According to the many of conservative and gun activist stripe - that was the death of democracy and the beginning of the age of American tyranny... We even had one of their elected leaders calling for impeachment simply because Obama was THINKING about these executive actions...
But alas, Heir Obama has signed the action. And now in order for these things to become law they must first be introduced to congress via a bill authored by congress. Then it mus pass the house of representatives, and then pass the senate, and then be signed into law by President Barack Obama... Oh this tyranny is killing me!
Yes people, this is the tyranny they speak of. This is the tyranny they feel presidents should be impeached for... This is the tyranny they need high capacity magazines and AR-15's to protect themselves from... I wonder if they really are not aware just how dumb they are, or if they just don't care how dumb they look? Maybe both, who knows.
Seriously people - anybody that thinks this is tyranny needs a check up from the neck up...
According to the many of conservative and gun activist stripe - that was the death of democracy and the beginning of the age of American tyranny... We even had one of their elected leaders calling for impeachment simply because Obama was THINKING about these executive actions...
But alas, Heir Obama has signed the action. And now in order for these things to become law they must first be introduced to congress via a bill authored by congress. Then it mus pass the house of representatives, and then pass the senate, and then by signed into law by President Barack Obama... Oh this tyranny is killing me!
Yes people, this is the tyranny they speak of. This is the tyranny they feel presidents should be impeached for... This is the tyranny they need high capacity magazines and AR-15's to protect themselves from... I wonder if they really are not aware just how dumb they are, or if they just don't care how dumb they look? Maybe both, who knows.
Seriously people - anybody that thinks this is tyranny needs a check up from the neck up...
What you have described is our system of government, and how we enact laws.
That doesn't always work for the right-wing. They only believe in the law-making process when they agree with the laws being proposed.
Founding Father: "So, let's see, you voted for President, you don't like some of what he has proposed, but not actually done, you can vote him out of office in 4 years, and undo everything he's done, but you think you're living under tyranny, and you want to impeach him?"
Art of CIP
Posts: 21,234
Long Beach, California, US
The Signature Image wrote: What you have described is our system of government, and how we enact laws.
That doesn't always work for the right-wing. They only believe in the law-making process when they agree with the laws being proposed.
Other than that they believe in democracy.
Oh no Signature Image... Our Federal Republic and all of its various mechanisms of "democracy" and "checks and balances of power" are clearly a tyranny...
Go out...
Get your gun...
Stand at the ready to defend yourself against it!
Art of CIP
Posts: 21,234
Long Beach, California, US
Chris Macan wrote:
Dude... I think those are all things the NRA supported last week,
You know... before "King Hussein" put them in his plan.
Ohhhh... that fukin tyrant!
Apparently they have willingly accepted their programming, in that they believe that pretty much any constitutional procedure used to champion anything they disagree with is tyranny...
I'm still waiting for the Kenyan, Islamic, Commie, Socialist, Devil Worshipping, Zombie Apocalypse take over? You bitches lied to me when you said it was going to happen!
Art of CIP
Posts: 21,234
Long Beach, California, US
Untitled Photographer wrote: I'm still waiting for the Kenyan, Islamic, Commie, Socialist, Devil Worshipping, Zombie Apocalypse take over? You bitches lied to me when you said it was going to happen!
I'm still trying to figure out how President Obama is both a Nazi and a communist at the same time. Historical confusion abounds...
Someone post the statistics of people killed by guns since 1960... is the trend going up before the order or going down?
And we all know criminals are going to say "Well. Damn. I WAS going to go on this mass killing spree with my gun.. but Obama signed this exec order that stops me from getting what I need ILLEGALLY".
American citizens killed without due process.
Property of American's seized without due process.
People imprisoned without due process.
Searches without warrants or probable cause.
Media prosecuted and shut down for publishing that which disagrees with the government.
Al Lock Photography wrote: American citizens killed without due process.
Property of American's seized without due process.
