Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Obama plans Executive Action to expand background checks for gun sales

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147

    Obama plans Executive Action to expand background checks for gun sales

    White House officials have been trying to draft an executive order that would effectively reinterpret existing law to require all or most such sales to go through the background check system.
    [ ... ]
    Officials have been scouring through state and local efforts looking for successful programs that have reduced gun violence and searching for multi-layered ways to attack what they see as a scourge. "That work includes looking at the gun show loophole,” said one White House official involved in the work. “But taking administrative action in this space is enormously complicated, with complex and intertwined policy, legal and operational considerations to take into account."

    "That process,” the official said, “is very much underway."

    http://www.latimes.com/nation/politi...203-story.html

    Looking for a successful program that has 'reduced gun-violence" will be fruitless, as it is obvious to even the casual observer that there is no such thing.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Northern Piedmont-Culpeper
    Posts
    176
    More like they are waiting for the right time to do it so it won't be noticed. They face a huge backlash once this is done. They also run the risk of losing more local and state elections. Even they know how popular guns and gun stuff is in this country.
    "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

  3. #3
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,726
    I guess that gun show loophole is so big I walked through it and didn't even notice. Or just maybe it just doesn't exist.

  4. #4
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by scooter348 View Post
    More like they are waiting for the right time to do it so it won't be noticed. They face a huge backlash once this is done. They also run the risk of losing more local and state elections. Even they know how popular guns and gun stuff is in this country.

    I don't about that; there were ONLY 185,000 NICS checks done on Black Friday, and since several states have NICS waivers with a CCW and there can be multiple guns on a single 4473 the total number possibly topped 200,000.


  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147

    Josh Earnest: White House, Obama Thinks Gun Control Will Deter Terrorists VIDEO

    White House spokesman Josh Earnest said that President Obama thinks that gun control would help deter terrorists. Earnest made the comments today at the White House's daily press briefing.
    [ ... ]

    Peter Doocy: "But so the president thinks that when there are potentially two terrorists sitting around planning a mass murder they may call it off because President Obama has put in place common sense gun laws?"

    Earnest: "Well Peter, we're still learning of the precise motives of the individuals who carried out this heinous act of violence yesterday. One thing we do know, is the four fire arms they were wielding we're legally purchased under the laws in place now. That's a fact. So, that might lead some to conclude that we should have made it a little harder for them. Would that have changed the entire outcome? We're still investigating the situation but I guess the question is, why wouldn't we? Why wouldn't we make it harder for them? What's the explanation for that?"

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/white-...rticle/2000061

    "Why wouldn't we make it harder for them? What's the explanation for that?" Because only the law abiding abide the laws.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 12-03-2015 at 04:00 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    STL MO, USA
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    White House spokesman Josh Earnest said that President Obama thinks that gun control would help deter terrorists. Earnest made the comments today at the White House's daily press briefing.
    [ ... ]

    Peter Doocy: "But so the president thinks that when there are potentially two terrorists sitting around planning a mass murder they may call it off because President Obama has put in place common sense gun laws?"

    Earnest: "Well Peter, we're still learning of the precise motives of the individuals who carried out this heinous act of violence yesterday. One thing we do know, is the four fire arms they were wielding we're legally purchased under the laws in place now. That's a fact. So, that might lead some to conclude that we should have made it a little harder for them. Would that have changed the entire outcome? We're still investigating the situation but I guess the question is, why wouldn't we? Why wouldn't we make it harder for them? What's the explanation for that?"

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/white-...rticle/2000061

    "Why wouldn't we make it harder for them? What's the explanation for that?" Because only the law abiding abide the laws.
    Riiight... Because it worked so well in France a few weeks ago. These people are absolute moonbats if they really believe what they are regurgitating.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    The right wing wants to make sure that the rights of domestic terrorists and crazy folks to obtain weapons isn't infringed by something so intrusive as a background check. They want their guns and they want them NOW! A few mass shooting every month is a small price to pay.

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    White House spokesman Josh Earnest said ... One thing we do know, is the four fire arms they were wielding we're legally purchased under the laws in place now.
    Really? In Cali these two legally purchased and possessed the evil "assault rifles" and "high capacity magazines" used for these murders?

    Or were these crimes committed using magazines that hold no more than 10 round each?

    Fox News reports that all 4 guns (2 rifles, 2 handguns) were purchased legally in the "United States" by someone other than the shooters, about 4 years ago. But the BATFE isn't releasing whether they were purchased in California or elsewhere.

    Lying gun grabbers....

