BREAKING: President Readying Executive Orders on Gun Control

Vice President Biden and President Obama walking to post Senate vote press conference yesterday. (courtesy Reuters)

“Vice President Biden told White House allies in the gun control fight Thursday that President Obama will be announcing new executive actions on gun violence in the days after the Senate voted down a gun violence bill,” buzzfeed.com reports. “On a conference call with ‘stakeholders,’ Biden told gun control advocates that the fight is not over and that eventual action on gun control will come. Press were not invited to the conference call; a participant provided BuzzFeed with access.” The White House is already walking back Biden’s promises. But here’s part of the transcript . . .

Look, I know you’re going to say that I’m just being an optimist and I’m trying to put a good face on this. But, you know, I’ve been around here a long time and we’ve already done, because of you, some really good things. Number one, the president is already lining up some additional executive actions he’s going to be taking later this week.

Already we have put out notifications to all communities that if they want school resource officers to use their portion of the COPS grant to be able to deal with a school resource officer or someone in the school who’s a counselor, or whatever they need.

Secondly, we also have pushed forward grants for new and available funding for dealing with training teachers and dealing with alerting them to high-risk, you know, kids in their communities and their school that are signs that they’re going to have a real problem and may be the very kids you need to get to now before they end up like an Adam Lanza. We also are going to have a national mental health dialogue where we’re going to vastly expand mental health availability under the Mental Health Parity act as well as the Affordable Care Act.

OK that’s the bit that the White House says refers to existing Executive Orders, signed between Newtown and yesterday’s Senate debate about background checks. And then there’s this . . .

We also are reviewing the list of prohibited purchasers to maybe expand that list of prohibited purchasers. Granted, only 60% of people who go for a purchase are doing it [background checks].

I wonder what that means. Or if it’s just “Double Barrel” Joe shooting his mouth off. Again.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

204 Responses to BREAKING: President Readying Executive Orders on Gun Control

  1. avatarJon R. says:

    Let the bells of tyranny ring!

    • avatarRedWingFanJan says:

      He will use obamacare and doctors to have people diagnosed as mentally impaired for any reason he deems viable and then they will not be allowed to purchase. They are already doing this to veterans diagnosed with any level of ptsd. He is evil and we must be ready to fight.

      • avatarconceal7 says:

        i feel that this too will fizzle out seeing as it is totally against the HIPAA privacy rule.

        just my guess at it.

        • avatarepador says:

          There is a loophole in HIPPA that is already being used to have US Census Workers review patient charts without patient consent for a CDC study “National Ambulatory Medical Care Study” in medical practices across the country — don’t forget the CDC considers gun violence under its purveyance.

      • avatarShawn Armstrong says:

        They’re already doing it to the veterans. I’ve already refused treatment from the VA for a shoulder and neck injury, because they’re giving doctors bonuses for the number of guns they confiscate. The going rate right now for a veterans 2nd amendment right is $3,000.00. You go in for one problem, and they send to a psychiatrist, and he makes some bogus diagnosis.

        • avatarMoe says:

          Good for you! My father was a POW from Nam. He did not have insurance so went to the VA hospital. First, the dr was from Nam so that made him very uncomfortable. They basically let him die!!! Certainly did not treat him the way he needed to be treated. He passed of Pancreatic Cancer in 2000. They told him there was NOTHING wrong with him. No, nothing wrong, he was just FULL of freaking cancer. So, not only did they deny him his POW status before he died, but had he be diagnosised correctly, he may still be alive. Shame that we send our people to war and dont give a crap about them when they come back messed up. Very sad! Thanks for what you did for me and my family. God Bless you!

      • avatarindeed! says:

        Yes, that’s an extremely likely scenario. That’s a very realistic fear that is likely to happen – in real life and everything!

      • avatarFat_Italian_Stallion says:

        That requires doctors to comply. They already hate him enough with the obamacare provisions that already exist. Good luck getting them to do more.

    • avatarPat says:

      Or the shots from an assassins bullet? I hope a libtard martyr is not made, as it would be terrible for the country, but people on the fringes would become unhinged.

  2. avatarjwm says:

    So, what’s the procedure for over riding an EO?

    • avatarshon says:

      There isn’t one, they’re laws…..

      • avatarPeter says:

        No, they dictate administration of the executive branch

      • avatarralph land says:

        the president CANNOT by the constitution make any laws.that is the territory of congress.but this man seems to think he is above the law. he is a tyrant and this country had damn sure better wake up.

        • avatarthomass says:

          For better or worse; since administrative law got grafted into the government the President can sorta make law… but either other branch of government can try to shut it down… if the exec fights the other branch, it then goes to whoever gets two out of three between the branches. I’m not saying I approve and actually I think the progressives got the idea for this admin law stuff from Mussolini… that said; its the way the government works now. The exec branch can ‘make’ law (re: when it comes to policies for exec agencies)…

        • avatarFat_Italian_Stallion says:

          The country won’t because that would be racist not to do what our first black president says to do, even if it’s unconstitutional

        • avatarBeth says:

          I agree with Ralph! AMERICA WAKE UP NOW!!!!

          By the way Italian Stallion, Check your history He is not the first black President check “Good Ole Abe Lincoln” heritage tree.

      • avatarPascal says:

        An EO is not a law. He can tell departments how to execute a law within a framework of an existing law but a president cannot make laws.

        But, Obama has been known to circumvent the laws and bend them.

        • avatarJPD says:

          He can try. Congress grants the administration the right to use use executive orders to administer laws already enacted. If a president oversteps, Congress, and Supreme court have the power to stop the execution of an executive order.

        • avatarSoccerchainsaw says:

          “But, Obama has been known to circumvent the laws and bend them.”

          Bend? Try break. Let’s not forget F&F and the bizarro followup, requiring reporting of multiple long gun sales in border states (prohibited by law).

      • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

        Actually EO’s can not create new law, but rather define existing laws. So they could say anyone who is a member of a militia, or Christian is now a prohibited person. This isn’t creating law but rather refining it’s definition.
        Of course if he did this it would not be a good thing, my guess is that a challenge for verbiage like that would more than likely get tossed.
        Then again he might just be off his rocker, and really make a law which bypasses the whole checks and balances thing. Course that would carry over into the next election cycle and pretty much assure that any candidate on the left would have a hell of a time being elected. People would be pissed and Obama would be a cancer to the party.

        • avatarAccur81 says:

          He’s already a cancer to the nation – being a cancer to the party wouldn’t change much.

        • avataruncommon_sense says:

          “Course that would carry over into the next election cycle and pretty much assure that any candidate on the left would have a hell of a time being elected.”

          The Prez may not see it that way at all. In fact he might actually be convinced that a majority of the citizens of the U.S. would applaud him for such activities and guarantee that the Progressive candidate wins the 2016 election.

        • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

          Daniel: If people aren’t pissed off yet at Obama, they are never going to be pissed off at Obama, no matter what the next nonsense he dreams up.

        • avatarscardog says:

          congress can override an executive order as can the courts.

        • avatarWill says:

          You tend to forget most of the nation has a short memory in which politicians are quick to capitalize on. 1994′s AWB was just a little too close to elections to be forgotten quick enough for them.

        • avatareffinayright says:

          POTUS can’t define existing laws in such a manner that acting under their redefinition yields unconstitutional results. Thus, he can’t decree that Christians or militia members can’t own guns. A POTUS can’t do indirectly what Congress can’t do directly.

      • avatarderfel cadarn says:

        They only apply to the executive branch he can order anything he likes, he still works for us and the Constitution is still the law of the land. Bobo can go get stuffed.

    • avatarBLAMMO says:

      Ignore it. We don’t work for him and he’s not the boss of us. I’m not in the military and I’m not a government employee. No private citizen or company has to follow an Presidential Executive Order.

      • avatarKY1911 says:

        Sorry, but that’s not how it works. An Executive Order is a defacto law as it has been interpreted as such by the courts. Congress cannot veto an Executive Order, but they can pass laws superseding Executive Orders to the extent they maintain a super majority to override a presidential veto. Obama can do a helluva lot via Executive Order if he so chooses. #1 on his list will be banning the import of semi-auto weapons – rifles, shotguns and handguns. And there’s a precedent for this: Bush #1 did it in 1989.

        • avatarCurtD says:

          No US citizen, government or military included, has no obligation to enforce or comply with any law or order that is not adherent with the Constitution. He can fill a trapper keeper with executive orders if he is so inclined but they don’t mean a thing without validation.

        • avatarNor'Easter says:

          Thanks for the explanation and you are quite correct. In addition though, they are subject to court review. I believe some case during the Korean War overturned Truman’s attempted take-over of some steel mills or such and EO’s have been carefully tied to a passed law ever since.

          Since they’re not specifically authorized by the Constitution, it’s always risky to issue them for a purpose strongly opposed by a dedicated group and I really believe they’re playing with fire if they go too far.

          Dare I say it, there’s always impeachment.

      • avatarBrad says:

        Tell that to the Japanese-Americans FDR put in camps by Executive Order.

        • avatarchaz says:

          all the crazies on the left keep telling me ‘it can’t happen. It won’t happen. Don’t be that extreme’ etc. and so on.

          History has PLENTY of examples of how extreme things can get.

    • avatarSkeeter says:

      Revolution!

    • avatarJoe Grine says:

      How do you “over ride” an EO made by a Democrat ??? Vote Republican!

      • avatarcsmallo says:

        Riiight, because in the 2012 election one candidate had signed a gun ban, hint: It wasn’t Obama.

        Sure Obama is a tyrant, but then most presidents are. William Henry Harrison was our best president. A shame more of them don’t follow his example.

        • avatarMikeinid says:

          Really? Your guy is whining and crying because he can’t take our guns legally, and you want us to believe Romney would have done this? Obama said “no gun control.” Is that what this was? Democrats are statists and fascists. If you don’t like it, change it, but don’t give me the line that republicans are worse. There is a difference between the parties. If you are honest, you can see it.

    • avatarTyler says:

      Impeachment and nullification of his presidency. If??? God forbid that failed? If it really came down to it? we’d have all out civil war.

    • avatarscardog says:

      congress can override an executive order as can the courts.

    • There is no “procedure”. An EO does not “make law” and yet has the authority OF law. It can’t be “repealed” because there is nothing to appeal and no process in place. It is a defacto Decree with no simple means of countering it.

      With that said, exactly one has been challenged and beaten in court, back in the 60′s or maybe even earlier. Lawsuits and dogged pursuit thereof are the only way to strike down an EO. This takes money, legal standing and potentially years. OTOH, no Citizen is actually subject to an EO but that’s problematic. If the “authorities” such as they are want to enforce it on you your response is…submit. Or get shot. In the former you can, if you have money or benefactors, fight it in court for a large portion of the rest of your life.

      Since this subject is firearms those who are willing to enforce it will, you can rest assured, shoot first and not bother to ask questions. The predictable result is exactly what the Left wants in order to take their next steps.

    • avatarWeisshaupt says:

      You override an E.O. by watering the tree of liberty.

  3. avatarOkierim says:

    Kiss anything foreign goodbye BHO will kill imports

    • avatarPascal says:

      How? Only the Senate can put laws on trade?

      • avatarm11_9 says:

        Previous law allow the exec to interpret what imports meet a sporting definition. Bush-I banned a bunch of imports as non-sporting in 89 under this.

    • avatarWilliam Burke says:

      Did you come out of mom backwards? It’s DOMESTIC goods that are being shut down, not foreign ones.

  4. avatark4R-15 says:

    Prepare to duck and cover (like the DHS tells citizens to respond to an active shooter threat in your area)

  5. avatarIn Memphis says:

    Go home Biden, you’re drunk

  6. avatarPowers says:

    He really hates this country doesn’t he?

