• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standard

Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

If the president through an executive order bans guns, that will be the "this"

That is exactly what the preppers are preparing for.

And what form of lunacy leads you to believe that will be the executive order?
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

That's quite an assumption, but he has already done things that are illegal, it's just that no one has called him on it. People do illegal things all the time, if there is nobody there to do anything about it they get away with it. And no, he's not a moron. He knows exactly what he is doing. He's playing chess with a public that barely understands checkers. Of course he's not going to push the full monte all at once, it would never pass. It's a matter of doing it in steps. It's the old boiling a frog example. The end intent has already been made clear, it's only a matter of time unless we stand firm on the little pieces.

No, he's done things that you think are illegal.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

There doesn't have to be if Redress is content to admit Redress is talking out of Redress's ass. But if Redress wants wants Redress's assertion to have any validity, then it's a question Redress needs to answer. This is Redress's burden, not mine.




Deuce, your batting average for responding to me with gibberish irrelevant to what I said remains at 1.000.

I restated Redress' point in a much simpler fashion. Apparently you failed again to understand it. Sorry. I'll try and help.

Here's the point: Any EO that Obama issues will at least be good enough to have some form of defense in court. I.E. it will not be blatantly unconstitutional like "overturn 2nd amendment and ban all guns."

Whether or not Redress can predict what the EO will be is irrelevant. You are the one being irrelevant here.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Yeah, because there is nothing wrong with taxing people to the point where they are forced to quit. Nothing at all. Oh and great job ignoring the black market it created. :cool:

You forgot about culture as well. It was the norm to smoke (popular) and no one knew the side effects. Now everyone is encouraging people to quit since it's bad for you.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

I restated Redress' point in a much simpler fashion. Apparently you failed again to understand it. Sorry. I'll try and help.

No, you went into some mouth-drooling about "you guys" and thinking "Obama is a moron," which I never said a thing about.

And to the extent you "restated" what Redress said (which you didn't, as Redress obviously had something specific in mind -- but apparently we'll never know what, seeing as Redress has fled), you also fail to answer the question. Which, indeed, needs to be answered, because as Simon W. Moon was helpful in illustrating, there's nothing a constitutional EO CAN do.

So, step up and take a shot at what you think such an EO could be. If not, you're prattling on about nonsense that you hope to be true, not anything of any epistemological worth, and that's the whole point of my question.

Go for it. Or don't, and babble on to someone else who might care.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Do you really believe second amendment protects your right to attack the government and kill elected officials? Really? That would be kinda stupid for a government to put that in writting, doncha think?

That's essentially how this country was founded. And the great men who wrote our Constitution recognized that the need might arise to repeat the process.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” — Thomas Jefferson​
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

If you are going to claim that, then show me the text in the Constitution that gives the President the authority to unilaterally create law.

Do you find that the PotUS is in charge of the executive branch of govt?
If you do see that the PotUS is in charge of the executive branch of govt, do you find that the PotUS has not only the right, but the responsibility to exercise his administration of the executive branch?
If you find that the PotUS is in charge of the executive branch of govt and that he needs to exercise his control over the executive branch of govt, do you realize that to do so he must make his instructions to the executive branch known?
If you find that the PotUS is in charge of the executive branch of govt and that he needs to exercise his control over the executive branch of govt and that to do so he must make his instructions to the executive branch known, do you see that executive orders are his instructions to the executive branch of government?

W/o being able to give instructions to the executive branch, how is the PotUS going to be able to run the executive branch of govt?

None of that has anything to do with making laws. The President doesn't have the authority to create laws on his own.

If you're going to claim otherwise, then show me where it says so in the Constitution.
 
Last edited:
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

We have things in the military called "unlawful orders", You see we are required to follow orders from our commanding officers, if our commanding officer says go and torture that kid over there? Not so much.

If we choose to follow that order, "I was just following orders" is not an acceptable defense in trial.

We are not just mindless robots, we are expected to think and make decisions on what is right or wrong.

The Fourth Nuremberg Principle.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

There isn't anything "adjusted priorities" could do which would do anything toward what it's supposedly to do.
What is it supposed to do?
If the president through an executive order bans guns, that will be the "this"
That is exactly what the preppers are preparing for.
I noticed that you added an "if" this time?
Is there any reasonable reason to believe that the PotUS will try to ban gun ownership via executive order?
None of that has anything to do with making laws.
that is correct. We're talking about executive orders, not laws.
The President doesn't have the authority to create laws on his own.
So?
If you're going to claim otherwise, then show me where it says so in the Constitution.
Why would I claim that the PotUS could legislate? The PotUS can issue executive orders though.
And EOs are not laws.

Just trying to help you understand about EOs.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

What is it supposed to do?

This, apparently:

"As the president said, if your actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly."

