates the 5th amendment. This isn't even debatable.

Fast and Furious is another blatant violation of the constitution, and the use of foreign governments to wage assaults on the many states, as Obama did when he used the U.N. to launch lawsuits against the state of Arizona.

I know you will trot out "BOOOOSHHHH" as a defense, but Obama pisses on the constitution as a matter of course.

Therefore, you have a false conclusion.

Try again, sparky.

He cannot do that. Therefore, he will not.

Neither you nor I can say what Obama will do. I can and have proven that he is unrestrained by the constitution.

An EO that infringes the 2nd amendment WILL spark a civil war, and every last one of us here knows it - which means that Obama and his masters know it as well. That may constrain him - but Obama is a wild card and there are no certainties.

You are a fool. EOs have been issued by Presidents for a very long time. They are not unconstitutional in and of themselves.

An order to an executive department or function is legal, provided the resultant act is legal. Therefor the Obama order to DHS to grant immunity to illegal aliens violates the law. So, Obama couldn't do it - right?

Oh, wait...

Obama doesn't give a fuck about the law, or the constitution.

You nervous nellies are wetting your pants over an imaginary ghost planted in your minds by your puppet masters.

You're right, Chancellor Hitler would never abuse his position, we need to support him and never question.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

^^^^^^
fuckin creepy!

Which is creepier: Plasma, or RGS inviting people to his house to touch his "rifle"?

Plasma. hands down, no contest.

Especially since I invited him here to try and take my weapons, meaning he would be the first person I shot and killed in that effort. I mean he is all bluster about rounding people up, let him come try.

 

[Dr Grump]

You're right, Chancellor Hitler would never abuse his position, we need to support him and never question.

Where your epic fail of an argument falls over the precipice of human logic is that Hitler (eventually) had the backing of the armed forces. Obama doesn't.

And considering for your Chicken Little, bed-wetting, champing at the bit, hard-on scenario (and believe me, I know you are dying for this to happen - this is a gun nuts Nirvana) to occur, your military and police would have to enforce these edicts. Gee, that's gonna happen considering most of them vote overwhelmingly GoP....

 

[g5000]

If Obama issues an Executive Order related to guns, it will be one ordering federal law enforcement work to improve database sharing and to improve the background check process.

Nothing unconstitutional.

Book it.

 

[Plasmaball]

So go on record and tell us what this EO will entail.

Will? Or could?

Obama could order a halt to all firearm and ammunition manufacturing. It would be consistent with the abuses that are a constant from this administration.

Personally, any EO from Obama on this would be viewed as an act of war by me. The question is where we draw the line when a Hitler or Lenin seize power. For me, this is the line, if Obama crosses it, then I must view it as an open declaration of war against the United States Constitution by the regime.

this is my new birthday wish!

 

[Uncensored2008]

I hope you will use your tight connection with the FBI to notify us in advance of the firearm grab.

Even Obama isn't stupid enough to attempt a grab. His acts would be more along the lines of restricting the manufacture and sale of ammunition. This too will spark civil war, but kicking in doors would be a blood bath and ensure a bitter defeat of the federal troops.

I figure that in a civil war that was disorganized with confused battle lines, the federal troops will easily win. No doubt the administration has modeled every conceivable scenario for war against the citizens of the nation, and understands that the absolute worst tactical move would be an assault on the domiciles of the nation, with no real knowledge of the firepower in each. There will be no gun grab.

 

[hazlnut]

Biden: Obama Might Use Executive Order to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standard


We've all said it and liberals just called us crazy, etc.. HERE IT COMES.

Now I get where the fear and paranoia comes from.

You're just plain ignorant. You never finished high school, I guess, and don't understand what an executive order is.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Is Obama the boogie monster who inhabits the closet of your nightmares?

Yes, I saw Obama boogie and it was the stuff on nightmares. His white half dominates.

 

[hazlnut]

If Obama issues an Executive Order related to guns, it will be one ordering federal law enforcement work to improve database sharing and to improve the background check process.

Nothing unconstitutional.

Book it.

Great post.

I think the fringe-righties have President Obama confused with Voldemort.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If Obama issues an Executive Order related to guns, it will be one ordering federal law enforcement work to improve database sharing and to improve the background check process.

Nothing unconstitutional.

Book it.

He doesn't need an EO for that. But lets play your little game.....What will YOU do if he does in fact issue an EO that violates current law and the Constitution? I notice you don't mind that twice he violated the law and the Constitution to murder two American citizens, that were not involved according to the law enforcement branch of our Government ( as in no charges ever filed) in illegal activity. One was a 16 year old teenager.

You have done nothing about Him allowing Eric Holder to violate the law in Fast and Furious. You claim that his clear violation of Immigration laws is not a violation at all.

You claim the law allows him to issue Immunity and amnesty to illegal aliens, as you keep saying to CK, CITE the specific law that provides that the President can unilaterally declare millions of illegal aliens legal.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Do you actually believe some of the shit you type? Seriously?

Isn't there a sheep calling you, gump?