Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns

Obama Opposed Gun Ban Exception to Defend One’s Home

As a state senator in Illinois, President Obama opposed legislation providing an exception to handgun restrictions if the weapon was used in the defense of one’s home.

Obama’s vote would have maintained the status quo, which made it a violation of municipal gun ban law to use a firearm to save your own life in your own home. But the bill was passed anyway without his support.

The vote is a sign of how committed Obama may be to strict gun control measures.

The Illinois vote is hardly ancient history, having occurred in 2004 as Obama was running for election to the U.S. Senate. In opposing the measure, Obama lined up well to the left of the mainstream, as the Illinois Senate included 32 Democrats to 26 Republicans but approved the bill by an overwhelming margin and subsequently overrode a veto by then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Obama did not participate in the veto override, which occurred in November 2004, likely after Obama had resigned his state Senate seat in order to prepare for his new role in the U.S. Senate.

The Illinois legislation was passed after a man who shot a burglar in his home was fined $750 by his town for disobeying its handgun ban. The absurdity and injustice of the situation doesn’t seem to have made much of an impression on Obama.

Just eight years earlier, in 1996, Obama answered “Yes” to a survey question asking whether he would support state legislation to “ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.” The Obama 2008 presidential campaign claimed the form had been filled out by an aide who mischaracterized Obama’s position, even though Obama’s handwriting was found on survey.

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2013/01/11/obama-opposed-gun-ban-exception-defend-home/

 

Disregarding both the fanatics who would claim every American has an absolute right to any weapon and those who would ban all personal possession, the reality is that folks have a right to own guns, and gun ownership is, and has always been, "regulated" by government.

Is it well-regulated? That's the actual focus of the debate. Most Americans prefer that easy access to the nation's 300 million guns not be accorded to homicidal crackpots and criminals, and even most gun owners appear to support criminal background checks and five-day waiting period for all purchases.

Of course, the estimated 500,000 guns stolen annually makes a central data bank essential in order to trace them if implicated in a crime, or return them to their owners if recovered by law enforcement.

Regulation is reality, doing it well the only option. Personally, I'd still divest them of their juju and treat them like automobiles.

Most chronic gun-fondlers are harmless, and most gun-phobics are as well. The former just like to make a lot more noise.

 

are you crazy? what the hell do you think is happening in Sudan?

 

Guys think! This is what liberals do! She is playing you! This thread is about: http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...considering-executive-order-deal-guns-43.html

It is not about global warming or race relations or the gay agenda. STOP!!

The liberals have no rational recant so they change the subject and then twist things around on you. Don't let her have her way. She has no points so she plays the race card. She is a troll with no life.

 

That was a community hostage/ransom mass-murder over a period of time ... different than an incident of mass-execution(s) ...

 

Mass murder is mass murder, and there has to be a nut job involved or they won't happen.

 

On the contrary, real nut-jobs are often too mentally disorganised to get their (*)(*)(*)(*) together enough. Ninety per cent of homicides involve perpetrators who have never had contact with mental health services.

 

Doesn't make them any less defective, either from their own mental condition or environmental conditioning, they are still defective.

 

That's ridiculous. Some people kill in the heat of anger or passion. Doesn't make them mentally unbalanced. All it really takes is one bad day.

 

Mass murderer not someone who kills somebody in a bar or the guy he finds in bed with his wife. These guys are for the most part certified. The kid in California may have just snapped but his aggression was directed at the people who bullied him. Going after strangers, who never did you any harm, and trying to kill as many as ya can before you get caught, commit suicide/suicide by police, is mentally defective.

 

Liberal/Marxists are such hypocrites.

- - - Updated - - -

Handguns kill far far far far more people/children each year in the U.S. than semi-automatic rifles. Really, if Liberals want to be intellectually honest, they need to ban handguns.

- - - Updated - - -

Handguns kill far far far far more people/children each year in the U.S. than semi-automatic rifles. Really, if Liberals want to be intellectually honest, they need to ban handguns.