    At least this is just "workplace violence" rather than an act of terrorism or something really bad.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    The right wing wants to make sure that the rights of domestic terrorists and crazy folks to obtain weapons isn't infringed by something so intrusive as a background check. They want their guns and they want them NOW! A few mass shooting every month is a small price to pay.
    There is nothing to suggest that a background check would have prevented this sale. On what basis do you deny the guy purchase of a gun? Has he ever been committed or convicted? Do you presume to deny him his rights as natural born US Citizen because he is Muslim?

    If a gun is purchased legally and then someone goes off the rails, the liberals claim that is proof we need more laws. If a gun is obtained illegally, it is still proof we need more laws.

    The gun grabbers want to deny ownership of guns to private citizens and are working to get the camel's nose into the tent.

    Notice that the Democrats banned the sale of a host of guns based on cosmetic features with their deceitfully named "Assault Weapon Ban" in 1994. It also banned sales of normal sized magazines. Many liberal Democrats have consistently called for a renewal of that ban.

    Do you disavow any desire to ban entire groups of guns and magazines?

    Are you willing to live with just a ban on new sales, or do you want to eventually confiscate (or forced "buy back") of these types of guns and magazines already in private hands?

    Requiring every private sale to go through a federal background check is impossible to enforce without also implementing a nationwide registry of all guns currently in private hands. Otherwise, how do you know whether a gun has been transferred. Are you ok with telling the government and the next Richard Nixon who owns every gun in the nation?

    The upshot to this is that gun control is a bigger loser today than when it cost the Democrats control of the House in 1994. If Hillary is stupid enough to embrace this it may overcome the usual stupidity of the GOP and result in a republican in the White House.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  10. #10
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,269
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    There is nothing to suggest that a background check would have prevented this sale. ... Charles
    Sir, your efforts are wasted when responding to beebobby. He is a liberal and his views of the world that you and I travel through is tainted by his refusal to understand that a liberal with a gun is not a citizen in search of restoring individual liberty.

    Your time is, I recommend, better spent on navel gazing.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    There is nothing to suggest that a background check would have prevented this sale. On what basis do you deny the guy purchase of a gun? Has he ever been committed or convicted? Do you presume to deny him his rights as natural born US Citizen because he is Muslim?

    If a gun is purchased legally and then someone goes off the rails, the liberals claim that is proof we need more laws. If a gun is obtained illegally, it is still proof we need more laws.

    The gun grabbers want to deny ownership of guns to private citizens and are working to get the camel's nose into the tent.

    Notice that the Democrats banned the sale of a host of guns based on cosmetic features with their deceitfully named "Assault Weapon Ban" in 1994. It also banned sales of normal sized magazines. Many liberal Democrats have consistently called for a renewal of that ban.

    Do you disavow any desire to ban entire groups of guns and magazines?

    Are you willing to live with just a ban on new sales, or do you want to eventually confiscate (or forced "buy back") of these types of guns and magazines already in private hands?

    Requiring every private sale to go through a federal background check is impossible to enforce without also implementing a nationwide registry of all guns currently in private hands. Otherwise, how do you know whether a gun has been transferred. Are you ok with telling the government and the next Richard Nixon who owns every gun in the nation?

    The upshot to this is that gun control is a bigger loser today than when it cost the Democrats control of the House in 1994. If Hillary is stupid enough to embrace this it may overcome the usual stupidity of the GOP and result in a republican in the White House.

    Charles
    All of the recent mass shooters were good guys with guns until that first shot at an innocent victim. Gun sales are more important to the NRA than the lives of those killed. Why doesn't the NRA get back to it's original purpose, gun safety? I'll tell you why... money. Where do you think all that bribe money comes from?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Northern Piedmont-Culpeper
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    All of the recent mass shooters were good guys with guns until that first shot at an innocent victim. Gun sales are more important to the NRA than the lives of those killed. Why doesn't the NRA get back to it's original purpose, gun safety? I'll tell you why... money. Where do you think all that bribe money comes from?
    My bet is on Bloomberg and Soros, but I could be wrong.
    Last edited by scooter348; 12-04-2015 at 08:35 AM.
    "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

  13. #13
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,269
    Quote Originally Posted by 357SigFan View Post
    Riiight... Because it worked so well in France a few weeks ago. These people are absolute moonbats if they really believe what they are regurgitating.
    All liberals elites need is for the great unwashed masses to believe what the elites are regurgitating...votes, it always boils down to votes.

