White House says there are 19 Executive Orders for gun control - Page 3
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > White House says there are 19 Executive Orders for gun control

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-16-2013, 06:35 PM   #21
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,425
Liked 5814 Times on 3288 Posts
Likes Given: 5280

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazedJava View Post
America. Freedom of Speech. Debate calmly and rationally so you can determine if they truly are someone willing to hear the other side and possibly change their mind, listen and calmly agree to disagree, or determine if they are indeed a wingnut.



Just the screen name screams WINGNUT!
__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 06:41 PM   #22
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Squawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 865
Liked 191 Times on 128 Posts

Default

These Actions are so vague, I'm not completely sure what to make of them. Time will tell.

__________________

If guns kill people, mine are defective.

Squawk is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 06:52 PM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sonic82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Minneapolis,Minnesota
Posts: 2,901
Liked 749 Times on 477 Posts
Likes Given: 586

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
Lety's see what the SCOTUS says about that.
Why would SCOTUS protect it??? There's nothing in our rights that protect magazine capacities.
__________________
“He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.”
― Alexander Hamilton

The comments made herein are those solely of this writer and in no way reflect the opinions of any other person, agency, or entity.
Sonic82 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 06:57 PM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TNFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: TN. U.S.A.
Posts: 293
Liked 125 Times on 68 Posts
Likes Given: 130

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic82 View Post
There's nothing in our rights that protect magazine capacities.
Let's recap, the 2nd Amendment was to protect OUR God Given Right to keep and bear arms suitable for Militia use, ergo arms with "hi-capacity" magazines and by default those magazines.
YES, the 2nd Amendment DOES protect "hi-capacity" magazines and the guns that use them.
__________________
http://www.infowars.com/
Member: Gun Owners of America
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here!
This is the War Room!"
TNFrank is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 07:12 PM   #25
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 665
Liked 208 Times on 127 Posts
Likes Given: 289

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNFrank View Post
Let's recap, the 2nd Amendment was to protect OUR God Given Right to keep and bear arms suitable for Militia use, ergo arms with "hi-capacity" magazines and by default those magazines.
YES, the 2nd Amendment DOES protect "hi-capacity" magazines and the guns that use them.
I agree with frank on this one. Shall not be infringed is the key to this. Look up the definition of infringed. It's pretty clear to me. The second was put in place to have a standing citizen army capable of overthrowing a tyranical and oppressive government...as a last resort. There is nothing in the constitution that says otherwise. I am no lawyer of constitutional law, but I can read. I see an amendment that was out there to protect the others. Not something that says I have a right to hunt. The nfa of 1934 was in direct violation of the constitution as will any other laws pertaining to controlling my firearms. It is a right in this country to one firearms to protect our family and our country. It is not a privilege, but a right! The government whether it be congress the senate the prez or the supreme court can not rule against the constitution. It is there for a reason. So if the asshat in chief wants to make the US safer, he should be harder on the vinegar sacks using the gons illegally and stop INFRINGING on my rights that thousand of men and women have died protecting. If our elected leaders don't like that I encourage them to step down from their office and resume their pitiful existence crying about **** they have no right to cry about, lIke Sarah Brady.
__________________
CaseyChadwell is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 07:15 PM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 6
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services website a citizen has a "Responsibility to defend the country if the need should arise". Could ANY minimization of gun rights on any citizen be considered treason?

From the Constitution of the US, Article III, Section. 3. "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."

From a law dictionary the definition of "aid and comfort" is, "To render assistance or counsel. Any act that deliberately strengthens or tends to strengthen enemies of the United States, or that weakens or tends to weaken the power of the United States to resist and attack such enemies is characterized as aid and comfort."

__________________
mhannaford is offline  
orangello Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 09:52 PM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sonic82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Minneapolis,Minnesota
Posts: 2,901
Liked 749 Times on 477 Posts
Likes Given: 586

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNFrank View Post
Let's recap, the 2nd Amendment was to protect OUR God Given Right to keep and bear arms suitable for Militia use, ergo arms with "hi-capacity" magazines and by default those magazines.
YES, the 2nd Amendment DOES protect "hi-capacity" magazines and the guns that use them.
As I said before, I agree with 99.9% of what you are saying. But, you don't understand what you're up against. There are many, many others out there that believe just as strong on the opposite side...ok..so, the 2nd does not define arms therefore it's open to interpetation on mag limits, style of weapons and the like.That's why there have been bans in the past (clinton). The only way do battle it is to have the solidarity of like-minded individuals stand tough and pray you win the contest. There is no 'fine print', it's your emotional attachment, your sense of patriotism and the little bit of help the 2nd ammendment provides that drives you and the rest of us.
__________________
“He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.”
― Alexander Hamilton

The comments made herein are those solely of this writer and in no way reflect the opinions of any other person, agency, or entity.
Sonic82 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 10:19 PM   #28
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 848
Liked 516 Times on 279 Posts
Likes Given: 113

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic82 View Post
As I said before, I agree with 99.9% of what you are saying. But, you don't understand what you're up against. There are many, many others out there that believe just as strong on the opposite side...ok..so, the 2nd does not define arms therefore it's open to interpetation on mag limits, style of weapons and the like.That's why there have been bans in the past (clinton). The only way do battle it is to have the solidarity of like-minded individuals stand tough and pray you win the contest. There is no 'fine print', it's your emotional attachment, your sense of patriotism and the little bit of help the 2nd ammendment provides that drives you and the rest of us.
There is a very good argument without dragging the 2nd Amendment into it about the uselessness of magazine capacity limits.

1. Bad guys in mass shootings are firing on unarmed victims. They have the luxury of reloading as often as they need and many of them assault with multiple weapons. Columbine happened during the last AWB and the Virginia Tech shooting happened despite the assailant having mostly 10 round magazines.

2. Someone in a defensive situation against multiple attackers may not have time to reload. Average citizens do not have the luxury of waiting for back-up.

3. The last time we banned anything over 10 rounds there was no impact on crime. Limiting magazine capacity does not stop bad guys and ONLY affects law abiding gun owners. Limiting the law abiding is placing them at an unfair disadvantage. ANY argument you can make for the police not to be limited applies to everyday citizens and possibly even more so.

Not to mention the detailed plan for using a 3D printer to "print" 30 round AR magazines is out there in the wild right now. In a few years anyone can make all the mags they want. In about a decade the technology will be cheap enough that it may force magazine manufacturers to rethink their business model.
__________________

"For every problem there is always a solution that is simple, obvious, and wrong." - Mark Twain

CrazedJava is online now  
Sonic82 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:48 AM   #29
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sonic82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Minneapolis,Minnesota
Posts: 2,901
Liked 749 Times on 477 Posts
Likes Given: 586

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazedJava View Post
There is a very good argument without dragging the 2nd Amendment into it about the uselessness of magazine capacity limits.

1. Bad guys in mass shootings are firing on unarmed victims. They have the luxury of reloading as often as they need and many of them assault with multiple weapons. Columbine happened during the last AWB and the Virginia Tech shooting happened despite the assailant having mostly 10 round magazines.

2. Someone in a defensive situation against multiple attackers may not have time to reload. Average citizens do not have the luxury of waiting for back-up.

3. The last time we banned anything over 10 rounds there was no impact on crime. Limiting magazine capacity does not stop bad guys and ONLY affects law abiding gun owners. Limiting the law abiding is placing them at an unfair disadvantage. ANY argument you can make for the police not to be limited applies to everyday citizens and possibly even more so.

Not to mention the detailed plan for using a 3D printer to "print" 30 round AR magazines is out there in the wild right now. In a few years anyone can make all the mags they want. In about a decade the technology will be cheap enough that it may force magazine manufacturers to rethink their business model.
I'll buy that!
__________________
“He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.”
― Alexander Hamilton

The comments made herein are those solely of this writer and in no way reflect the opinions of any other person, agency, or entity.
Sonic82 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:47 AM   #30
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
StainlessSteel215's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 821
Liked 282 Times on 204 Posts
Likes Given: 192

Default

Does anyone have a link to these 23 new presidential exec orders?

I really want to review them in detail....and tonight Im being lazy.

__________________
StainlessSteel215 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
White House Determines Gun Control Executive Action Can Be Taken! HockaLouis Legal and Activism 46 01-11-2013 10:47 PM
Eric Holder: executive orders on gun control? Bigcountry02 Politics, Religion and Controversy 21 12-29-2012 08:59 AM
White House describes gun control measures Obama supports Wiebelhaus Politics, Religion and Controversy 25 12-19-2012 09:58 PM
White House to Welcome Rapper Who Wants U.S. Troops Tortured to the White House Overkill0084 Politics, Religion and Controversy 19 12-08-2012 08:16 PM