Will Obama curb the right to buy arms or will the NRA block him?
 

Obama to take unilateral action on US gun violence.

There's no denying the US needs to relook at the Second Amendment now we're in a fight against terrorists. Or that the ease of owning a gun has led to many needless deaths.

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cps...uns_624_v3.png

The problem is who rules, elected politicians or big business?

And to claim it won't be 100% effective, is stupid. That argument can be applied to drunk driving or bank robbery.

A simple rule, making the selling of guns something that was regulated by the local police. Would reduce the number and power of guns held by people who clearly have no right to own one. You need a license to drive a car, own a dog, sell hot dogs on a corner. So why not owning a gun, with an annual inspection that the owner is still capable?

And when people on Terrorist Watch Lists are able to walk into a gun store and buy as many as they can afford. You know the time for change is past.

What are the checks made before a person can buy a gun? Mentally ill, criminal, has a history of violence, has a family with issues, suspected terrorists, etc. Or just a driving license?

A question this big has to be discussed in greater terms than. Men in fear of the British, French, Indians, Bears, Wolves said everyone had a right to own a musket. so now I can own as many assault weapons as I choose, with huge magazines of armor piercing bullets. Is my right.

Well, it's not otherwise your right would include owning a machine gun to mount on your car like this. Instead of hanging it on the rack on your pick up.

https://img.rt.com/files/news/30/05/00/00/syria-2.n.jpg

Jtfc you're a fucking dimwit troll.

It doesn't matter whatever he does by "executive order" will be undone one way or another and in all actuality isn't really even a law.

As of today in Texas ( and I presume elsewhere) a new law allowing " open and carry" of guns came into effect....They also have the "stand your ground law" ... I am waiting for the first case of a bar room brawl resutling in death where the perp will defend himslef " he had a gun and I was afraid and thus stood my ground"

Stupid? Of course, but hey its America...:thumbsup

Time to jump on my soap box.

There is a homicide issue in this country but guns are not the cause, they are the tools. The numbers show that gun control laws don't change what criminals do with firearms.

An August 2013 CDC report looked at rates for gun homicides in the 50 most populous metropolitan areas. It found that for 2009-2010, the top gun murder rate areas were, in order: New Orleans, Memphis, Detroit, Birmingham, St. Louis, Baltimore, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Philadelphia and Chicago.
Six of those cities are in states with poor scores for their gun laws, while the other four get a â??Câ?� or better. Chicago, which placed last in the top 10, had a ban on handguns at the time. Thereâ??s no discernible pattern among those cities, nor clear or convincing evidence in these statistics that shows more gun laws lead to more or less gun crime.

What we need to address is the underlying social issues that are fueling violence, predominantly in those cities.

Firearms are a massive problem in the United States. Every day there are firearm deaths, to the point where it barely makes the local news. The other night a man in California shot and killed four people over a fucking washing machine:
Washing Machine Dispute Led to Quadruple Homicide: Officials - NBC News

More locally, in Stockton California a gun owner thought it was okay to shoot up in the air in celebration and.... The bullet came down into a police car and hit a freaking police officer in the leg.

We have the 2nd amendment which says we have the right to own firearms, but a large percent of the population just isn't mature enough to own firearms. If you are dumb enough to shoot and kill four people over an argument over a fucking washing machine you should have never been allowed to own a firearm in the first place.

Hate to break it to you;

1. There will be no ''ban of 'gun' ownership."
2. There will just be restrictions placed on sales at gunshows to require the same background checks of persons buying firearms at the registered location of federally licensed gun dealers (ATF Regulated Sales).

This administrative law proposal is just for widening the background check/registration process to gunshows.

President Obama, close the 'gun show loophole' - CNN.com

Just as clueless as ever and forever will be. The simple answer is NO and he is not going to try to do that anyhow. In addition whatever he does will more than likely be knocked down by the Supreme Court...as they have ruled every time the issue is before them...it is a constitutional right to buy and own guns. One can even legally own machine guns with the proper license. The only way to stop it is by constitutional admendment and that is not going to happen.

Correct.

So Obama really is coming for your guns!

(It's about time)

In all seriousness, if it stops even one person from losing their life, it'll be a good thing.