People imprisoned without due process.
Searches without warrants or probable cause.
Media prosecuted and shut down for publishing that which disagrees with the government.
All happening.
Sure sounds like tyranny to me.
That list sounds like it came from Amy Goodman to me!
"A 5-year-old girl was suspended from school earlier this week after she made what the school called a "terrorist threat." Her weapon of choice? A small, Hello Kitty automatic bubble blower."
I just read the "23-point plan". Everyone really needs to calm the hell down, on both sides. You're all getting worked up, and everyone is shouting louder to be heard over the other person. Just... think, analyze, take another calm breath, and THEN speak.
Over and over again, the list attempts to bridge connections between agencies for better information-sharing. It attempts to bring better enforcement to laws already on the books, with regard to making sure the mentally ill are not allowed to purchase firearms. It attempts to make it easier to trace the path of a gun used in a crime, and to allow LEOs to do a proper background check on someone for whom they've already seized a gun- and note that this does not give or broaden any extra search/seizure laws, it only effects the ability to do a proper background check to make sure the person who had the gun, is supposed to be able to have the gun.
I'm happy to be a lawful and responsible firearm owner, and I think it's absolutely insane that anyone would oppose making sure firearms do not end up in the wrong hands.
Yes, it will still happen- but there damn sure better be effective laws on the books to take them away from the mentally ill, and people who have shown their disrespect for life and/or this country by committing crimes that would prevent them from legally purchasing or owning a firearm.
I'm happy we have the second amendment, and I would be right there in the fight against "tyranny" if it existed. Some people need to get their head out of their asses, start thinking rationally, and start speaking calmly. This is not going to get solved by the scared soccer moms wielding politicians while the reactionary among the gun crowd loses their shit in "pry it out of my cold, dead hands" fervor.
Bottom line: it says nothing about taking or restricting firearms for law-abiding citizens for whom it's mentally safe to be armed, banning certain types of weapons of any size or kind or magazine capacity, or anything else about removing or limiting firearm access from the hands of law-abiding citizens.
Calm the hell down, people. Do it from your bunker or minivan/SUV if you must, but take some deep breaths already.
This is how we all get screwed up... we lose our sense of right and wrong because people have died- children have died- and scared people do dumb things. There are good ideas being proposed to help limit- as much as possible- the purchase and possession of firearms by individuals who should not have them. These are guidelines already in the books, but not enforced well enough because there is not enough agency cooperation nationwide to maintain a coherent list of unauthorized individuals.
Getting more riled up only riles up the opposition more- and you do not want scared, riled-up soccer moms to get any more upset.
(For the record, "soccer moms" refers to any person who is attempting to ban guns by waving the "save the children" banner, making this foolish and unconstitutional suggestion because they allow fear to run their lives, instead of reason.)
Chris Macan
Posts: 12,736
HAVERTOWN, Pennsylvania, US
Michael Kerrek wrote: Over and over again, the list attempts to bridge connections between agencies for better information-sharing. It attempts to bring better enforcement to laws already on the books, with regard to making sure the mentally ill are not allowed to purchase firearms. It attempts to make it easier to trace the path of a gun used in a crime, and to allow LEOs to do a proper background check on someone for whom they've already seized a gun- and note that this does not give or broaden any extra search/seizure laws, it only effects the ability to do a proper background check to make sure the person who had the gun, is supposed to be able to have the gun.
I know... total tyranny!
How dare the president use an executive order to try and do some of the things the NRA has been saying they wanted!
Of course... maybe the NRA never really wanted them.
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 11,625
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Michael Kerrek wrote: I just read the "23-point plan". Everyone really needs to calm the hell down, on both sides. You're all getting worked up, and everyone is shouting louder to be heard over the other person. Just... think, analyze, take another calm breath, and THEN speak.
Over and over again, the list attempts to bridge connections between agencies for better information-sharing. It attempts to bring better enforcement to laws already on the books, with regard to making sure the mentally ill are not allowed to purchase firearms. It attempts to make it easier to trace the path of a gun used in a crime, and to allow LEOs to do a proper background check on someone for whom they've already seized a gun- and note that this does not give or broaden any extra search/seizure laws, it only effects the ability to do a proper background check to make sure the person who had the gun, is supposed to be able to have the gun.
I'm happy to be a lawful and responsible firearm owner, and I think it's absolutely insane that anyone would oppose making sure firearms do not end up in the wrong hands.
Yes, it will still happen- but there damn sure better be effective laws on the books to take them away from the mentally ill, and people who have shown their disrespect for life and/or this country by committing crimes that would prevent them from legally purchasing or owning a firearm.
I'm happy we have the second amendment, and I would be right there in the fight against "tyranny" if it existed. Some people need to get their head out of their asses, start thinking rationally, and start speaking calmly. This is not going to get solved by the scared soccer moms wielding politicians while the reactionary among the gun crowd loses their shit in "pry it out of my cold, dead hands" fervor.
Bottom line: it says nothing about taking or restricting firearms for law-abiding citizens for whom it's mentally safe to be armed, banning certain types of weapons of any size or kind or magazine capacity, or anything else about removing or limiting firearm access from the hands of law-abiding citizens.
Calm the hell down, people. Do it from your bunker or minivan/SUV if you must, but take some deep breaths already.
This is how we all get screwed up... we lose our sense of right and wrong because people have died- children have died- and scared people do dumb things. There are good ideas being proposed to help limit- as much as possible- the purchase and possession of firearms by individuals who should not have them. These are guidelines already in the books, but not enforced well enough because there is not enough agency cooperation nationwide to maintain a coherent list of unauthorized individuals.
Getting more riled up only riles up the opposition more- and you do not want scared, riled-up soccer moms to get any more upset.
(For the record, "soccer moms" refers to any person who is attempting to ban guns by waving the "save the children" banner, making this foolish and unconstitutional suggestion because they allow fear to run their lives, instead of reason.)
The truth is that you never read the details of the 23 orders....you only read something like a "summarized list" that was completely without details...and possibly "sugar-coated" to be palatable. The "sugar-coated" summarized list was made available to the public by.....guess who?....the White House. So, essentially, they provided what appears to be a harmless list. OK. But where are the details??? The "real story" is always in the "details".
We all understand that the POTUS has 23 ideas he'd like to implement...but where are the details???? Here's the problem....there are no details that the POTUS is willing to share. It's not like you can search the internet to read the details of what he signed. The details are a secret.
The POTUS didn't ask for Congressional input. He circumvented Congress. Despite the fact that these 23 orders are being referred to as "executive orders" they simply are not. The reason they are not executive orders is that if they were, they would have to be made public....and they aren't public....the elusive details are part of Obama's secret plan...the details of which he doesn't want made public. It seems that he'll attempt to implement his secret plan, using various government agencies, without divulging the details. The lack of details means essentially he'll have little opposition and can pretty much do as he likes. It is not by accident, that the POTUS did not enact executive orders, he's a constitutional scholar. Instead of signing executive orders, (which are made public), he signed "executive memorandums" which are virtually identical to "executive orders" except for one small detail...unlike executive orders...executive memorandums can be secret.
So we have a POTUS who is doing something involving gun control, possibly infringing on the 2nd amendment, and he won't disclose the details. Sweet. So much for transparency!
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 11,625
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Robb Mann wrote: Our founding fathers would be buying land in Montana and living off the grid...
Nedah Oyin wrote: 'Our' founding fathers lived hundreds of years ago when that was the only option..
Yes. Today, they would have "other" options. For example, they could decide to live in Chicago, which has gun laws that are amongst the toughest in the nation...and yet, somehow, a very high and rising rate of gun violence. I'm fairly certain they'd question why there's so many restrictions on lawful, sane citizens, in a place where there is so much violence. I'm fairly certain that they would not find much comfort in knowing that with a telephone the police can be summoned and they'll arrive to "fix" everything in usually about 10-20 minutes.
