Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Gun Grab by President on its way?

  1. #1
    Regular Member TOF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Happy Jack, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    443

    Post imported post

    I got the following by Email this morning. Thought you all should be aware:

    Code:
    Subject: Re: [AssociationofRetiredPhoenixOfficers] Hey Guys Check This Out!!!
    
    Tighter restrictions on gun ownership for those over 60 
    Guns to Be Banned for Elderly 
    Staff Reports
    United Press International
    Washington
    
    Deputy Attorney General Designate David Ogden is circulating a draft of an executive order in which, among other things, firearms possession would be severely limited to people over 60.
    
    An assistant to Ogden told us, "It appears that in these changing times, it is no longer necessary to allow the elderly to be armed. With all of their physical ailments and increasing senility, to leave them in control of a deadly weapon would be ludicrous."
    
    While the Executive Order may sound too powerful, experts in Constitutional law state that it is not actually un-Constitutional.
    
    "It's a question of wording." states Columbia Law Professor, Dr. John Braxton. "The Constitution forbids the Congress, that is, the legislative branch, from passing any laws infringing on gun ownership. The executive branch is not included in this proviso. As long as the Congress doesn't get involved, it's technically a non-issue."
    
    The Justice Department was tossing the idea of a gun ban for seniors during the Carter and Clinton Administration, but public opinion stopped these initiatives. Now, the Obama White House believes differently.
    
    An unnamed aide close to Ogden agreed to talk on the condition of anonymity.
    
    "Clinton and Carter didn't have as much of a mandate as President Obama. They were both Southerners, and the Second Amendment was sacrosanct to their constituents. However, President Obama comes from a new sort of politics, where divisive issues like firearms do not apply to him."
    
    "Quite frankly, it's a shame that no one has had the good conscience to have done this already. It's a simple process, and the majority of the American people will understand it and follow the law."
    
    The enforcement mechanism for this particular executive order has not been published. It is likely that the confiscation of weapons will be similar to Great Britain 's handgun ban, in which citizens willingly gave the weapons to police.
    
    It is expected that the executive order will be given around July 1, when senior-related gun deaths reach their peaks.
    
    The aide to Ogden stated: "For eight years you see the rolling back of regulation, and crime has skyrocketed. In fact, in Massachusetts alone, murders have risen 50% since 2002. Armed robbery has also risen dramatically. With such circumstances, we must act boldly."
    If you woke up breathing, congratulations! You get another chance.

  2. #2
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    It appears that in these changing times, it is no longer necessary to allow the elderly to be armed. With all of their physical ailments and increasing senility, to leave them in control of a deadly weapon would be ludicrous.
    Because being older and more feeble makes them LESS of a target?

    It's a question of wording." states Columbia Law Professor, Dr. John Braxton. "The Constitution forbids the Congress, that is, the legislative branch, from passing any laws infringing on gun ownership. The executive branch is not included in this proviso. As long as the Congress doesn't get involved, it's technically a non-issue.
    You know what's also a non-issue? Executive orders.

    The three branches of government are specifically ordered and defined in the Constitution. The legislative writes the law. The judicial interprets it. The executive enforces it.

    Given those three simple statements, no arbitrary order issued by the President is legally binding on ANYONE.

    The Constitution forbids congress from passing any laws infringing on gun ownership (and they've really honored that, haven't they?) The Constitution furthermore forbids the EXECUTIVE BRANCH from writing laws, period.

    For a "law perfesser" he is quite a dullard.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cuyahoga County, Ohio
    Posts
    219

    Post imported post

    I searched upi's web site and no such story comes up.

    http://www.upi.com/search/?sp=t&sLoc...david+ogden%22

    I also did a lot of searching on Google and I can find no reliable source for this story.

    I am very skeptical of stories that get emailed around.

  4. #4
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    According to : http://secondstoryfoundation.typepad...a-reality.html

    It was originally created as a satire, and is not true.

  5. #5
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    I'm skeptical of anything that starts out:

    I'm from the government and I'm here to help you.

    Translation: RUN AWAY.

    Anybody else watch the animated movie The Iron Giant and notice some disturbing and poignant parallels to the fed.gov?