In reality there is a little more to an actual gun store transaction ..... Like an ATF form submitted to the FBI for a criminal background check. But I'm sure you know that.




http://i.imgur.com/gUM01gl.png


.

Your last statement is a blanket statement that is not necessarily true. In my opinion many, many people deserve to be shot.

Paul, why are you so concerned about it? You don't live here. It doesn't affect your life in one way or another.

I know I don't sit around worrying about the latest law being passed in England or Europe.

Just always seems odd that so many people not in the U.S. seem to be obsessed with our laws and our politics. Bizarre.

Isn't this an action that the President is taking in response to the mass shootings? At least that's what he says.

Reality Check: None of the proposals he is making would have had any effect whatsoever on Sandy Hook, San Bernadino, or any of the other shootings.

What's the point?

All of which don't apply when gun dealers sell at gun shows. But I'm sure you know that.

Looks pretty thorough to me. Make sure it's enforced it and eliminate any existing gun show loopholes and that should cover it :thumbsup

"3 percent of criminals who use guns get them legally."

Source: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact...crimes-commit/

How is this possible? You mean to tell me that criminals don't follow the law?

If that's the case, all the laws in the world aren't really going to stop a criminal who wants to use a gun. The laws would only be a hindrance to law-abiding citizens. You know, the very ones who would use their guns to defend innocent people in a mass shooting, while waiting precious minutes for the cops to arrive?

So are gun laws, in effect, doing nothing but aiding and abetting criminals? And turning law-abiding citizens into sitting ducks?

:2 cents:

It's just because we care, that's all. Seeing mass shootings on the news is both scary and and heart breaking at the same time. The most natural reactions might include "How can that happen?" And "will laws tighten in the future?'. It just prompts conversation from everyone, outsides like us included, when things only seem to get worse and not better.

So **********, is what President Obama proposing going to stop the mass shootings?
Is it even going to "help" (whatever that means)?

Will even ONE criminal in the United States be hindered for even one second from getting a gun?

Or will this apply only to LAW ABIDING citizens who aren't going to use their guns for criminal activity anyway?

Just answer those questions. No emotional "feelings" or nonsense. And no lectures.
Just simply answer them "yes" or "no".

And when you're done answering those questions, then ask yourself: "What is the purpose of what Obama is wanting to do? If it doesn't "help" stop criminals, then what is the REAL purpose?"
Hint: There is ALWAYS money and power involved in anything politicians do.

In a single word, yes. The stricter the gun laws are, the more difficult it will be for criminals or mentally ill people to get their hands on firearms.

Remember Adam Lanza, the twenty year old who shot twenty kids in a grade school? He had a long history of mental illness, schizophrenia, and was anti depressants. If there was a law about homeowners not being allowed be store firearms at a location where there is someone who is clearly mentally ill perhaps this never would have happened?





Who was that kid who killed all of the school children a while back? Didn't he have a long history of mental illness? Adam Lanza his name was. They pulled him out of school because he had Asperger syndrome, and put him on anti depressants and they said he had undiagnosed schizophrenia. If only there was a law saying that if you have someone living in your house who has schizophrenia and is on anti depressants cannot legally own and or store firearms where this p

30% of the guns used in criminal acts are bought through this loop hole. Yep, seems like a nice thing to close if you want to reduce crime.

That would be a violation of ones constitutional right to own a firearm and of the "Castle Law". So it cannot be done.

And it also has nothing to do with what Obama is proposing. I have no idea why Rochard even joins these discussions if he's not going to follow the thread more carefully and understand what he is responding to.

I find it strange that some people have this "burning desire" to protect their home with a firearm yet I am forty-seven and have never had the need to "protect my home". Nor have I ever been robbed.

A friend of mine just bought a handgun because he wants to protect himself. Really? There has been one home invasion in the town he lives in in the past five years, the homeowner was armed, and the only one who got shot was... the homeowner. With his own firearm. Why does he live in fear of being robbed?

The odds of him shooting his own wife or someone he knows is greater than him shooting a robber. Wouldn't it be better for him to get a dog and an alarm? (I have both really. And firearms.)

I have a fifteen year old kid, and my kid has lots of friends who sleep over. They stay up late, raid the kitchen at 2am; I can't be arming myself every time something goes bump in the night.