As well as the general "deal with guns."
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

You have in fact not. Gun rights are less restrictive now than they have been any time recently. And some one who claims to be neutral on some rights, and is actually against others, can't go and claim to be a big defender of right. At least I am consistent, and believe strongly in protecting rights, even when I do not like the outcome of that protection. Being willing to limit people's access to medical treatments(see abortion), but don't come after my gun, that is not consistently defending rights. Claiming to be neutral on the right to marry, but heaven help some one who is considering possibly, maybe limiting in some way that might even pass Supreme Court muster, and you are willing to declare your intent to ignore those laws(which there is no constitutional basis for you to be able to do)...that is not a consistent defense of rights, and kinda means you should not be crying about any "erosion of rights".


I wonder how fast you'd scream if Bush had said he was going to issue an Executive Order putting "some reasonable restrictions" on abortion... probably fast and loud.

If I'm a hypocrite apparently I'm not the only one...
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

What is the proposed EO?


I heard today on the radio that Biden has said "the focus is going to be on mental health issues and banning hi-cap magazines".

I haven't verified that with other sources yet, but that's what I heard.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Is there any reasonable reason to believe that the PotUS will try to ban gun ownership via executive order?

We don't know yet, my guess is that no, he will not "ban all guns" through executive fiat, but what he, and Holder will come up with will probably the stupidest gobledy gook since Fienstien came up with the first absurd banning of rifles based on their looks. In any case, why isn't he doing so properly, by going through congress to write a law? I'll tell you, because his own demo's won't vote for it. They still remember the blood bath election they went through the first time.

We're talking about executive orders, not laws.

Is there any reason to believe that his EO won't carry the force of law?
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

banning hi-cap magazines

Yeah. He doesn't have the authority to do that.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

That's essentially how this country was founded. And the great men who wrote our Constitution recognized that the need might arise to repeat the process.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” — Thomas Jefferson​

Well, that same great man you quoted signed a law in 1807 granting the president the power to use the standing army against US citizens......

Elektratig: Thomas Jefferson Enforces the Embargo 1: Congress Authorizes the Use of the Army and Navy to Suppress Insurrection


And....here's how it would play out today....

War Colleges Need to Plan for Military Action to Suppress ?Insurrections? on U.S. Soil
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Well, that same great man you quoted signed a law in 1807 granting the president the power to use the standing army against US citizens......

Elektratig: Thomas Jefferson Enforces the Embargo 1: Congress Authorizes the Use of the Army and Navy to Suppress Insurrection


And....here's how it would play out today....

War Colleges Need to Plan for Military Action to Suppress ?Insurrections? on U.S. Soil


Yes, and by your standard, no one would have the protection to ward against that from an unscrupulous government...
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

An EO is to make sure the the law is executed as written. The EO does not give the president the ability to create laws. This means Obama can not use it to create further restriction on guns like Biden thinks he can.

Exactly correct and any EO that Obama issues that attempts to further restrict firearms is an illegal unconstitutional order. Just like his illegal order to allow illegal aliens to get identification and allowing them to get jobs.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Yes, and by your standard, no one would have the protection to ward against that from an unscrupulous government...
It's true my standards are very high and it would take a lot more than the government regulating a few firearms and/or ammo that probably does more harm than good for me to turn against my country.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

It's true my standards are very high and it would take a lot more than the government regulating a few firearms and/or ammo that probably does more harm than good for me to turn against my country.

Yes, you should probably wait until you have nothing to fight with...
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

It was never intended to be like this...I dont know who started it either and I dont care

:shrug: Wilson, mostly. To a lesser extent, Lincoln - but that was wartime specific, and it went away after him. Wilson revived it, Coolidge did his best to ignore it, Hoover and then FDR full-flowered it, and ever since then every President has found it too tempting not to touch.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

It's true my standards are very high and it would take a lot more than the government regulating a few firearms and/or ammo that probably does more harm than good for me to turn against my country.


Ok, I asked people before, now I will ask you....What defines an assault weapon?
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Jefferson was casually refering to the Shay rebellion. But guess what? After Thomas Jefferson became president, he signed a law that gave him the presidential authority to use a standing army to squish domestic insurrections.....yea, think about that the next time you're citing his "against tyranny" quote.....


Um yeah? Congress has the right to pass laws relating to the declaration of armed conflict. For example, 60 odd years later, they squished a rather significant domestic insurrection. I realize that our public education system has fallen as of late - but you must have heard of it. There was a Denzel Washington movie and everything.


Now, had Jefferson attempted unilaterally to abridge the Constitutional rights of the American Citizenry, yeah you would have a point on the claim that he was a hypocrite on this issue. Unfortunately, it seems that you're just quoting a blog without understanding it.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

An EO would only be unconstitutional if and only if congress passes a law that contravenes the EO, or the Supreme Court rules it so. Using an EO to, for example, restrict magazine articles would be legal, up until one of those two situations happened.

That is incorrect - EO's apply only to members of the executive branch. Government services could be forbidden from writing magazine articles; but the general populace would be free to continue to write as many diatribes in Better Homes and Gardens as they wish.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Ok, I asked people before, now I will ask you....What defines an assault weapon?

I think if many anti-2nd amendment crack pots had it their way then assault weapon would be defined as any semi-automatic weapon that accepts a detachable magazine and revolvers.
 
Back
Top Bottom