Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Usurper in Chief at it Again

  1. #1
    Regular Member HandyHamlet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Terra, Sol
    Posts
    2,779

    Usurper in Chief at it Again

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-furious-spin/


    MILLER: Obama’s fast and furious spin
    Sneaky White House budget provisions undermine the Second Amendment

    President Obama is using his budget to advance an anti-gun agenda just before the election. One particularly sneaky provision buried deep within his submission to Congress Monday would, if enacted, allow the mistakes of the “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scandal to be repeated.

    In November, the president signed the Justice Department appropriations bill, which included language from Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, prohibiting federal agencies from facilitating the transfer of an operable firearm to an individual known or suspected to be in a drug cartel, unless they monitor the weapon at all times.

    Now Mr. Obama is proposing to remove that provision from the 2013 spending bill, thus making it legal to revive gun-walking operations in the future. The White House justification is merely that the prohibition is “not necessary.”


    It is glaringly obvious that the White House can't get a lick of sleep. Not unless it is bathed in blood with bits of shredded Constitution tossed about like confetti.
    (IMHO Big Sis)
    Last edited by HandyHamlet; 02-16-2012 at 04:24 PM.
    "Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
    Abraham Lincoln

    "Some time ago, a bunch of lefties defied the law by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial, resulting in their arrests. Last week, a bunch of them pulled the same stunt and - using patented Lefist techniques - provoked the Park Police into having to use force to arrest them."
    Alexcabbie

  2. #2
    Regular Member .40S&W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    74
    I think I'm just going to start referring to the White House as the Kremlin.
    Never get complacent. Practice situational awareness. Stay alert stay alive.

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    This article is well worth the read and reposting, retweeting, etc.

    Several other equally disturbing provisions quoted below, including the destruction of brass, a major source of reloads for law-abiding citizens. Remember the fury this caused a few months back?

    TFred


    Mr. Obama’s budget contains other gun-grabbing surprises. The White House is looking to reclaim authority to destroy surplus M1 Garand rifles and M1 Carbines. For 30 years, the Defense Department has been blocked from scrapping these collectible firearms that served our soldiers well in World War II and the Korean War. The administration also wants to melt down the military’s spent brass casings, thwarting gun owners who have been buying and recycling the surplus materials.

    The president’s budget would also restore millions in funding to the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control so they can pump out junk science studies claiming handguns are a public health hazard.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran Cavalryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    308
    "...prohibiting federal agencies from facilitating the transfer of an operable firearm to an individual known or suspected to be in a drug cartel, unless they monitor the weapon at all times."

    I actually have a problem with this. My problem is that breaking the law is still breaking the law. It's not legal for law-enforcement agencies to break the law to enforce the law. Transferring a firearm to a person known to be a "prohibited person" is a crime and anyone who does it is a criminal. Period. The above quote should have stopped after the word "cartel."

  5. #5
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavalryman View Post
    "...prohibiting federal agencies from facilitating the transfer of an operable firearm to an individual known or suspected to be in a drug cartel, unless they monitor the weapon at all times."

    I actually have a problem with this. My problem is that breaking the law is still breaking the law. It's not legal for law-enforcement agencies to break the law to enforce the law. Transferring a firearm to a person known to be a "prohibited person" is a crime and anyone who does it is a criminal. Period. The above quote should have stopped after the word "cartel."
    Actually, my issue on your quote is this... INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW!!!!!!!!!!!
    If they are believed to have committed a crime then arrest and prosecute them in court. Convince their jury that they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, penalize them with jail/prison time....

    DO NOT INFRINGE THE RIGHT OF US RESIDENTS/CITIZENS TO KEEP AND POSSESS ARMS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!!!!
    Last edited by JoeSparky; 02-24-2012 at 01:29 AM.
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    connecticut
    Posts
    125
    I mean really couldn't some of these "stings" be considered entrapment? Im sure the LEO's never try to push people into buying these firearms that they otherwise wouldn't.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by smokeyburnout View Post
    I mean really couldn't some of these "stings" be considered entrapment? Im sure the LEO's never try to push people into buying these firearms that they otherwise wouldn't.
    As I understand it, they're all entrapment. It is my understanding the courts have created the arbitrary and fictitious distinction that it doesn't count as entrapment if the person has an inclination to do it. Or, conversely, it only counts as entrapment if he did not have an inclination to do it.

    When they can't find any real criminals to justify their existence, they create criminals.

    Its just another angle on Ayn Rand's concept in Atlas Shrugged that government doesn't want the laws obeyed. It wants the laws broken. Because there is no way to rule over innocent men.

  8. #8
    Regular Member sawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    As I understand it, they're all entrapment. It is my understanding the courts have created the arbitrary and fictitious distinction that it doesn't count as entrapment if the person has an inclination to do it. Or, conversely, it only counts as entrapment if he did not have an inclination to do it.

    When they can't find any real criminals to justify their existence, they create criminals.

    Its just another angle on Ayn Rand's concept in Atlas Shrugged that government doesn't want the laws obeyed. It wants the laws broken. Because there is no way to rule over innocent men
    .
    OMG. I totally believe this. It's a codicil of the 'absolute power corrupts' principle. It's the way HUMANs act (tribal and seizure of rights, using lawful means and slippery slope).

    Cops know that if crime REALLY decreases and they are successful that it leads to them downsizing the police force. (I can't blame them TOO much, but it's WRONG).
    A firearm is a tool of convenience, not effectiveness - Clint Smith, Thunder Ranch

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    215
    All these so called laws that you complain about, are not laws.
    An unconstitutional law is not law and never will be.
    As long as you are uneducated about the Constitution you will
    continue to CONSENT to them.
    Courts in this country are not constitutional courts, they are
    International Contract Courts, how can you tell. Easy the
    Admiralty Flag in the Courtroom.
    The Constitution is written in the language of the Common Law.
    You have to know how to Reserve Your Rights and force the Courts
    to honor your Common Law Rights.

    Mattox v U.S. 156 US 237, 243 (1895)
    " We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the Law
    ( as it existed at the time it was adopted )."
    Life is tough, its tougher when your stupid.

    http://www.itsnotthelaw.com

    Feds: U.C.C. 1-308, State: U.C.C. 1-207, Both: U.C.C. 1-103.6

  10. #10
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by HandyHamlet View Post
    [snip]





    It is glaringly obvious that the White House can't get a lick of sleep. Not unless it is bathed in blood with bits of shredded Constitution tossed about like confetti.
    (IMHO Big Sis)
    OMG, I am going to be reading threads like this for the next four years

    "Unsurper" is just a flavor of this month. Whatever President Obama deems necessary to the safety of the U.S., he can do, Constitutionally.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •