Obama executive order a go.....

[greg54]

From todays NY Times:

                                     The president wants to increase the number of government agents to process background checks and to expand the number of dealers who need federal licenses under current law and for more money to combat mental illness.

                                     He is not currently advocating renewal or expansion of the expired assault weapons ban.

 

None of these things in any way seeks to take away anybody's guns, but of course all you paranoid, anti government, NRA followers will always find some secret conspiracy when it comes to anything to do with guns.  

King O'bama says the display of the Confederate flag is racist.

[The_Field_Ager]

From todays NY Times:

                                    

 

 

 

[ants]

From todays NY Times:

                                     The president wants to increase the number of government agents to process background checks and to expand the number of dealers who need federal licenses under current law and for more money to combat mental illness.

                                     He is not currently advocating renewal or expansion of the expired assault weapons ban.

 

None of these things in any way seeks to take away anybody's guns, but of course all you paranoid, anti government, NRA followers will always find some secret conspiracy when it comes to anything to do with guns.  

And how will any of his ideas prevent some gang banging, law ignoring criminal scum bag from getting an illegal gun or using the one he already has, to commit a crime?

 

Of course, a pro big government, NRA hating, Obama crush on, anti gun person like you will probably not answer that.

[Uptown Redneck]

Ants, it won't, but that doesn't mean we can't do things to help keep guns from those who shouldn't have them. Which is what background checks are designed to do. So according to your thinking, because criminals will find a way to get guns we shouldn't do anything at all to keep people who shouldn't have guns from getting them? For the record I too think Obama, like Bush before him, is a failure as president.

 

[ants]

Ants, it won't, but that doesn't mean we can't do things to help keep guns from those who shouldn't have them. Which is what background checks are designed to do. So according to your thinking, because criminals will find a way to get guns we shouldn't do anything at all to keep people who shouldn't have guns from getting them? For the record I too think Obama, like Bush before him, is a failure as president.

Background checks are and have been in place. And I think thats a good thing. But nuts and criminals will not get their guns by going to the local gun shop, filling out a 4473 form and going through a background check, which they would fail and be denied a sale anyway. They have people buy guns for them, or deal in stolen guns. Thats what needs to be addressed.

[The_Field_Ager]

The mentally ill used to be confined to institutes for their and our safety. Now we have 'care in the community' programs. A recipe for failure. SSRI drugs are also a huge problem no one wants to face up to.

 

Forbes Calls for “Re-institutionalizing” the Mentally Ill

 

http://www.anh-usa.org/forbes-calls-for-re-institutionalizing-the-mentally-ill/

Edited January 6, 2016 by Papist

[Uptown Redneck]

Background checks are and have been in place. And I think thats a good thing. But nuts and criminals will not get their guns by going to the local gun shop, filling out a 4473 form and going through a background check, which they would fail and be denied a sale anyway. They have people buy guns for them, or deal in stolen guns. Thats what needs to be addressed.

Expanding background checks and fighting the flow of illegal guns are two separate issues. Perhaps some of the additional money Obama is calling for can be used to fight the flow of illegally obtained guns. As it is already known our Justice system is broken and many crimes go unpunished and many laws go unenforced. However we should all agree that doing everything that is possible to keep those who should not have guns from getting them should be a priority.

[Mr VJP]

The trouble with that is, it's Obama deciding who should not have guns!!

 

[Mr VJP]

For the record: "The [Obama] administration has overseen a striking drop in prosecutions of gun crimes, winning only about 6,000 convictions in 2015 — down more than 15 percent from five years ago. ... Part of the reason is prosecutors are simply bringing fewer cases." —The Washington Times ("For every elected or registered Democrat who actually wants to prosecute criminals, there are dozens who would rather prosecute the NRA and Republican politicians. Because they don't care about the crime. Or the criminals. Just their own political agenda. And that agenda is to disarm you." —Caleb Howe)

[bubba]

I will just order my guns online. Even a violent felon can order a gun online with no background check

[bubba]

Funny part is the places in this country that have the strictest gun laws, have the most shootings. You never hear that from the gungrabbers

[diplomat019]

online orders have to go to a ffl.

[ants]

I will just order my guns online. Even a violent felon can order a gun online with no background check

Sarcasm…Right??

[diplomat019]

I will just order my guns online. Even a violent felon can order a gun online with no background check

if this was a troll job it went right over my head lol.

[ants]

Expanding background checks and fighting the flow of illegal guns are two separate issues. Perhaps some of the additional money Obama is calling for can be used to fight the flow of illegally obtained guns. As it is already known our Justice system is broken and many crimes go unpunished and many laws go unenforced. However we should all agree that doing everything that is possible to keep those who should not have guns from getting them should be a priority.

Adding more laws on top of preexisting laws, that are not enforced or prosecuted, do little and eventually infringe upon the rights of honest citizens. If existing laws were enforced and vigorously prosecuted, you would  see lower gun related crimes. The criminals who don't go through background checks now, to obtain guns, will not go through expanded background checks either. But everyday citizens will. And what would an expanded background check add to the existing background check? 

[Huntscreek]

Why do uninformed American's keep saying we need background checks. When we have one? It's the responsibility of the FBI to OK Each transfer, but only with the data that they have. So if they denied a request, it needs to be followed up, why, who, are they a threat. So enforce the laws we have and they will work. Also I like the idea of crime with a gun gets you put away longer like 3 times the sentence.