    Interesting side line, my son was in his HS government class and the teacher asked the class how many were aware of the California incident, three out of ~24 kids raised their hand, my son being one of the three. This is the primary challenge that 2A supporters face in our efforts to restore individual liberty, getting a few more hands raised in a HS government class.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  14. #14
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,269
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    All of the recent mass shooters were good guys with guns until that first shot at an innocent victim. Gun sales are more important to the NRA than the lives of those killed. Why doesn't the NRA get back to it's original purpose, gun safety? I'll tell you why... money. Where do you think all that bribe money comes from?
    What questions do you still have regarding gun safety? There is a short list of important and easily recalled "rules."

    I recommend that you visit http://training.nra.org/nra-gun-safety-rules.aspx

    If you continue to have questions regarding gun safety the above link also has contact information available.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by scooter348 View Post
    My bet is on Bloomberg and Soros, but I could be wrong.
    Both Soros and Bloomberg are anti_NRA.Why do you think they would contribute to the NRA?
    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/us...-nra.html?_r=0
    Kochs gave 4.9 million to the NRA in 2014.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/1...-filing-215979

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Bobby B's link does not support his assertion that his hero is anti-NRA but only that Doomedberg thinks that he can out spend the NRA, that his 1% are wealthier than in toto the NRA's swinging members.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Bobby B's link does not support his assertion that his hero is anti-NRA but only that Doomedberg thinks that he can out spend the NRA, that his 1% are wealthier than in toto the NRA's swinging members.
    My assertion that he is anti-NRA is supported by the fact that Bloomberg's aim is to reduce gun violence as opposed to the NRA's aim which is to sell more guns to anyone.
    Last edited by beebobby; 12-04-2015 at 01:20 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    My assertion that he is anti-NRA is supported by the fact that Bloomberg's aim is to reduce gun violence as opposed to the NRA's aim which is to sell more guns to anyone.
    The NRA does not sell guns, it sells privilege, even to blacks that will pay for it.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    The NRA does not sell guns, it sells privilege, even to blacks that will pay for it.
    Even to blacks! Man, that must chap their ass. The NRA is a well organized and well funded gun union.
    Last edited by beebobby; 12-04-2015 at 01:49 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    [ ... ] The NRA is a well organized and well funded gun union.
    It beggars union that cannot strike.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  21. #21
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Charlotte
    Posts
    3
    People don't seem to understand that guns:

    - Are the reason you can be liberal or conservative.
    - Are the reason that the world enjoys its present standard of living.
    - Are the reason we are one of the safest places to be ON EARTH. We have 350 Million guns in the United States and the percentage of those used in crimes compared to the rest of the world is crazy small. (FYI, I grew up in Brazil. We had a guard, a fence with broken bottles on the top and live in maid that would make you disappear if need be).
    - Are a HUGE economic force in this country
    - Are owned by the very people that give the most of their money and time to charities here and around the world.
    - Are the reason you have the INTERNET.
    - Are the reason you have most ALL of the things you now enjoy and love

  22. #22
    Regular Member REPR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    The right wing wants to make sure that the rights of domestic terrorists and crazy folks to obtain weapons isn't infringed by something so intrusive as a background check. They want their guns and they want them NOW! A few mass shooting every month is a small price to pay.

    'Right wing' is a term made up by the liberals in an effort to justify their views. Supporting the Constitution and the 2AM have no bearing to the left or right, merely maintaining the course of our founding fathers. The ideas and opinions of the liberals take a sharp left turn, while the 'right wing conservatives' are simply trying to maintain those rights given to us by God, and guaranteed by the Constitution.

  23. #23
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Charlotte
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by REPR View Post
    'Right wing' is a term made up by the liberals in an effort to justify their views. Supporting the Constitution and the 2AM have no bearing to the left or right, merely maintaining the course of our founding fathers. The ideas and opinions of the liberals take a sharp left turn, while the 'right wing conservatives' are simply trying to maintain those rights given to us by God, and guaranteed by the Constitution.
    Yep, it's just plain being American. Neither right nor left wing. It's square on the back of that bird.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by REPR View Post
    'Right wing' is a term made up by the liberals ... [ ... ]
    That is simply not so. The left-wing/right-wing paradigm dates from the French Revolution of 1789 and the seating of the legislatures, with the supporters of the status quo, then the old regime, seated on the speakers right, and the progressive commoners on the left wing of the house.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    I guess that gun show loophole is so big I walked through it and didn't even notice. Or just maybe it just doesn't exist.
    Hey YOU ... come over here .. just for a sec ... wanna gun?

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •