• 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

You were the one who brought up the point asking who will protect the non-gun owners against bad people who use guns in their wrongdoing. And I wish more people would think that guns are tools and not some scary demonic device that goes off and kills people.

No, I didn't. I would that a silly conversation, which is why I said so. However, both sides too often see them as more than tools. Emotions are too often feverish all the way around.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

If the intent of the second amendment was to protect the right to self defense from government then why limit it to firearms? Why not include canons, swords, axes and other methods of self defense?

swords sabers dirks, hatchets, poleaxes, bayonets rapiers switchblades (Supreme Court of Oregon ruled that its "second amendment" applied to switchblade knives) etc are all clearly protected as well
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Nonsense. I've protected myself, and an occasional neighbor just fine without ever owning a gun. A gun is nothing more than a tool. Safety should not depend on tools, but the human minds ability to reason and plan.

that is as idiotic as saying no one needs chemotherapy or surgery because you have cured a pimple with a tube of Neosporin
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

The sad truth is that we would all be "safer" if only the criminals and the police had guns. No one thinks that will work here but we need to at least miniimize the risks so our gun culture isn't so destructive to innocents. What we don't want is for everyone to "need" a gun or think that having a gun will make you safer from gun violence, that is a lie and is unacceptble given the additional deaths it would cause. The other statistic that is undisputable is the one that says more guns = more gun violence. Is that what the "gun nuts" really want? More shootings, more murders?

By putting safer in quotes I think you would agree it really would not make us safer.

Appropriate education would minimize accidents with guns. Eliminating gun free zones would also work to make us safer from those who target the disarmed.

The main point is that some of the worst violence that occurs in ares where guns are strongly restricted and the local police force lightly patrols and comes in only for investigations.

From what I know where gun bans have been placed violent crime has gone up not down.




No, I didn't. I would that a silly conversation, which is why I said so. However, both sides too often see them as more than tools. Emotions are too often feverish all the way around.


Even though guns are tools it is a fundamental right for self defense to be able to have one as well as a tool to fight against a Tyrannical government.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

By putting safer in quotes I think you would agree it really would not make us safer.

Appropriate education would minimize accidents with guns. Eliminating gun free zones would also work to make us safer from those who target the disarmed.

The main point is that some of the worst violence that occurs in ares where guns are strongly restricted and the local police force lightly patrols and comes in only for investigations.

From what I know where gun bans have been placed violent crime has gone up not down.







Even though guns are tools it is a fundamental right for self defense to be able to have one as well as a tool to fight against a Tyrannical government.

collectivists and statists do not consider governments killing dissidents to be a bad thing

you may remember when Anti war activist Joan Baez condemned one of the communist nations that started killing massive numbers of people after the Viet Nam war ended. Radical communist lawyer William Kunstler chided Ms Baez noting that he thought it was wrong for her to criticize "progressive governments" where there were human rights violations.

far lefties loathe the thought of people being able to resist and even kill collectivist government agents and leaders
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

collectivists and statists do not consider governments killing dissidents to be a bad thing

you may remember when Anti war activist Joan Baez condemned one of the communist nations that started killing massive numbers of people after the Viet Nam war ended. Radical communist lawyer William Kunstler chided Ms Baez noting that he thought it was wrong for her to criticize "progressive governments" where there were human rights violations.

far lefties loathe the thought of people being able to resist and even kill collectivist government agents and leaders

Yes and I get the sense that they are pro-death penalty if it doesn't mean a trial.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

If Congress should not infringe on the 2nd Amendment most certainly the President has no authority to do so.

Futhermore if there is a insurmountable division that is a sign that the public cannot agree on a solution and we do not need some President to make a decision by fiat

since this violates both the idea of our government being a democracy or a republic.

It is a position of autocracy.
Not only are you arbitrarily labeling the potential measure a violation of the Amendment without a clue as to the contents, you're also claiming the President has no authority through EO to alter existing legal measures. Both are simply opinions and unfounded ones at that.

Opinion based jargon, not much to discuss here.

The concept and legal repercussions of the executive order has been found to be within the scope and powers of the federal government through judicial review previously, despite some insisting otherwise.

Poor choice of wording. Executive orders are subject to judicial review as are legal measures approved by congress.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Not only are you arbitrarily labeling the potential measure a violation of the Amendment without a clue as to the contents, you're also claiming the President has no authority through EO to alter existing legal measures. Both are simply opinions and unfounded ones at that.

Opinion based jargon, not much to discuss here.

The concept and legal repercussions of the executive order has been found to be within the scope and powers of the federal government through judicial review previously, despite some insisting otherwise.

Poor choice of wording. Executive orders are subject to judicial review as are legal measures approved by congress.


And the court system is where an EO concerning limiting the 2nd amendment rights of American's will end up. Meanwhile, The President, who took an oath to protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, get's to wipe his ass with it.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

And the court system is where an EO concerning limiting the 2nd amendment rights of American's will end up.

Meanwhile, The President, who took an oath to protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, get's to wipe his ass with it.
Possibly, depending on the contents within.

More caricature based analysis. Legal analysis is best obtained from folks who actually work within said field as opposed to opinion based junk and armchair analysis from blogosphere bird brains.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

31 pages...Hmmmm...


Let's put some perspective to this fear and anxiety over the President possibly issuing an Executive Order on "gun control". Unless that order reads "No American citizen can purchase any gun or riffle of any type in the U.S. unless they are part of a state militia or military force," you can relax.

Restrictions on gun sales (i.e., types of weapons allowed to be sold to the general public for personal protection), types/calibers of ammunication or points of sale (i.e., general/sporting goods stores vice trade shows/flea markets) aren't the same as an all-out ban on selling any and ALL weapons. So, gun enthusiast, get a grip!
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

31 pages...Hmmmm...


Let's put some perspective to this fear and anxiety over the President possibly issuing an Executive Order on "gun control". Unless that order reads "No American citizen can purchase any gun or riffle fr any type in the U.S. unless they are part of a state militia or military force," you can relax.

Restrictions on gun sales (i.e., types of weapons allowed to be sold to the general public for personal protection), types/calibers of ammunication or points of sale (i.e., general/sporting goods stores vice trade shows/flea markets) aren't the same as an all-out ban on selling any and ALL weapons. So, gun enthusiast, get a grip!

this is idiotic because you either intentionally ignore or are ignorant of the incremental program to destroy gun rights. If Obama came out tomorrow and said he was going to ban all guns his administration would be over effectively that day because he would be impeached. But what we have seen was a many year program to ban guns. Bans on automatic weapons has been cited as precedent for bans on semi automatic weapons. 30 round magazine limits then ten round limits (NY and other states) and now Cuomo wants 7 round limits.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Possibly, depending on the contents within.

More caricature based analysis. Legal analysis is best obtained from folks who actually work within said field as opposed to opinion based junk and armchair analysis from blogosphere bird brains.


Nonsense, we are members of this forum to discuss our opinions on a range of subjects. You don't like that others have negative opinions of Obama and his actions so your argument is to dismiss others opinions, and label them something less than worthy of discussion, in a true Sol Alenski-esque application debate that begs the question if you are not here to honestly discuss opinions with others that may disagree with you, then why are you here?
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

this is idiotic because you either intentionally ignore or are ignorant of the incremental program to destroy gun rights. If Obama came out tomorrow and said he was going to ban all guns his administration would be over effectively that day because he would be impeached. But what we have seen was a many year program to ban guns. Bans on automatic weapons has been cited as precedent for bans on semi automatic weapons. 30 round magazine limits then ten round limits (NY and other states) and now Cuomo wants 7 round limits.

What bill approved by Congress and signed into LAW by our nation's 44th President bans the sale of any and all weapons in the United States?

You know the answer is NONE, but you enjoy spewing your hyperbolic anti-Obama/anti-Liberal rants just to foster an atmospher of fear and anxiety. Do get over yourself, TD, and try to get a grip on reality.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Nonsense, we are members of this forum to discuss our opinions on a range of subjects.

You don't like that others have negative opinions of Obama and his actions

so your argument is to dismiss others opinions, and label them something less than worthy of discussion in a true Sol Alenski-esque application debate

that begs the question if you are not here to honestly discuss opinions with others that may disagree with you, then why are you here?
Yeah, I got that.

Actually, I'm not personally in favor of further gun control, as I feel it wouldn't adequately address the root of such events. I'm actually on board with LaPierre's suggestion. What I do dismiss frequently and without hesitation are claims of knowledge and foresight regarding the constitutionality of alterations to current law before the specifics are so much as released. Easy to do and fun too!

Hmm..Must be Saul's cousin or something. By the way, Saul doesn't exactly have a monopoly on mockery interjected into conversation. Could just as easily be traced back to Rodney Dangerfield or Groucho.

Oh I discuss and argue a great deal, although I can't say I value opinions much at all regarding nuts and bolts, black and white issues. By the way, just what have I presented thus far that would qualify as dishonest as you suggest?
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

What bill approved by Congress and signed into LAW by our nation's 44th President bans the sale of any and all weapons in the United States?

You know the answer is NONE, but you enjoy spewing your hyperbolic anti-Obama/anti-Liberal rants just to foster an atmospher of fear and anxiety. Do get over yourself, TD, and try to get a grip on reality.

I get tired of people playing dumb on this issue. You pretend that unless there is a complete ban, there is no intent to ban. Sadly for you, those of us who actually follow this issue are well aware that those who want bans have publicly noted that a complete ban, right away won't work, so it has to be gradual

so anything that is designed to

1) ban some stuff

2) desensitize the public to bans

3) create legal precedent for bans

are part of the program to ban guns

and while one can support one of the steps without personally supporting the ultimate goal, you are still supporting those who want a total ban
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

I get tired of people playing dumb on this issue. You pretend that unless there is a complete ban, there is no intent to ban.

and while one can support one of the steps without personally supporting the ultimate goal, you are still supporting those who want a total ban
And on the other hand you've arbitrarily assigned extreme and draconian motives to those you disagree with. Both degrees of silliness and naivety I'm afraid.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

I get tired of people playing dumb on this issue. You pretend that unless there is a complete ban, there is no intent to ban. Sadly for you, those of us who actually follow this issue are well aware that those who want bans have publicly noted that a complete ban, right away won't work, so it has to be gradual

so anything that is designed to

1) ban some stuff

2) desensitize the public to bans

3) create legal precedent for bans

are part of the program to ban guns

and while one can support one of the steps without personally supporting the ultimate goal, you are still supporting those who want a total ban

No. I support sensable gun control because I don't believe it is necessary for the general population to own any weapon they so desire. Moreover, I believe that unless you address the wholes in legislation that DO NOT keep the most dangerous weapons off the streets and out of the hands of mentally ill or mental unstable individuals, criminals or those who just want to conduct mayheim, we don't do society any good whatsoever.

Now, you can stay on the side of "political creep" that says every little step is a prelude to a larger one down the road, but I say it's a foolish position to take. Why? Over 200 years since the Militia Act was first ratified by Congress and people can still rightly purchase a gun or riffle.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Yeah, I got that.

Actually, I'm not personally in favor of further gun control, as I feel it wouldn't adequately address the root of such events. I'm actually on board with LaPierre's suggestion. What I do dismiss frequently and without hesitation are claims of knowledge and foresight regarding the constitutionality of alterations to current law before the specifics are so much as released. Easy to do and fun too!

Hmm..Must be Saul's cousin or something. By the way, Saul doesn't exactly have a monopoly on mockery interjected into conversation. Could just as easily be traced back to Rodney Dangerfield or Groucho.

Oh I discuss and argue a great deal, although I can't say I value opinions much at all regarding nuts and bolts, black and white issues. By the way, just what have I presented thus far that would qualify as dishonest as you suggest?


It was just the tactic...IF you really don't value other opinions, then it really makes no sense to me that you would waste your time on a site that is composed of opinions. :shrug:
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Where do you get off saying that Hitler, Stalin and Mao disarmed the population?

Found an interesting site:
Dictators and Gun Control « America In Chains

Some excerpts from the site:
***
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.”
- Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942

***

Read this post for more information on Hitler's gun control laws.

More from the site:
***
“If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.”
- Joseph Stalin

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. By 1987 that figure had risen to 61,911,000.

“The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements. … They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results.”
- Benito Mussolini, address to the Italian Senate, 1931
***

11 years later, General Mario Robotti, Commander of the Italian 11th division in Slovenia and Croatia, issued an order in line with a directive received from Mussolini in June 1942: "I would not be opposed to all (sic) Slovenes being imprisoned and replaced by Italians. In other words, we should take steps to ensure that political and ethnic frontiers coincide.",[126] which qualifies as ethnic cleansing policy.