  7. avatardlj95118 says:

    …f*kin communist – you had your vote, and now you’re just gonna shove it through.

  8. avatar16V says:

    Apparently the reaction was swift and harsh as “Buzzfeed” has an update claiming that ‘Uhh, did I say new? I meant implementing the last EOs. Yeah, that’s the ticket’

  9. avatarJeh says:

    I see Hitler really wants people to bow down and kiss his @ss, oh wait that’s Obama, eh same thing.

  10. avatarBob says:

    So Obama want’s to be kicked from office. There must be an easier way for him to retire.

    • avatarWilliam Burke says:

      See… not every terminal ‘s’ mus be preceded by an apostrophe; in fact, what you wrote is “So Obama want is…”, “Obama WANTS”.

      Here are the simple rules:

      http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/punctuation/apostrophe-rules.html

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        Ouch. Many mobile devices auto-correct. When I was trying to write “Ouch” my iPhone tried to write “Much.” Maybe my iPhone thinks I need another background check or psychological evaluation. It was built in China but has Chicago style desires.

      • avatarBrock says:

        I thought he was saying the president’s want is to be kicked from office. Thankfully: you’re we’re here to straight-en that out?

  11. Like we couldn’t see this coming? Gentlemen, prepare to defend yourselves.

  12. avatarOldLawman says:

    My first thought after reading the good news the other day about the Senate vote was to look out for executive orders.

    “If one child’s life is saved…” What BS.

    For a brutally honest take on all the parents involved in this kabuki theater, try this:
    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=219764

  13. avatarpk in AZ says:

    I would imagine that there are TTAG followers here that are democrats….

    Aren’t you guys so happy that you not only elected him the first time….

    But also the second?

    What’s that saying about a sucker born every minute…

    • avatarPascal says:

      At least the voted. How many gun owners are not even registered to vote or get involved?

      • avatarSilver says:

        “At least they voted.”

        So that’s like scolding a drunk driver for killing someone, but you saying “at least he drives.”

      • avatardwb says:

        ^^ this. rumors are that a significant (40%) share of people who wrote or testified against the Maryland gun grab were not registeted.

      • avatarRichard says:

        I hope all gun owners will get involved in this fight we need everybody.

      • avatarJake F. says:

        I’ve got a friend that voted democrat, he’s actually come out and said that he knows he screwed up. He’s decided to change parties after this last election because he just couldn’t stand them anymore.

        • avatarWeisshaupt says:

          Too Late. 100% votes in some districts means cheating. The fact no one has been arrested means that even when its obvious, nothing will be done. Now how much cheating occurred in places where they didn’t make it obvious? There will never be another fair election in this country. The Dems don’t want one. Why else are they trying to bring in Mexicans to vote for them?

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      I voted for Romney, but I don’t believe he was a stellar candidate. Rand Paul, on the other hand, appreciates freedom, balanced budgets, a secure border, and less intrusive government. That’s some change I could believe in.

  14. avatarLucubration says:

    Yeah, screw representation; our Dear Leader knows what’s best for us!

    The last several years I’ve slowly progressed from ‘bemused’ to ‘concerned’ to ‘flabbergasted’ to ‘outraged’ to ‘fsking disgusted’ with this administration.

    History should remember Obama’s administration as the “War on Rights”.

    • avatartheaton says:

      This administration? Clinton came up with the Patriot Act but couldn’t get it through. 9/11 gave Bush the opportunity to push it Through. If you think there’s a dimes worth of difference between the Ds and the Rs then you’re part of the problem. As long as the sheep keep voting for the Ds and the Rs, they’ll continue to try and chip away at our rights. As long as we’re to lazy to get off the couch and do something, they’ll succeed at chipping our rights away. We don’t need to look hard to find someone to blame, we only need look as far as the closest mirror!

      • avatarJPD says:

        +1000

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        Look at the Senators who voted for gun control, then look at who voted against. If you think D’s and R’s are the same in regard to the 2A, you need to re-evaluate your reasoning skills.

        On the other hand, if a realistic Independent comes in, I’m all ears.

      • avatarClyde says:

        Amen Brother!

      • avatarIXLR8 says:

        Sad but true, both the same

      • avatarMark says:

        There is a difference between D’s and R’s and it’s obvious. I hate it when people make this silly and simpleton argument. We need the R’s in office and NOW. Once that’s accomplished, we can figure out how to get the damn big government R’s out of office. It’s a lot of work but what’s the viable alternative?

        I wish we could just burn it down and start over as well but that is still not the best alternative. I must say that day seems to be drawing uncomfortably near though. However, to say a Rubio is the same thing as a Reid is just asinine.

    • avatarIn Memphis says:

      “History should remember Obama’s administration as the ‘War on Rights’.”

      Too bad the people writing and teaching the books are on his side. Hitler had to burn books to prevent people from thinking outside the box as did England in the book “Farenheight 451″ but in the USA we can make (up) history.

  15. avatarimrambi says:

    Here is his new expansion of prohibited persons.

    Persons who are:
    1) White
    2) African American
    3) Hispanic
    4) Asian
    5) any ethnicity that can be filled in on form 4473

    This also includes those who
    1) are Republicans
    2) are independents
    3) are Democrats
    4) excludes those that are do not and will never own a firearm and are for civilian disarmament.

    (sarcasm off)

    • avatarPascal says:

      No, but you are probably on the right track. That 4473 form is going to get much longer. Criminals are going to be pissed they have to fill out a second page.

  16. avatartheaton says:

    “But, you know, I’ve been around here a long time ”

    This is the underlying problem.

  17. avatarjp says:

    Impeachment anyone?

    • avatarIn Memphis says:

      Could he be impeached for enacting laws that were shot down through the propper channels?