There are more than 8,000 home invasions every day in the U.S. and this does not include the more than 6,000 break-ins and burglaries every day of the year. So your indvidual experience nor mine mean little in the scheme of things. I carry every place I go and I have been robbed before. A teenage kid robbed me at gunpoint with a semi automatic pistol which did not even have a clip in it. I was carrying at the time but decided I did not want to shoot a kid over the amount of money I had in my wallet. So I took my time providing what he wanted...all the while taking mental notes about him. I let him walk and turned the matter over to the police.

The main thing is it shouldn't matter what anyone wants or needs to do.

We aren't children and the govt. has no business disarming us. If I want to collect guns (which I don't) or just have a shotgun (which I do)...it's not anyone's business.

This "free" country has just about had all the "free" squeezed out of it.

It's amazing that when Benjamin Franklin minted the first coins for the United States, they didn't say "In God We Trust" on them. They said "Mind Your Business"
That's a true fact.

Too bad people and govt. feel the need to try and treat adults like we are children.

How about this...When somebody does something wrong, arrest them. Quit trying to figure out how to stop things that can't be stopped. And quit trying to politicize every damn horrible thing that happens.

It's shameful.

I heard a report that 1 Jan over 10,000 new laws took effect.

So if there are such a distinct underlying social issues that are fueling violence, why give people guns which are the most effective tools for killing?

Guns with a large magazines, kill more than single shot, which kill more than muzzle loaders, which kill more than knives. giving violent people guns, is like giving drunks a lorry.

Are you happy with the number of gun deaths and to clueless to see the connection?

And happy to see your country ruled by businessmen?

So this means no people who break these rules has ever been able to buy a gun?

In my opinion many of those are the ones buying guns. How many do you own?

My family live there, I have visited there, I don't like that very powerful countries are controlled by a small group of businessmen.

This is exactly how criminals get guns. We really don't have illegal gun sales as the laws are not enforced or don't exist. He is closing that loophole. They now need to find an illegal seller. If he is caught and turns over the seller. Everyone can be charged. Before there was no crime for selling person to person with no check. I am not sure how the NRA can spin this but it is a good thing for everyone.

Paul, Robbie grew up in a really violent area in a violent time. They all had guns and killed each other frequently. He feels that this is ok. It has been discussed many times.

No denying? Lots of people deny it. Mainly citizens of the US. You know, the people of the country that the 2nd Amendment applies to.

Dont like it? Fuck you, eat a bucket of dicks. You're not a citizen here and not living on our soil. You dont matter here.

Say what?

Where the fuck do you people get your information? Obviously from the news and/or forums where people don't know shit.

Please stop spreading lies like this. It only give the Pauls of the world more ignorant shit to spew.

BTW, in case my point eludes you....What you posted is flat out wrong.

No, they also make all the pussies and communists, like Rochard, FEEL safer.

Because Rochard is a piece of shit who holds no value in the oath he swore to protect the U.S. Constitution. He's an anti-patriot fudd.

the way forward is to do the exact opposite of anything markham or rochard think is right.

rochard wants psychologists to dictate human rights based on psych tests and markham will sleep better in his little village in eastern europe after there's a fundamental change to the document that defines the rights of people in the USA.

fucking tards.

124 Anti-gun Democrats Introduce Semi-Auto Gun and Magazine Ban in House of Representatives

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2015...epresentatives

(Stop getting mad - leave the emotions out dude)

Well first, he can close the loophole that lets people buy guns at gun shows without background checks. Isn't that a good start?


Maybe. Why not let him try? And if 1 criminal or 1 would-be criminal isn't able to buy the gun(s) he wants to commit a mass shooting, and maybe if one person is saved, isn't that a good thing?

Law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about.

You didn't ask Yes or No questions, and I'm not getting emotional. I think you are though. Relax man.

I think he wants to attend a few less services for murdered people. I think that if you were the patriarch of a large family, or the president of a large company, that were full of people killing each other, that you would feel some sadness for those people and perhaps some embarrassment. You might also feel frustrated because your attempts to curb the violence is blocked by others in your family or company who have other interests.

If Obama can reduce the killings, fantastic. If there's somehow money in this too, even better. Nothing wrong with that.

Peace and love, Robbie.

It's a free forum, and thankfully its a free country too. I personally like reading what Rochard has to to say on any topic. It's clear and to the point and doesn't pepper his language with hate and fear like you do. His comments are also on-topic.