Sent from my XT830C using Tapatalk

[wildcat junkie]

Background checks are and have been in place. And I think thats a good thing. But nuts and criminals will not get their guns by going to the local gun shop, filling out a 4473 form and going through a background check, which they would fail and be denied a sale anyway. They have people buy guns for them, or deal in stolen guns. Thats what needs to be addressed.

That is basically what unlicensed gun dealers do at gun shows in states that do not require background checks for "private sales".

 

[DirtTime]

Wow Rob... I have no idea where that came from but lets clear some things up...You are not "the other poster" and anyone here that follows these guys knows of whom I refer. Now I could assume your little out burst was due to you thinking I slighted you, which wasn't the case at all. Assumptions tend to back fire on people. I DID NOT back peddle as you are trying to infer..in fact I said exactly why I chose those particular words...and though you couldn't see I had a PM about it with another member here discussing this.

so you need to calm down a bit and regroup Then stop making assumptions.

 

Here's a PS for you...I won't assume you know what the word elicit means from reading your post .  

 

 

 

remember my words:

I will apologize for the "other poster" comment. But, not the rest. You knew what you were thinking making this post and where it would end up. You and everyone else knows what you "meant". There is no assumption, well, maybe one. The assumption is that 'you assume' people wouldn't get what you did in fact imply.

Say what you want, cover your backside. I get it. See, to keep in secrecy with your true thoughts and feelings, there's a word for topics like this ( pssst, it starts with a "T" ).

[Marion]

I will apologize for the "other poster" comment. But, not the rest. You knew what you were thinking making this post and where it would end up. You and everyone else knows what you "meant". There is no assumption, well, maybe one. The assumption is that 'you assume' people wouldn't get what you did in fact imply.

Say what you want, cover your backside. I get it. See, to keep in secrecy with your true thoughts and feelings, there's a word for topics like this ( pssst, it starts with a "T" ).

Oh! Oh! Pick me! Pick me! Is it a Troll?

You Can't Beat My Meat!

[bubba]

Sarcasm…Right??

. If you guys listened the king said that in his speech. He said blatantly lying that andi quote. Violint felons can buy guns online and not have a background check. Yes he said that.

[bubba]

Does anyone want to guess why he is doing this now? It can be summed up in 2 words. Safe Act. Everything in here is already I the safe act already. When the safe act was thrust down our throats, it was a trial to see if it would!d hold up. Our king Andy was promised a shot at the white house. Well now2 years later, residents have become so complacent, they expect little resistance. As most sat on their collective butts, they waited to see what would happen. Well this is the result.

[growalot]

 

Ants, it won't, but that doesn't mean we can't do things to help keep guns from those who shouldn't have them. Which is what background checks are designed to do. So according to your thinking, because criminals will find a way to get guns we shouldn't do anything at all to keep people who shouldn't have guns from getting them?

 

Here's something that Americans fail to realize...We  completely lost not 1 but 2 wars...Vietnam and the "war" on drugs. Now not counting the loss of life, money and taking a hit to being world top dog. Vietnam wasn't too bad a loss...The cluster we've  made on the "war" on drugs has made things not only worse here but in several other countries as well. That's a big loss...Now I won't even get into the past 15 yrs or even the present with ISIS. Words fail in describing that "bunging".

This "war" on guns  will make the "war" on drugs look like loosing a summer days game of pick up sticks. The consequences will be felt world wide in the end. Now think that statement extreme or unreal..? Then you are on par  with the rest of the short sighted and historical blind people of this country and Europe. 

[chas0218]

Expanding background checks and fighting the flow of illegal guns are two separate issues. Perhaps some of the additional money Obama is calling for can be used to fight the flow of illegally obtained guns. As it is already known our Justice system is broken and many crimes go unpunished and many laws go unenforced. However we should all agree that doing everything that is possible to keep those who should not have guns from getting them should be a priority.

I noticed that in your statement you did realize that Obama is not stopping the flow of illegally obtained guns and is attacking only law abiding citizens. As you and all of us see he isn't thinking logically when making decisions based on the problem. 

 

The thing I don't get is how you can support a president or anyone for that matter that is trying to strip you and other law abiding citizens of their rights.

 

Can you agree that law abiding citizens aren't the problem and should not be attacked by these laws or others? Because that is all he is doing.

[chas0218]

Does anyone want to guess why he is doing this now? It can be summed up in 2 words. Safe Act. Everything in here is already I the safe act already. When the safe act was thrust down our throats, it was a trial to see if it would!d hold up. Our king Andy was promised a shot at the white house. Well now2 years later, residents have become so complacent, they expect little resistance. As most sat on their collective butts, they waited to see what would happen. Well this is the result.

You couldn't be more right.

[growalot]

Rob ...You really need to grow up...Like I said...I had a conversation in a pm with another member  about this whole thing ...So what I said to you and right about the time you said it...is no different than what I said to virgil...BTW take a look at your likes and see the company your with... I do have my reasoning for the wording and It  was "veiled"...but not in the way you insist on imagining...sorry you are wrong. That disgusting piece of work in the white house is near the end of his impotent reign. That said, do to his not implementing as much  damage as he had hoped,IMO. His well being, good or bad is of no concern to me...his long life after office ,when all he has or hasn't done is taken apart piece by piece in the media and he has no power to stop it...well, that will be his just deserts the thing that will eat away at him as his supporters slowly fall to the way side....See I look farther than my nose at things.

You can try to work your imagined psychic abilities all you wish, but it doesn't make them any less imagined. Sorry...But as far as my purpose for this thread...you have been a great part...thanks

Edited January 7, 2016 by growalot