      • avatarPwrserge says:

        If he goes one inch outside existing statute? That would be rulling by decree. By definition that is insurrection and therefore treason. We don’t just impeach traitors.

        • avatarRambeast says:

          When was the last time anyone from the three branches was convicted of treason? Even if convicted (and that would take some extreme action) do you really believe that the death penalty would be implemented?

  18. avatarbumpysquish says:

    Anything unconstitutional is null and void , Anything representing tyranny will be met with a constitutional reply

    • avatartheaton says:

      I would have thought Obama starting a war without Congressional approval represented Tyranny but very few said anything. If we ever screw-up the courage for a Constitutional reply, it will be so late that the vacuum will be filled by China and Venezuela rushing in to claim the land.

      • avatarSilver says:

        Let them. The leftists that voted in Obama will finally get the supposed utopia they so desired and will learn the truth the hard way.

      • avatarlittle pony says:

        You also have to condemn Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, and Truman for their “Police actions” (or whatever other BS euphemisms they use for illegal war).

        US presidents seem to be addicted to belligerence.

  19. Looks like the original story has been updated:

    “Update: A White House official told BuzzFeed the executive actions Biden was referring to on the call are part of Obama’s original list of 23 executive actions on guns announced in January.”

    • avatargloomhound says:

      So he didn’t say: “We also are reviewing the list of prohibited purchasers to maybe expand that list of prohibited purchasers. Granted, only 60% of people who go for a purchase are doing it.” then?

    • avatarOldLawman says:

      Yeah…we’ll see. Don’t believe it, personally.

      They must really be chapped. Despite the warning signs for the last couple of weeks that they did not have enough votes, they can’t help but act as though this was a last-minute surprise and sneak attack by those dastardly gun owners and the evil NRA.

  20. avatarMr. Pierogie says:

    I hate to say I told you so, but… Obviously most of us saw that coming. Question is, how bad is he going to make it?

    • avatartheaton says:

      He will make it just as bad as we let him. The founders knew that there would be people like Bush and Obama that would come along an usurp power and try and Tyrannize the United States. That is why they put the government in the hands of the people. They just couldn’t foresee an America in which the vast majority of the citizenry would be cowards!

  21. E.O.’s only apply to the Federal Agencies of the Executive Branch..if they are contrary to law, they are subject to being overturned by the courts…and certainly one would have a good argument for injunctive relief against their application. Additionally, once a new president takes office, it is common practice to cancel multiple E.O.s of their predecessor.

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      Those courts did not overturn Obamacare or the SAFE Act.

      • avatarZM 1306 says:

        Nor the Hugh’s amendment, or the NFA, or the many other state and federal weapon laws that are all infringements on the second amendment.

  22. avatargloomhound says:

    I would just like to take this time to remind you all that said: “Obama is not going to take and take your guns.” that you said this.

  23. avatarLemming says:

    My God! It just dawned on me. They really, really, really believe the “40% of guns don’t go through NICS” thing. I mean, it’s not just a lie to convince the masses, they really mean it.

    • avatarNor'Easter says:

      Yes, this is a strong selling point for them. The worst thing to do now is let our guard down. The grabbers have been set back but they’ll try again.

      The main thing to do is work on the misconception that 40% of sales are “off the books” (the gun show loophole) and the idea that a background check is harmless with 90% supposedly in favor.

      I don’t think it would be anywhere near those numbers if people realized how intrusive and dangerous these checks can be and how many gun laws there already are.

    • avatartheaton says:

      It really doesn’t matter what they believe, it matters what they can convince the sheeple to believe.

    • avatarJohn Doesky says:

      And there is a big percentage of them that think that magazines are one time use like the dimwit democratic legislator “gun control expert” who was pushing for magazine limits for 4 years in Colorado thinks. Imbeciles.

  24. avatarSilver says:

    I hope in his misinformed, childish tantrum, he unleashes the most staggeringly ludicrous EO’s that ensure his impeachment. His handlers might stop him before he does, but still.

    In any case, as ever, we see in Obama the true nature of a tyrant. As I said in the post where we won the day yesterday, tyrants do not accept the rule of law and he will act unilaterally to crush the rights of his would-be subjects.

    Yesterday wasn’t the end of a fight…it was Americans drawing a line in the sand. You really think a narcissistic self-fancied emperor isn’t going to step across? Keep your powder dry.

    • avataruncommon_sense says:

      “… he [Obama] unleashes the most staggeringly ludicrous EO’s that ensure his impeachment. His handlers might stop him before he does, but still.”

      Have you considered the possibility that his handlers actually want the executive orders that he will create?

      This is the problem with all of us good people. We try really hard to play by the rules and keep assuming that the elite play by the rules as well. The elite play by the rules when it suits them. When the rules do not suit them, they try to change the rules. If they cannot change the rules, they buy-off the people who would enforce the rules. This situation is no different.

  25. avatarMuddy says:

    At what point do the idiots on the left realize that this man is only hurting their agendas by his bullheaded approaches to circumnavigate not only the current laws we have in place but the Constitution as well? I know I know it’s a rhetorical question.

    • avatarSilver says:

      If they were intelligent or reasonable enough to see, they wouldn’t be leftists in the first place.

  26. avataralanhmn says:

    Jeeze, they got their effin vote. What is the problem? FBHO!

    • avatarSilver says:

      They didn’t want a vote. They wanted their way, like the spoiled children they are.

      Have your two year old demand a family vote for extending bedtime. When he loses, see if he doesn’t throw a fit.

  27. avatarHal J. says:

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but couldn’t he use an EO to restrict the importation of firearms & ammo? If this is the case, I’m frankly surprised he hasn’t already done so.

  28. avatarmichelle says:

    He can’t EO over Our Constitution

    • avatartheaton says:

      He can do whatever the hell he wants as long as nobody does anything to stop him. So far, we haven’t done much.

      • avatarNor'Easter says:

        You’re so right. The story of this administration is exactly that. Obama and Co have seemingly tested the limits they can push their power to and dared anyone to do something about it. They may be reaching the limits now. Hope!

      • avatarJohn Doesky says:

        Hell he got away with an EO that unilaterally declared about 1 million + illegal immigrant felons to ultimately become citizens. If he can get away with that, he pretty much believes he can get away with anything.

  29. avataruncommon_sense says:

    You know, if the Prez really wanted to play dirty pool, he could yank all staff from firearms related and unrelated programs. For example he could totally yank the staff that answers the NICS system and … POOF! … no more commercial gun sales. He could also yank all staff processing FFL applications/renewals as well as the staff that processes tax stamps for suppressors, short barreled rifles, full auto firearms, etc. And for dessert, he could triple the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives staff and audit the living $#!+ out of FFLs all across the country. (Of course while auditing the FFLs, the staff would photo copy or take digital photos of every single page of every FFL’s “bound book” and have the necessary data to compile a registry.) And the Prez could yank all staff from something totally unrelated to firearms — such as processing passports — and tell everyone that he will restaff (and resume processing passports) when Congress passes the civilian disarmament laws that he wants.

    And since neither he nor the Justice Department care about Congress or being contempt of Congress, why shouldn’t he do all of the above?

    • NO he can’t! He does not have that power.

      • avatartheaton says:

        He doesn’t have the power to start a war without Congressional authorization or imminent threat to the U.S. but he did so with hardly a word.

    • avatarJohn F says:

      :How many times do I have to remind you READ THE BOOK
      “Unintended Concequences” by Ross

    • avatarClyde says:

      Well, I guess he could do all those thing but then he’d miss all the firearms that were sold/bought on the “free” market – you know, those pesky ones that aren’t documented because the purchaser and seller didn’t go through an FFL. See why we don’t want mandatory background checks? Being able to transfer firearms without paper trails will save us in the end… maybe.

    • avatartom swift says:

      No, sabotaging the NICS system won’t work. If NICS fails, the sale can proceed. NICS allows them to stop a sale, but a sale doesn’t need NICS approval – recall that a rejection must be made within a certain time limit or the opportunity’s gone.

      And they can only “audit” FFLs annually. That’s for pure harassment purposes. Of course if ATF is investigating an actual crime that limit doesn’t apply.

      The obvious stuff has been taken care of. Remember the sunset clause on the original “assault weapons” ban. This isn’t the first time the gun grabbers have reared their despicable heads; we’ve seen these tricks before.

  30. avatarSaul Feldstein says:

    Mostly hot air, as usual, out of Joke Biden, this is actually good news as it appears Obama will double down on this gun grab rhethoric and expend his diminishing political capital on it, helping the GOP in 2014.

    • avatartheaton says:

      And if the GOP continues to nominate people of Romney’s ilk, what good will ’14 do? Or even ’16. We’ve allowed the fundamental transformation of America. We allowed Bush to take away some of our rights and spend double what Clinton did. We’ve allowed Obama to take away more of our rights and his on track to spend four times what Bush did. We must be willing to admit that the vast majority of the citizenry, including many gun owners, would rather have an SS, medicare or other government handout than having freedom.

      • avatarClyde says:

        You, sir, get it!

      • avatarJ in NC says:

        +1000

      • avatartom swift says:

        SS and Medicare are not “handouts”. They are payouts of an insurance plan which the recipients have been paying into for their entire working lives. Much like auto or home insurance – you have to pay for it, but once you do, the insurer owes you some money when certain conditions, like a house fire, or a car crash, or old age or disability, occur.

        • avatarPeter says:

          It’s yet another government scam — it’s just redistribution of wealth. If you paid into a private insurance plan and investments you would have far more return. That is, unless you are poor and wouldn’t have. Ergo, it’s a handout to those who are poor, and legalized theft from those who are successful.

  31. The people up above are right. The Constitution strictly forbids the Executive Branch, the President from creating NEW laws. He must only amend or clarify existing laws. He cannot change existing Constitutional laws as it exists, ie, destroy or go around an amendment to the constitution. If he does any of the above, its grounds for impeachment.

  32. avatarmichelle says:

    If he tries I really believe people will come out in masses demanding impeachment. This is not a gun issue. It is about his arrogance and lack of respect to and for our Country and it’s Constitution.

    • avatarSilver says:

      I like to think that, but I have zero faith in this nation’s people. The vast majority couldn’t care less about gun rights one way or the other, most wouldn’t tear themselves away from Idol to take a stance on anything, and the MSM will come to Dear Leader’s aid to brainwash them away from any impeachment demands.

      Just like 1776, it’s unfortunately the minority that truly care about America…and I’d venture to say far less than the 30 percent they had.

  33. avatarKY1911 says:

    I suspect he will try to “.08″ this thing onto the states. Change your state laws to make it what we want OR you lose your funding. Boom! Gun control.

    • avatarJ in NC says:

      Ding ding ding! You got it. It’s an established, quicker end-around all those other pesky constitutional grounds they need. Then it’s not Federal compulsion or edict, it’s just Federal “incentive” and voluntary acceptance. They did it with national speed limits. So many other examples. And now, the SCOTUS gave them the extra idea that they can probably accomplish this sort of agenda with tax and spend clause power as well. Just wait. Contrary to many assertions made on this board and others, these arseholes may be many things, but stupid they ain’t! While many of those on our side bask in the “victory” of the senate vote from this week and commence to let vigilence take a breather, Commissar Obama and his crones lie awake, planning their revenge. They’ve already been hedging bets and winning the death by 1000 cuts battles at the individual states’ levels. Just wait, til they turn their full attention and propaganda machine to that front.

      All I can say is: BOHICA

    • avatar16V says:

      Sad to say, that’s likely how it will play out.

      No support for insane .08 DWI standards (the average drunk is north of .14) ? Take away the money. Don’t think 55MPH is reasonable in MT? Take away the money.

      Uncle Sugar knows how to work it.

      • avatarPeter says:

        Same with the minimum drinking age. If it’s not at least 21 the state loses 10% of its highway funds. Funny, since that money belonged to the citizens of the state to begin with…

  34. Every time he opens his mouth and another lie comes out he is diminishing his credibility. He is cutting his own throat, and political strength. People ARE waking up and seeing a lying, cheating, capable of doing anything illegal to get what he wants. ….and the important thing is, people ARE tired of WHAT HE wants! What HE wants! The power is still with us people, we need o exercise that power that frightens him to no end and GET rid of him! American Spring, force him to resign or force impeachment processes to take our country back1

  35. avatarMr aNINNYmouse says:

    I have seen this before…..

    Mala tempora currunt.

  36. avatarMotoJB says:

    OH HELL NO!!! IMPEACH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  37. avatartjlarson2k says:

    He seems really determined to put his other foot in his mouth.

  38. avatarWendigo says:

    “The liberal messiah moves heaven and earth to show his glory and power over the corrupt and heartless Senate…”

    Naah. Get decked, Obammie.

  39. avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

    Well, just look at the way he responded to the “Dream Act” failing. He effectively did what he wanted anyway by selectively ignoring enforcement duties. Any thus far, he’s gotten away with it. We will see, but if the left stay in character, they will be back with the same proposals at every opporunity, and will ignore the law to push forward their agenda whenever they can get away with it. The only thing that isn’t clear to me is how far America will tolerate it. Have enough people woken up to vote some clowns out in 2014 and 2016? Will Obama succeed in blaming republicans enough to actually make gains in 2014? This would all be splendid drama if our liberty were not at stake.

    • avatartom swift says:

      I think we’ve seen some indication of how far they’ll tolerate it. Gun sales have never been better. That doesn’t sound like wholesale toleration of the gun-grabber agenda to me.

      What’s O going to do to bribe his base this time? Give each of ‘em another free cell phone?

  40. avatarShawn says:

    Patriot Act…you reap what you sow.

  41. avatartomjonesa22 says:

    sore looser

  42. avatarTaco Ninja says:

    I learned in school the Legislature makes the laws…the President enforces them…so why is he making the laws? That only happens in dictatorships! Yes, the naive tone is intentional.

  43. avatarStinkeye says:

    “On a conference call with ‘stakeholders’… “

    Huh, that’s funny, nobody asked me to be on the conference call. Since it’s my second amendment rights at stake, you’d think they’d consider me a stakeholder. Maybe I just didn’t have a good cell signal when they tried to call. That must be it.

  44. avatarArmchair Command'oh says:

    I’m not one to run around screaming that the sky is falling, but in this case, Obama can actually do a lot of damage.

    While he can’t sign an EO that would create new gun laws out of whole cloth, Congress has already given the ATF a lot of power in certain areas. Here is some of what Obama (through the ATF) could do:

    1. Revise the sporting-purpose test for handgun imports to effectively ban all standard service pistols, like Glocks.

    2. Revise the sporting-purpose test for Rifles to adopt the new Feinstein standard for assault weapons, resulting in the ban of a huge number of imports. This would also have 922(r) ripple effects.

    3. Adopt the ATF’s 2011 test for a non-sporting shotgun and apply that under the NFA, making many shotguns destructive devices (under that ATF standard, even adding a flashlight made a shotgun non-sporting). Note: you may think shotguns are safe because the NRA saved the day with a provision added to the 2012 appropriations bill, but that fix only applied to banning imports, not declaring a shotgun non-sporting under the NFA.

    4. Ban the importation of ammunition.

    5. Prohibit the sale of surplus ammo components. Sell the brass and lead for scrap.

    6. Take M855 off the exempt list for armor piercing ammo, claiming it no longer has a sporting purpose. Also ban copper ammunition. Federal law says the jacket can’t be more than 25% of the weight of the bullet. For copper ammo, they’ll argue the jacket is 100% of the bullet.

    7. Slow down the NICS system to take the full 3-days allowed under the law to process a request, effectively creating a 3-day waiting period.

    8. Furlow the NFA examiners and blame the sequester.

    9. Greatly increase the documentation required to conduct a NICS check.

    10. Etc.

    If I spent some time on it, I could probably come up with a bunch of other things that Obama could do under our current law. Needless to say, he could do a lot of damage. Right now, the only limit is what he thinks he can get away with politically.

    • avatarPascal says:

      An EO cannot revise existing law. Yes, he can make things more difficult, no he cannot revise anything because that would be new law. Even the ATF has to follow the law.

      5 & 7 are probable, but not likely. The rest, nope!

      • avatarArmchair Command'oh says:

        All of those items listed were created by AFT regulations. The ATF can amend its own regulations. Agencies do that every day.

        • avataruncommon_sense says:

          Exactly. As one person commented above, they could revise the form 4473 and make it 100 pages long if they want — and prosecute anyone who writes anything incorrectly on it — which is pretty much guaranteed if the form is long enough.

          These sort of things sound ridiculous to sensible, reasonable, rational people. We are not dealing with sensible, reasonable, rational people.

          And another thing. Even though they can take up to three days to return a verdict on an NICS check, there are many retailers who will not sell guns without a green light from an NICS check no matter how long it takes to get a confirmation. (They believe they will avoid all possible liability if they only sell firearms with confirmations for all sales.)

          These sort of actions are NOT new laws. They are changes to how existing law enforcement agencies — who fall under the Executive Branch — do what they do. The Prez can manage them any way he wants. And while totally de-staffing the NICS crew or over-staffing the ATFE would be insane as far as gun owners are concerned, the civilian disarmament crowds would be dancing in the streets with glib smiles on their faces because the Prez finally DID something … where Congress failed.

  45. avatarChuckN says:

    If he tries an end run around of the 2nd Amendment (and probably the
    1st, 4th etc…), I won’t worry. I’ll sit back and watch while all elected
    officials band together to institute impeachment proceedings.
    Because… you know…that will happen.

  46. avatarRimfire says:

    What else is disturbing is that potus also snubbed the British for the Thatcher funeral, a first for any White House occupier! You don’t just turn your back on our loyal Allies like that! poor behavior again, makes the USA look small. What a putz!

    • avatarRalph says:

      That putz sent a bust of Churchill back to the Brits, probably because he didn’t like what Churchill did to his homeland in Kenya.

  47. avatarMike Taylor says:

    Joe Biden is an idiot. Every time that imbecile opens the hole under his nose there is a problem. If, and I do mean a big IF, that cretin is suggesting any kind of action in violation of the constitution, then we are obligated to restore order. That fvcking retard had better not be making noise to that end.

  48. avatarBill says:

    I’ve been waiting for this shoe to drop. Bring it.

  49. avatarRalph says:

    We thought that Newtown was America’s Dunblane. It turns out that Obama thinks it was America’s Reichtag Fire, allowing him to rule by decree. Or maybe it’s just his inner Hussein revealing itself.

  50. avatarLarry Mayfield says:

    Every single one of you are completely off your rocker. All you do is spout off ignorance and complete and utter lack of realism. “Riot!”, “Revolution!”, “Impeachment!” Small-minded individuals who have no clue. You’re fast to mouth off and slow to act. God help your children, and I pray they’re not the next one stuffed in a closet by a teacher waiting for a gunman to find them in their school. What part of NINETY PERCENT of the voting public want tougher gun laws do you not understand??? Seriously? What part? If an EO is passed he is simply doing the will of the PEOPLE. It’ll pass by vote or EO at some point here very soon regardless of your lack of knowledge, fear or resentment towards this President. Sorry. If you don’t like it go back to your hills and hoard more armament. As long as you’re a law abiding citizen you’ll have no problem in purchasing them.

    • avatarDisThunder says:

      You got stones for bringing that in here, but I’d strongly recommend you do a little fact checking first. 90% of Americans supposedly support background checks right? Well, good news America! We have those. Even the evil guns shows run more background checks than not.
      And the WILL of people? That’s kinda like mob rule. The institution that is this country was designed as such to prevent the “will of the people” from, you know, over-riding the will of the rest of the people.
      Tread lightly, and you might learn something in here.

    • avatarfoggy says:

      So Larry, you think it would be a good thing for the president to ignore congress in this case? You want to live in a dictatorship? Move to North Korea. Obama seems to be channeling their leaders at this point anyway.

    • avatarJohn Doesky says:

      Hey Larry….How did you like taking that reaming yesterday .

      President StompyFeet and V.P. Pouty-Mouth didn’t look too happy.

      Waaaaaaahhhhh.

      Another problem for you…. you have your biased demographic opinion poll and we have the constitution…. I think I have more leverage (for today anyway)

    • avataruncommon_sense says:

      A quick reminder Larry:

      We live in a Constitutionally limited republic with representative democracy. That means we elect people to office to carry out the will of the people as long the will of the majority does not deprive a minority of their rights.

      With that in mind, any scheme for background checks cannot infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. If a background check costs anything or takes more than a minute, it infringes on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. If a scheme for background checks involves recording a person’s identity, it violates a citizen’s right to privacy. If a scheme of background checks or ownership requires “papers” (e.g. licenses), then that violates a citizen’s Fourth Amendment right to be secure in their persons, papers, and property and to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. (We do not live in Nazi Germany and we do NOT have to show our “papers” upon demand of our modern day Gestapo for any reason they see fit.)

      These are not small matters. If we do not protect the rights of minorities, then we live under a tyranny of the majority. And we are supposed to be living in a country free of tyranny.

    • avatarRandy Drescher says:

      Larry, If you were really secure in yourself you wouldn’t be here. Perhaps you don’t buy the gotta die for the criminal anymore? In any event, welcome, look & listen, Randy

    • avatarRalph says:

      Larry, is that you? Hey, I just want to tell you that I love your new dress.

    • avatarSilver says:

      90 percent or more of the people were in favor of slavery 200 years ago. I suppose you think it’s ok then.

      Why do you support slavery, Larry?

      We live in a Constitutional republic, not a straight democracy, where the Constitution was designed to give voice to the minority and protect them from willful idiots like…certain people posting on this page.

      I have to shake my head. Such ignorance as this is why the country is in the shape it’s in.

    • avatarjwm says:

      Larry, if slow joe and urkel wanted to protect those students in the classrooms they would have fast tracked laws allowing staff and parents to arm themselves at the schools. A background check did not stop Lanza or the Joker.

      Where are the laws mandating security fences and systems at the schools? I work in the public schools. The school I was at tonight has no fences and large floor to cieling windows next to the locked doors.

      Worried about the kids my ass. slow joe and urkel have no concern for the victims, they want to create more with thie foolish laws.

  51. avatarLauderdale Vet (@lauderdalevet) says:

    So Nick, still wear your Obama shirt to the range these days?

  52. avatared says:

    Larry, so sad to see how misinformed you are. Firstly as with most liberals you start off with uninformed rants and insults. That 90% does not represent the countries population, only of the people polled, and who were they over 80% of those were liberal Democrats like yourself, so the poll is flawed from the beginning. Next these buffoons were elected to protect the Constitution not piss on it, this Bill (and they all knew) would do nothing to prevent any shootings anywhere some of them even admitted that. It was a corner stone for full blown gun confiscation. This president is not doing the will of the people-how can you and people like you still be so blind, look at his luxury vacations, which by the way, you are paying for (well if you work you are), the real unemployment numbers are closer to average 15% nation wide and when Obama care completely kicks in more will be laid off. You need to read a basic economics book and you can see how it is supposed to work, now he wants banks to make the same kinds of bad loans that they started to make when Clinton (yes Clinton) 1st gave foreign banks permission to start doing mortgage loans here, and Bush made the mistake of actually listening to Barney Franks tell him that there was no problem in the housing market. You guys always scream about lies but you never even bother to check anything out. Why has you boy Obama used at least three names since he was a kid, how did he go from a 1 million dollar net work to over 10 in his first 2 years, why did he never actually practice law-just teach Constitutional law (that’s how he knows about trying to cheat it) if he was white he would never even been allowed to run- I know you will now say I’m a racist well I’m as much of one as him and his wife are! Learn some facts-at least all the stuff i just told you can be verified — how about your tripe?

  53. avatarg says:

    It’s all about a Game of Thrones, I mean, Game of Politics. Whenever a party doesn’t get its way (Dem or Repub), it has to find a way to “save face”… especially given the victory the gun rights community scored against gun control supporters. The President spent so much political capitol on this fight that Democrats are concerned (rightly so) that they will appear weak in future negotiations over the budget, immigration reform, etc. So while “new executive orders” sounds pretty fancy, they will NOT carry the force of brand-new laws – they can only shape interpretations of existing ones.

    That said, I can get behind executive orders mandating more funding for school safety or improving the mental health system. Let’s all hope they’re limited to just that.

    • avatarRalph says:

      I can get behind executive orders mandating more funding for school safety or improving the mental health system.

      I can’t. I do not want the same kind of people who run the Veterans Administration to have anything to do with school safety or the mental health system. Whenever the feds “fund” anything with our money, they own it. Not us. Them. And then they f^ck it up.

      • avatarDisThunder says:

        I’m afraid so. I would still like to believe government funding and effort can make things better for at least someone, somewhere, but then I think back to visiting buddies at the VA hospital and I can’t remember if I wanted to scream or cry.

  54. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    He has to show the sheep that he is powerfull otherwise the whole big daddy obama thing comes apart. There was no question he would do something, the question is how nuts is he going to get, Randy

  55. avatarFred Boas says:

    You’re wrong Joe, it’s over, and so is your political career, say BYE BYE Joe.

  56. avatarNEWTON says:

    16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256
    So to answer the question….screw him!

  57. avatarAharon says:

    When do these gun control obsessed clowns find the time to focus on any non-gun related issue?

  58. avatarKATIE says:

    I HOPE THEY IMPEACH THIS SOB

  59. avatarKenH says:

    Die Schwarzen Führer

  60. avatarAnmut says:

    Government gun grabbing liberals are always saying “we don’t want to take away guns or the 2nd Amendment, we don’t understand how people keep coming up with that conclusion – it must be the NRA’s fault.”

    THIS is why we are paranoid – because you morons can’t keep your monkeys tied to the accordion box.

  61. avatarS.CROCK says:

    so, what is the point of having a senate if emperor obama does whatever he wants in the 8 year reign?

    • avatarSilver says:

      It gives simpletons the illusion that they live in a free country. After all, none are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they’re free.

  62. avatarMax says:

    If he can’t accept the checks and balances of this country, then he can’t possibly understand the Constitution he swore an oath to defend as he is clearly violating it. A real Executive order against the Constitution must be met with impeachment or revolt.

    • avatarWeisshaupt says:

      No Liberal understands the Constitution. Fundamentally, a liberal believes that the collective OWNS, as a Slave, every individual in the society. They believe that they can sacrifice the rights of that individual to anything they fell would benefit “the collective”- which invariably ends up being a bunch of pigs hogging apples in a farmhouse. A liberal can’t comprehend the idea that individual rights trump the “will of the collective” and therefore the Declaration, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights mean nothing to them. Only power and the advancement of their agenda mean anything, and towards that goal they feel justified in lying, cheating, stealing, raping, maiming and murdering – because its not evil if it serves a Higher Cause (ultimately that cause is in bolstering their own narcissistic egos) No liberals respects you as an individual No liberal can be your friend, as they are only interested in how you serve their cause, and they will happily send you into an oven if they feel their own happiness would be furthered by it. These are not misguided people who see things differently. These are people who have rejected the very concepts of truth and morality in preference to a belief system that rewards them for merely having “good intentions.” however they chose to define them from moment to moment.

  63. avatarbour3 says:

    Please let your intractable ideology make this an existential thing, please, please, please, pretty please with sugar on top.

  64. avatardaveinga says:

    the thing about turning this up a notch is that when people start looking at the kenyan real hard, his whole house of cards falls down. computer experts claim his credentials are bogus. he didn’t take executive privilege (illegally) on fast & furious for no reason. benghazi is still hanging around his neck. his bosses must really want the guns badly, especially from vet’s who can operate equipment, military arms/armor. sounds like there is a timetable here. face it, he can’t step out of that office, ever. his past will have him in prison in no time, along w/ all his cronies. its all or nothing now. he is very predictable when you understand his agenda. be ready. kypd

    • avatarPeter says:

      We don’t have a Congress that has the stones to do anything about it. If they really did, they would call for Holder’s arrest and actually follow through.

  65. avatarapetra says:

    Meanwhile, back in reality, schools across the nation are requesting more information about how to participate in the NRA’s Armed Security initiative.

  66. avatarAPBTFan says:

    Petulant President.

    He’s only ten years older than me and any kid I grew up with, myself included, would’ve got a whoopin’ and a damn good talking to about how to act like a grown up if we acted that way. Whoever raised him did a shit job of teaching him humility.

  67. avatarJosh Ruble says:

    Seriously stop trying to take our guns. If something happened here, like is unfolding in Boston… or WW3 breaks out… or overnight, our government becomes liking to tyrants… it’ll be comforting to know our 2nd Amendment and Constitution are firmly in place to offer protection to the citizens of the United States of America.

    • avatarDavid Murray says:

      Obama is the evil one and he is only doing what his boss has tried : setting his throne too high and how well did that work. Thats it from a religious point of veiw. But my earthly instince says: If he likes hell so much lets give it to him!

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.