The Province of Ljubljana saw the deportation of 25.000 people, which equaled 7.5% of the total population. The operation, one of the most drastic in the Europe, filled up Italian concentration camps on the island Rab, in Gonars, Monigo (Treviso), Renicci d'Anghiari, Chiesanuova and elsewhere.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_Mussolini#War_crimes_against_the_Slovene_civil_population

More from Dictators and Gun Control:
***
Mao Tze Tung - Promoted Gun Control
“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”
- Mao Tze Tung, Nov 6 1938

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952 10,076,000 political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated in Kuomintang China, and by 1987 another 35,236,000 exterminations were carried out under the Communists.

***

And one (amoung many people of note) of the entries against the confiscation of guns:
***
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government
Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

***

For those who may not know who Thomas Jefferson was, here's his introduction in his wikipedia article:
***
Thomas Jefferson (April 13, 1743 (April 2, 1743 O.S.) – July 4, 1826) was an American Founding Father, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776) and the third President of the United States (1801–1809). At the beginning of the American Revolution, he served in the Continental Congress, representing Virginia and then served as a wartime Governor of Virginia (1779–1781).
***
 
Last edited:
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

The sad truth is that we would all be "safer" if only the criminals and the police had guns.

Or hammers. Don't forget hammers. :roll:
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Or hammers. Don't forget hammers. :roll:

The # of murders committed with hammers is inconsequential. I don't see your point.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

that is as idiotic as saying no one needs chemotherapy or surgery because you have cured a pimple with a tube of Neosporin

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

By putting safer in quotes I think you would agree it really would not make us safer.

Appropriate education would minimize accidents with guns. Eliminating gun free zones would also work to make us safer from those who target the disarmed.

The main point is that some of the worst violence that occurs in ares where guns are strongly restricted and the local police force lightly patrols and comes in only for investigations.

From what I know where gun bans have been placed violent crime has gone up not down.







Even though guns are tools it is a fundamental right for self defense to be able to have one as well as a tool to fight against a Tyrannical government.

No one has argued you can't defend yourself. Nor that a gun can't be one of those options. There is virtually no chance that option will be removed. The worse like to happen is a return to the the assault weapons ban. Very little else.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Not only are you arbitrarily labeling the potential measure a violation of the Amendment without a clue as to the contents, you're also claiming the President has no authority through EO to alter existing legal measures. Both are simply opinions and unfounded ones at that.

Opinion based jargon, not much to discuss here.

The concept and legal repercussions of the executive order has been found to be within the scope and powers of the federal government through judicial review previously, despite some insisting otherwise.

Poor choice of wording. Executive orders are subject to judicial review as are legal measures approved by congress.

It is within the prerogative of the Office of President of the United States to issue an executive order to inhibit an execution of law or delay funding of any budgeted item. Furthermore, he has great range of choice in determining what resorces can be dealt with; for example, insted of allowing a Navy ship to be retrofitted which the Navy requests to be mothballed, he can have that ship be striped of equipment sent out to the deep blue Ocean and then sunk. He would then request Congress for replacement. He could then be impeached by Congress but I doubt it.

With respect to the content I do not know since he has not yet issued it but I suspect it will not be in concordance with the Powers of the Executive Branch under the Constitution
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

No one has argued you can't defend yourself. Nor that a gun can't be one of those options. There is virtually no chance that option will be removed. The worse like to happen is a return to the the assault weapons ban. Very little else.

No one? So Diane Feinstein didn't want an outright ban on all firearms? A CT Senator didn't just propose a felony on all firearm ownership that's capable of more than a single shot?

>50 % of Americans support bans on "high capacity" magazines and "assault weapons." Should Feinsteins bill, with all the support it has + the full weight of the President's support, pass it would mean no more semi-automatic handguns as well.

These things aren't liberal pipe dreams, they're under serious consideration so concerns about them is QUITE warranted.

I'm willing to make a $200 paypal escrow bet that we see the passage of some form of gun control in the next two months, I've got $300 on something happening at the state level in at least one state. You game?
 
Back
Top Bottom