Can I correct you and say "It shouldn't matter what any LAW ABIDING CITIZEN wants or needs to do?

No one is disarming you. If someone said you are being disarmed, they are lying to you.


It should be registered, just like your car is. If you are a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN, you should have no complaints about registering your firearms and obtaining a license.


Completely not true. You are free to say what you want, travel where you want, do what you want. You're allowed to drive cars and shoot guns. You're even allowed to shoot porn and sell it. What freedom have you personally had taken away from you?

Kind of irrelevant, but ok. If that's true I'll back you up by saying "cool", and there's too much religion screwing things up these days, but this is a different topic.

No one is treating you like a child. Someone is telling you this maybe, but its not true.

What's more important? Arresting a guy after he murders your children, or preventing him from doing so in the first place?

I'll agree with you there. Too many politicians, especially the current crop of republican candidates, try to politicize things for their own gain. Huckabee and Trump come to mind.

Peace and love be with you!!

**********, just saying stuff doesn't make you correct.

Disarming the citizens is the goal here.

If that is what the majority of people in the US believe should happen, then the constitution should be ammended.

I have no problem with that.
Bureaucrats who are always surroundex by armed guards trying to sneak laws through loopholes of the constitution they swore to uphold? Now that's a big problem.

As for freedom...every new law takes away a little more freedom. It's been done in babysteps. And now we are spyed on, searched at airports like common criminals, searched by cops at traffic stops, shot and killed by cops in many cases, have a media that tries to shape events and does selective reporting, forced to buy a product by the federal govt., and the list goes on.

Perhaps you wouldn't mind all of that IF you lived here. But you don't and I do. I'm not happy with the way things are going in our country. And the latest polls show the vast majority of citizens here feel the same way.

I hope that REAL change is coming and that for the first time in decades it will finally reflect the will of the people and not the will of the ruling class politicians.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/-mKRHjCZDOvw/UP...jpg?imgmax=800


I refuse to allow anyone deny me the right to protect myself and loved ones the way I see fit. I will never register nor give up my firearms.

Funniest thing I saw this morning was on CNN.

First they did an "anti-gun" "report" and showed a still picture of Pres. Obama looking like a benevolent father and talked about his "Guns" speech he is about to do. Then the talking heads came on and "discussed" how guns need to be under CONTROL of the govt. for the safety of the people.

THEN...after the commercial, they did an investigative report about the Airport Police at Chicago's airport.

And I swear to God this is what they said: The Airport Police at Chicago are unarmed. They have no guns. And they are TRAINED to "run and hide" in the event of a gunman entering the airport.
The reporter said that the Airport Police needed to be armed because otherwise they couldn't defend themselves if an armed gunman came after them!!!

WTF!?!?!?!

So a citizen of the U.S. doesn't need to be armed to protect himself.

But the Airport Police need to get armed right away because they are defenseless against an armed gunman.

Am I the only one that sees the double standard?

All govt. people must have either armed guards or guns. Normal citizens...not so much. :(

Here's the link to that story. And the ironic part was that it followed the Anti-Gun report saying that citizens don't need guns to protect themselves:

Guidance to aviation police: Run and hide - CNN.com

Robbie:

Simple Yes or No question for you: Do you think the loophole that lets people buy guns at trade shows without background checks should be closed?

No

It has nothing to do with crimes being committed. Criminals don't buy guns at gun shows. They actually have those gun shows at the Casino's here in Vegas (just like the trade shows).

Guarantee you 100% that the last place on Earth a gang member on the southside of Chicago is going to get a gun, is at a gun show surrounded by law enforcement (all the cops go there to check out guns) and tons of rich white people.

This is from the US Burea Of Justice statistics on where guns were purchased for crimes:
"less than 2% bought their firearm at a flea market or gun show"

Notice they included "flea market" in that statistic. A "flea market" is an open air market that happens on the weekends and people show up with stuff to sell.

It is as different from a gun show as McDonalds is to eating at a fine restaurant.

But even with adding flea markets in with gun shows...it's still only 2%

So **********...why do people going to gun shows suddenly have to spend extra money and time (money that will go to...you guessed it, bureaucrats for "registering") to do something that doesn't hurt anyone?