 

The responsible question is 'what list' and the responsible answer to a 3AM visit is 'what guns'?...And if folk rutinely begin to experience such unlawful asaults, other folk will learn of it and when those '3 o 4 sherrif's cars' get home they might discover they no longer have a home to return to...

Put another way, you advocate government actions almost exactly like the 3rd Reich or Stalin's thugs. I note that, at least to Hitler, the citizens outside of Germany hunted the 3rd Reich's thugs as effectivley as the Reich hunted them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinhard_Heydrich

When the government breaks the basic law of the land, the citizens sometimes push back

 

Much better.

 

You do realize how silly that sounds....you can count the number of legally and privately held handguns in the home on both hands...

 

Gangbangers do, as do drug cartels of all colors and ethnicity

 

I don't think anyone has even mentioned going into gun-owner's homes and taking their guns. What I've heard is a lot of crazy talk about people who own guns going out in force against the government!

Talk is cheap. I don't think a group of gun-toting crazy people is going to scare the military or the FBI, it it were to come to such drastic conclusion. I'm not sure many will be willing to die just to keep an attack weapon, but there may be a few nuts willing to do that.

And the consequences may be more detrimental to the nuts who think they can take the military, but there's always people who are willing to make bad choices.

 

Possibly because when you were in HS the teachers weren't obsessed with inserting their collectivist, anti-American free market views into every fabric of "education" which began to surface during and after the Viet-Nam area. Since that period, basically all Universities have been churning out little socialist who flood the public education system and the vast majority of our media outlets. With Obama the indoctrination seems to have run full circle and their vision is now quickly becoming reality. Chaos and division are rampid and rational debate is nowhere to be found. Instead, we have one side shouting down the other using slandering, demagoguery, personal attacks and even threats. It's no way to run a country, but it's happening none the less and the resulting future reality will be shocking.

God bless the men & women who have, and do, defend liberty & (*)(*)(*)(*) those who are attempting to steal/destroy it.

 

I'd like to see the link to those figures......

 

I'm talking about defensive use of guns. The good guys with the guns.

 

What part of 'legally held' and 'handguns' did you not understand...

 

If yo believe that y hav not listened to a vast host of far left politicians from Bloomburg to Cuomo.

makes the assumption that the most honorable segment of government, the military, will enforce tyrany on our citizens..I doubt it.

Same faulty assumption...

This is why the scheme is in trouble again. Every day that passes makes any serious grabbing less likely as opposition grows and the wild claims and demands of the left are reported.

There will be no revolution because there will be no serious gun grab. About the best they will accomplish is a silly grab of high capacity magazines with folk pretty much ignoring whatever law is enacted...Quiet disobedience will be far greater if BoBo tries to enact legislation through executive order.

- - - Updated - - -

If yo believe that y hav not listened to a vast host of far left politicians from Bloomburg to Cuomo.

makes the assumption that the most honorable segment of government, the military, will enforce tyrany on our citizens..I doubt it.

Same faulty assumption...

This is why the scheme is in trouble again. Every day that passes makes any serious grabbing less likely as opposition grows and the wild claims and demands of the left are reported.

There will be no revolution because there will be no serious gun grab. About the best they will accomplish is a silly grab of high capacity magazines with folk pretty much ignoring whatever law is enacted...Quiet disobedience will be far greater if BoBo tries to enact legislation through executive order.

- - - Updated - - -

If yo believe that y hav not listened to a vast host of far left politicians from Bloomburg to Cuomo.

makes the assumption that the most honorable segment of government, the military, will enforce tyrany on our citizens..I doubt it.

Same faulty assumption...

This is why the scheme is in trouble again. Every day that passes makes any serious grabbing less likely as opposition grows and the wild claims and demands of the left are reported.

There will be no revolution because there will be no serious gun grab. About the best they will accomplish is a silly grab of high capacity magazines with folk pretty much ignoring whatever law is enacted...Quiet disobedience will be far greater if BoBo tries to enact legislation through executive order.

 

Wow, you are getting pretty pathetic.