Robb Mann wrote: Our founding fathers would be buying land in Montana and living off the grid...
Our founding fathers are the Lee Iacocca, the Colin Powell, the Johnnie Cochran, the Everett Dirksen (I may be the only one who recognizes that name) of the more modern era. They were the merchants, lawyers, CEO's, and statesmen of their time. That's actually one thing that set the American Revolution apart from so many others - it was conducted by the intelligentsia.
Art of CIP
Posts: 21,234
Long Beach, California, US
udor wrote: "Heir Obama"?
According to our more activist brothers and sisters of hard right leanings Mr. Obama is a tyrant. Clearly the man must be heir apparent to the throne of America and not a twice elected president by the citizenry of America!
The truth is that you never read the details of the 23 orders....you only read something like a "summarized list" that was completely without details...and possibly "sugar-coated" to be palatable. The "sugar-coated" summarized list was made available to the public by.....guess who?....the White House. So, essentially, they provided what appears to be a harmless list. OK. But where are the details??? The "real story" is always in the "details".
We all understand that the POTUS has 23 ideas he'd like to implement...but where are the details???? Here's the problem....there are no details that the POTUS is willing to share. It's not like you can search the internet to read the details of what he signed. The details are a secret.
The POTUS didn't ask for Congressional input. He circumvented Congress. Despite the fact that these 23 orders are being referred to as "executive orders" they simply are not. The reason they are not executive orders is that if they were, they would have to be made public....and they aren't public....the elusive details are part of Obama's secret plan...the details of which he doesn't want made public. It seems that he'll attempt to implement his secret plan, using various government agencies, without divulging the details. The lack of details means essentially he'll have little opposition and can pretty much do as he likes. It is not by accident, that the POTUS did not enact executive orders, he's a constitutional scholar. Instead of signing executive orders, (which are made public), he signed "executive memorandums" which are virtually identical to "executive orders" except for one small detail...unlike executive orders...executive memorandums can be secret.
So we have a POTUS who is doing something involving gun control, possibly infringing on the 2nd amendment, and he won't disclose the details. Sweet. So much for transparency!
c_h_r_i_s
Posts: 13,325
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
Al Lock Photography wrote: American citizens killed without due process.
Property of American's seized without due process.
People imprisoned without due process.
Searches without warrants or probable cause.
Media prosecuted and shut down for publishing that which disagrees with the government.
so this list came off of MSNBC. Did Michael Moore approve it first? Did Rosanne Barr give it her rubber stamp? It seems the liberals on SB are gushing over this hogwash.
They missed a number of details...like the constitutionality of a US President bastardizing his "executive order" privileges....or research on violence in video games and movies and the effect it has on children.
We as a society have been desensitized to violence so much by the media and by Hollywood that our children grow up not knowing the difference between reality and fiction. That being said, this is just another knee jerk reaction and in no way will reduce gun violence. The only way to do that is to fix America culturally.
FlirtynFun Photography wrote: They missed a number of details...like the constitutionality of a US President bastardizing his "executive order" privileges....
I am not THAT familiar with the constitution. Could you please show me the passage that addresses or defines what "bastardizing his [the president] 'executive order" privileges..." exactly is.
FlirtynFun Photography wrote: or research on violence in video games and movies and the effect it has on children.
We as a society have been desensitized to violence so much by the media and by Hollywood that our children grow up not knowing the difference between reality and fiction. That being said, this is just another knee jerk reaction and in no way will reduce gun violence. The only way to do that is to fix America culturally.
Please also show me how a female nipple on television is going to cause greater harm to the development and mental stability than violence on television and video games. (Janet Jackson's Nipple Gate)
| 
| 
| edu