Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 359

Thread: (during Press conf. 1/9/2013)Biden: Obama May Use Executive Order To Deal With Guns

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558

    (during Press conf. 1/9/2013)Biden: Obama May Use Executive Order To Deal With Guns

    Vice President Joe Biden revealed that President Barack Obama might use an executive order to deal with guns. "The president is going to act," said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...might-use-exec

    http://www.drudge.com/news/164532/bi...r-deal#4362616
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chesterfield
    Posts
    340
    Did this fellow graduate middle school? All those people who went out and bought guns did not do so to turn them in a month later. The constitution cannot be overturned by EO. Nor can legislation be done by fiat. Perhaps our president needs a refresher course on separation of powers and presidential authority. He was not elected King Obama.

    These guys are blithering idiots, but they are very dangerous blithering idiots. They should take a leaf from history. The American revolution was not caused by the Boston Tea Party, but rather the crowns attempt to seize the colonists arms. Do they really think we are so different from then to now?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by MamabearCali View Post
    Did this fellow graduate middle school? All those people who went out and bought guns did not do so to turn them in a month later. The constitution cannot be overturned by EO. Nor can legislation be done by fiat. Perhaps our president needs a refresher course on separation of powers and presidential authority. He was not elected King Obama.

    These guys are blithering idiots, but they are very dangerous blithering idiots. They should take a leaf from history. The American revolution was not caused by the Boston Tea Party, but rather the crowns attempt to seize the colonists arms. Do they really think we are so different from then to now?
    They dont care if it violates our rights or not. He IS a dictator that cant pass what he wants in congress and so he uses EO for everything.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chesterfield
    Posts
    340
    Quote Originally Posted by zack991 View Post
    They dont care if it violates our rights or not. He IS a dictator that cant pass what he wants in congress and so he uses EO for everything.


    He has better hope like hades he is not. In VA our flag says Sic Semper Tyrannus, check it out. Right now legal means of redress are still possible, we should use them while we can. Otherwise we get back to "when in the course of human events."

  5. #5
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    He won't EO anything. Congress will pass a couple of things through, but that's it.

    If he did EO something, it would be nothing that has any significant impact on firearm owners, and the firearms they own.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 01-09-2013 at 02:41 PM.
    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...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chesterfield
    Posts
    340
    Beretta, he said he would do so. Why should I believe you? What evidence do you have of his willingness to abide by the constitutional right of citizens to bear arms?

    He has said he wants gun control by any means. Don't be like the people of Europe breathing a sigh of relief with the words "I have the signature of the furher." We don't even have that. We have a man who has been hostile to the constitution in general since he took his oath of office.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by MamabearCali View Post
    Beretta, he said he would do so. Why should I believe you? What evidence do you have of his willingness to abide by the constitutional right of citizens to bear arms?

    He has said he wants gun control by any means. Don't be like the people of Europe breathing a sigh of relief with the words "I have the signature of the furher." We don't even have that. We have a man who has been hostile to the constitution in general since he took his oath of office.
    I'm not asking you to believe me. I am stating that he won't--but let's say he did...magazine limits...maybe, not much else...closing so-called gunshow loopholes, maybe.

    Who gives a sh*t about Hitler, live in the now. Obama is nothing like Hitler. Comparing Obama signing an EO for, say, magazine capacity limits, comparing that to Hitler lining up Jews, Blacks, Gays, and other undesirables, is nonsense. Please, let's be reasonable here. People undermine legitimate concerns when they start acting as if some AWB--which we had for ten years, and no Americans were lined up and sent to gas chambers--is the equivalent to Nazi Germany; get a freaking grip people.

    Accusing him of being hostile to the Constitution is nothing more than fear-mongering. Believe it or not, there is another half of the population that hold Obama is not hostile to the Constitution. Go figure--this is where Opinions collide I suppose.

    I have tried to wrap my head around references to Hitler, and accusations that Obama is anti-American...I suppose it just comes with the territory, that seems to be inhabited by some sort of fear induced delirium.
    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...

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    If he did EO something, it would be nothing that has any significant impact on firearm owners, and the firearms they own.

    Significance? Are you kidding me...significance? We're talking about a man bypassing the balance of powers, using his executive office to violate the constitution of this country. If he even passes an EO even containing the word "arms" that isn't a reference to the hokey mother****ing pokey, it is an act of treason.

    Keep your powder dry.
    Last edited by shastadude17; 01-09-2013 at 03:09 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member crazydude6030's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Fairfax, va
    Posts
    512

    Eo

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    He won't EO anything. Congress will pass a couple of things through, but that's it.

    If he did EO something, it would be nothing that has any significant impact on firearm owners, and the firearms they own.
    He never said what the order will be. However he has has bloomberg and a few other gun haters bending his ear. My guess is they would reclass semi autos to be class three arms. That's something Bloomberg has long asked him to do

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by shastadude17 View Post
    Significance? Are you kidding me...significance? We're talking about a man bypassing the balance of powers, using his executive office to violate the constitution of this country. If he even passes an EO even containing the word "arms" that isn't a reference to the hokey mother****ing pokey, it is an act of treason.

    Keep your powder dry.
    Agreed, I guess his long history of using illegal EO to get what he wants done when congress says no, I must be wrong thinking he will do another illegal EO on firearms when his history says he will. He has come out and said he will use EO.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  11. #11
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by shastadude17 View Post
    Significance? Are you kidding me...significance? We're talking about a man bypassing the balance of powers, using his executive office to violate the constitution of this country. If he even passes an EO even containing the word "arms" that isn't a reference to the hokey mother****ing pokey, it is an act of treason.

    Keep your powder dry.
    EO's are Constitutional, unless Found not-Constitutional. You can say whatever you believe the constitutionality of the EO, generally, or a specific EO is, but it's irrelevant.

    It's not an act of Treason. Please, people, read the freaking Constitution, Read The Federalist.

    I have stated before, if there was a segment of the American population that took arms up against the Government, you will get your collective ass kicked, period. All the Jonesesque hothead BS don't mean crapola.--I should point out that the vast majority of Americans would be on the side of the Government in the face of that type of Treasonous act perpetrated by armed citizens.

    Remember, David and Goliath is a nice story to tell, but would fail miserably in the face of the Federal Government.
    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...

  12. #12
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by zack991 View Post
    Agreed, I guess his long history of using illegal EO to get what he wants done when congress says no, I must be wrong thinking he will do another illegal EO on firearms when his history says he will. He has come out and said he will use EO.
    Please, link us up a list of EO's that President Obama has signed that have been Found illegal.
    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...

  13. #13
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by crazydude6030 View Post
    He never said what the order will be. However he has has bloomberg and a few other gun haters bending his ear. My guess is they would reclass semi autos to be class three arms. That's something Bloomberg has long asked him to do
    Bloomberg is one of a multitude of individuals that 'have his ear'. I suppose you accidentally forgot to include the NRA, and Republicans talking to Obama about the issue of firearms as well.
    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...

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Please, people, read the freaking Constitution
    Quote Originally Posted by Constitution of the United States of America, Article II
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
    ^^^^ You mean this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Merriam Webster Dictionary
    Infringe, transitive verb:
    1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another
    2: obsolete
    Last edited by shastadude17; 01-09-2013 at 03:16 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by shastadude17 View Post
    ^^^^ You mean this?
    Nice. Still doesn't answer the question.
    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...

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Please, link us up a list of EO's that President Obama has signed that have been Found illegal.
    Right. Because legality translates to morality.

    For example: Assassinating a US citizen and his juvenile son in a foreign country via drone strike for suspected connections to terrorism without arrest, right to counsel, or a trial by a jury of his peers. Totes legal because no one has said that it isn't yet. I hate referencing the Hitler fallacy, however allow me to make my point: Everything Hitler did was legal.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Nice. Still doesn't answer the question.
    Must be Baby's First English. Questions end with a question mark. A question mark looks like: ?


  18. #18
    Regular Member crazydude6030's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Fairfax, va
    Posts
    512

    Re

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Bloomberg is one of a multitude of individuals that 'have his ear'. I suppose you accidentally forgot to include the NRA, and Republicans talking to Obama about the issue of firearms as well.
    I didn't forget anything but I was putting in context what those orders would be as those are the only orders the media has been reporting.

    Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

  19. #19
    Regular Member crazydude6030's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Fairfax, va
    Posts
    512

    May Use Executive Order To Deal With Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post

    I have stated before, if there was a segment of the American population that took arms up against the Government, you will get your collective ass kicked, period.
    I don't like playing theory games but I doubt many would take up arms.

    If anything were to happen it would be a few and I think they would do random killings of elected officials. In that situation I can see things going south real fast for the average American

  20. #20
    Regular Member Tucker6900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Posts
    1,249
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Nice. Still doesn't answer the question.
    I dont get what is so wrong with what he said. In order to get rid of, bypass, infringe, substitute, or encroach the 2nd Amendment is by amending the amendment. No executive order can over ride the Constitution. Period. Show me, in the Consitution, where its says a president can supercede any law found in the constitution with an executive order.
    The only terrorists I see nowadays are at the Capital.


    The statements made in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of OCDO or its members.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    read the freaking Constitution
    U.S. presidents have issued executive orders since 1785. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration [b]"take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Executive Orders must use Constitutional reasoning as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties, the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office. Congress may override a veto with a two-thirds majority to end an executive order. It has been argued that a Congressional override of an executive order is a nearly impossible event due to the supermajority vote required and the fact that such a vote leaves individual lawmakers very vulnerable to political criticism.
    Last edited by zack991; 01-09-2013 at 03:35 PM.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  22. #22
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by shastadude17 View Post
    Right. Because legality translates to morality.

    For example: Assassinating a US citizen and his juvenile son in a foreign country via drone strike for suspected connections to terrorism without arrest, right to counsel, or a trial by a jury of his peers. Totes legal because no one has said that it isn't yet. I hate referencing the Hitler fallacy, however allow me to make my point: Everything Hitler did was legal.
    I will bite: Link me up to any EO Obama made that was not moral.
    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...

  23. #23
    Regular Member crazydude6030's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Fairfax, va
    Posts
    512
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Bloomberg is one of a multitude of individuals that 'have his ear'. I suppose you accidentally forgot to include the NRA, and Republicans talking to Obama about the issue of firearms as well.
    "Obama wants Congress to reinstate a ban on military-style assault weapons, close loopholes that allow gun buyers to skirt background checks and restrict high-capacity magazines. Other recommendations to the Biden group include making gun-trafficking a felony, getting the Justice Department to prosecute people caught lying on gun background-check forms and ordering federal agencies to send data to the National Gun Background Check Database.

    Some of those steps could be taken through executive action, without the approval of Congress. White House officials say Obama will not finalize any actions until receiving Biden's recommendations."

    http://news.yahoo.com/biden-meets-gu...-politics.html

    Seems to me the intent on any EO on this would be to place restrictions.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker6900 View Post
    I dont get what is so wrong with what he said. In order to get rid of, bypass, infringe, substitute, or encroach the 2nd Amendment is by amending the amendment. No executive order can over ride the Constitution. Period. Show me, in the Consitution, where its says a president can supercede any law found in the constitution with an executive order.
    Signing an EO, or passing a Law that limits magazine capacity is not a infringement on the Right to keep and bear arms.

    Read the the Articles of the Constitution, you will find it in there.
    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...

  25. #25
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by zack991 View Post
    U.S. presidents have issued executive orders since 1785. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration [b]"take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Executive Orders must use Constitutional reasoning as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties, the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office. Congress may override a veto with a two-thirds majority to end an executive order. It has been argued that a Congressional override of an executive order is a nearly impossible event due to the supermajority vote required and the fact that such a vote leaves individual lawmakers very vulnerable to political criticism.
    Listen, when you are quoting word-for-word, WIKI, you have to post the link as well, and quote the portion pasted.

    BTW, if you think for a moment that they have not formulated a Constitutional Reasoning, well, you don't give them as much credit as they deserve. Thanks for the example though. What you have offered up is an argument for EO's being above Congress, and above SCOTUS review.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 01-09-2013 at 05:01 PM.
    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...

Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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