    How about cheering for the "bad guy" during Live Free Or Die Hard?
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Great Lakes, , USA
    Posts
    167

    Post imported post

    Interesting story, but a cite is really necessary to vet it. Even then I doubt this would be the approach. Why just seniors? Sound fishy to label all over 60 as senile or likely to be. We've all likely known many folks in their 80's and 90's that are sharp as a tack and fewer that are senile...

    You can bet a grab is on the way, but with the control the Dems have in Congress why not go big?It appears that theyhave the votes top to bottom to get it done, just a matter of if they think what they do won't jeopardize 2010 for them. Other than phone/letter pressure when they start something on the floor, that is about all that would stop them frompassing it and the Bamster would gleefully sign it.

    Also, if they wait around a bit and see the economy 'spode with the attendant riots/disturbances, they'll get a golden reason(s) that most sheople would lap up...

  7. #7
    Regular Member TOF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Happy Jack, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    443

    Post imported post

    It was vetted about as well as the Tax Dodger appointments being made.

    I placed a question mark at the end of the title for a reason. I do consider it a good possibility however.
    If you woke up breathing, congratulations! You get another chance.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chesterfield, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    98

    Post imported post

    More bogus info flying around. I suspect the POTUS loves this because while we're worried about these rumors they are doing other things.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lake Charles Area, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,723

    Post imported post

    AllAmerican wrote:
    More bogus info flying around. I suspect the POTUS loves this because while we're worried about these rumors they are doing other things.
    Exactly. The smoke screens have been thrown on the battlefield.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    Any serious threat to gun rights will almost always be on record on easily accessible government web sights. With that in mind, it is always wise to check the facts before taking a legal rumor seriously.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cuyahoga County, Ohio
    Posts
    219

    Post imported post


  12. #12
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    Yeah, if this were true and came to pass, I bet there would be a lot of grieving LEO widows in the aftermath.

    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  13. #13
    Regular Member TOF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Happy Jack, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    443

    Post imported post





    NRA's "RUMOR CONTROL" Comments:

    Code:
    Now don't take all this to mean that we underestimate our anti-gun opponents, or that we don't believe they would happily and readily seize the opportunity to adopt and enforce any of these measures. We know full well that they would. Rather, our message is this: Rumors abound, so don't believe everything you read. If it's a legitimate concern, rest assured your NRA-ILA will promptly address it and will give you the straight story.
    We are now only suposed to believe rumors the NRA wants us to believe.

    Have a good day folks
    If you woke up breathing, congratulations! You get another chance.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    I thought this was already debunked on OCDO. I traced it back to the Jumping in Pools Blog when the story first broke last month and I believe this to be the original satirical post:
    http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2...r-elderly.html

    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  15. #15
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    405

    Post imported post

    I got suspicious when a "Law professor" said:
    "It's a question of wording." states Columbia Law Professor, Dr. John Braxton. "The Constitution forbids the Congress, that is, the legislative branch, from passing any laws infringing on gun ownership. The executive branch is not included in this proviso. As long as the Congress doesn't get involved, it's technically a non-issue."
    I don't believe a "Law Professor" would allow his name to be attached to such a fundamental error.
    The "Congress shall make no law" language appears in the first amendment, but is conspicuously absent from the 2nd.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Raleigh Area, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    Twosimple questions: If you are over the age of 60 does that mean you are no longer an American? Didn't we already go through a civil rights moevement?

    Maybe it's just me!

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Two simple answers:
    1) debunked
    2) satire
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    Dustin wrote:
    AllAmerican wrote:
    More bogus info flying around. I suspect the POTUS loves this because while we're worried about these rumors they are doing other things.
    Exactly. The smoke screens have been thrown on the battlefield.
    Remind anyone else of the Clinton years? Sex scandals, Whitewater, etc. it's all a bunch of garbage to feed the masses while they're up to more scandalous acts of Constitution shredding.
    ...And don't think I don't include the last 8 years of inept "leadership", they were probably worse than the rest.
    We need to remind them who is supposed to be the boss (that would be us, by the way, for those of you that never had the occasion to learn that...) and master of the government. The servant NEVER has more rights or power than the master, unless the master gives that power away, either by weakness or ignorance.
    BTW, don't even bother trying to read into my comment and think I'm racist, I use the terms "master" and "servant" in the proper context here, not a "slave/master" relationship.
    Get involved.
    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Virginia USA, ,
    Posts
    1,688

    Post imported post

    It is satire. But the EO has no power other than instructing agencies under the President.

Posting Permissions

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