Looks like Obama finally getting ready to do something about guns

[Trevor4Iowa]

It's about time. With bullets flying everywhere in this country, I hope he is heavy handed on this topic. Gun violence is out of control in this country.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/obama-mike-bloomberg-gun-control/index.html



What could Obama do?


In his executive action, Obama could alter the government's definition of who is "in the business" of selling guns, expanding it to include private dealers and others who can currently sell without completing a background check. Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has already said she would take such action if elected to the White House.


But the legal hurdles in moving unilaterally have proven difficult for the administration to surmount. If he does move forward with executive actions, they would almost certainly be challenged in court by Republicans and groups like the NRA.


And like previous executive actions, Obama's move on guns could be overturned by his successor.


Valerie Jarrett, Obama's senior adviser who also attended the meeting with Bloomberg Wednesday, said this week that the executive orders would be revealed in "short order," but refused to offer any more detailed timelines.

 

[22*43*51]

I wish he would do something about National Security.

After all, this last issue was a Terrorist attack on American soil.

But, let's blame our laws and our citizens instead.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

he has no power constitutionally to do anything about guns, but that won't stop him

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

I sort of hope he goes for it here with a big EO on guns. I think it would finally motivate many "average Joe's" to action to counter his end runs on Congress.

 

[swagsurfer02]

I sort of hope he goes for it here with a big EO on guns. I think it would finally motivate many "average Joe's" to action to counter his end runs on Congress.

If he did this there would be chaos and he would without doubt be the president who possibly brought about a civil war by going against the constitution.

 

[Pepperman]

He has about 6 months to try to do anything. He's already a total joke and most sane people know it and ignore the man. Meanwhile, good luck getting law enforcement to follow whatever decree he tries to pull off.

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

If he did this there would be chaos and he would without doubt be the president who possibly brought about a civil war by going against the constitution.

I am not sure if things would rise to the level of chaos, but they could, but I do think it would be a "final straw" kind of thing that would spur a reaction. I say bring it.

 

[hawkssox1]

It's about time. With bullets flying everywhere in this country, I hope he is heavy handed on this topic. Gun violence is out of control in this country.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/obama-mike-bloomberg-gun-control/index.html



What could Obama do?


In his executive action, Obama could alter the government's definition of who is "in the business" of selling guns, expanding it to include private dealers and others who can currently sell without completing a background check. Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has already said she would take such action if elected to the White House.


But the legal hurdles in moving unilaterally have proven difficult for the administration to surmount. If he does move forward with executive actions, they would almost certainly be challenged in court by Republicans and groups like the NRA.

The current President recently received the "Jimmy Carter"trophy as the worst ever.
And like previous executive actions, Obama's move on guns could be overturned by his successor.


Valerie Jarrett, Obama's senior adviser who also attended the meeting with Bloomberg Wednesday, said this week that the executive orders would be revealed in "short order," but refused to offer any more detailed timelines.

 

[hawkssox1]

It's about time. With bullets flying everywhere in this country, I hope he is heavy handed on this topic. Gun violence is out of control in this country.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/obama-mike-bloomberg-gun-control/index.html



What could Obama do?


In his executive action, Obama could alter the government's definition of who is "in the business" of selling guns, expanding it to include private dealers and others who can currently sell without completing a background check. Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has already said she would take such action if elected to the White House.


But the legal hurdles in moving unilaterally have proven difficult for the administration to surmount. If he does move forward with executive actions, they would almost certainly be challenged in court by Republicans and groups like the NRA.


And like previous executive actions, Obama's move on guns could be overturned by his successor.


Valerie Jarrett, Obama's senior adviser who also attended the meeting with Bloomberg Wednesday, said this week that the executive orders would be revealed in "short order," but refused to offer any more detailed timelines.

Has anyone seen Barry with his "Jimmy Carter"trophy as worst POTUS ever?

 

[IMCC965]

It's about time. With bullets flying everywhere in this country, I hope he is heavy handed on this topic. Gun violence is out of control in this country.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/obama-mike-bloomberg-gun-control/index.html



What could Obama do?


In his executive action, Obama could alter the government's definition of who is "in the business" of selling guns, expanding it to include private dealers and others who can currently sell without completing a background check. Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has already said she would take such action if elected to the White House.


But the legal hurdles in moving unilaterally have proven difficult for the administration to surmount. If he does move forward with executive actions, they would almost certainly be challenged in court by Republicans and groups like the NRA.


And like previous executive actions, Obama's move on guns could be overturned by his successor.


Valerie Jarrett, Obama's senior adviser who also attended the meeting with Bloomberg Wednesday, said this week that the executive orders would be revealed in "short order," but refused to offer any more detailed timelines.

Gun violence is down overall.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

He has about 6 months to try to do anything. He's already a total joke and most sane people know it and ignore the man. Meanwhile, good luck getting law enforcement to follow whatever decree he tries to pull off.

My understanding is that law enforcement generally wants tougher gun control.

Besides, the action suggested in the OP would presumably be handled by ATF, not beat cops.

If all he's doing is modifying the definition of "dealer" so that those who can currently skate around background checks and such have less license, is that really a bad thing? Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

If you were following the discussion in another gun thread, Gimmered regularly made the point that dealers have to do background checks. That was an argument against being too worried about end-run gun deals at gun shows. But it also makes the point that some people are dealing without being counted as dealers.

I don't claim to know what the proper definition of "dealer" should be. Would it be based on the number of gun deals you are involved in per year or something like that? But whatever it is, it seems like a perfectly reasonable approach to expanding background checking - which is something nearly all Americans favor.

And no, OiT, it wouldn't even slightly violate the constitution. Modifying the definition of "dealer" in no way changes your ability to keep or bear arms. As long as the definition doesn't make it unreasonably hard for eligible purchasers to get guns, it's fair sailing from a constitutional perspective.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Gun violence is down overall.

Even assuming that's true, let us know when it is down enough.

 

[markfromj]

With bullets flying everywhere in this country...

Overstate much?

 

[22*43*51]

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

The people who have been profiting (both financially and politically) by screaming about the black man coming to get their guns for 8 years are really excited.

I can just feel them yearning for Obama to do something that will prove that they haven't been craven liars all this time. It's palpable. But, of course, Obama won't give them that gift.

It will be fun to see the gun nuts try to twist whatever he does into a confiscation plan

 

[Huey Grey]

I wish he would do something about National Security.

After all, this last issue was a Terrorist attack on American soil.

But, let's blame our laws and our citizens instead.

Largest attack on American soil in the history of our country was done when a Republican was in charge. What were you saying again?

 

[Huey Grey]

The Republican repsonses to terrorism are straight up out of fantasyland, so it makes sense that you're using another fantasyland to justify them.

 

[22*43*51]

The Republican repsonses to terrorism are straight up out of fantasyland, so it makes sense that you're using another fantasyland to justify them.

 

[Trevor4Iowa]

He has about 6 months to try to do anything. He's already a total joke and most sane people know it and ignore the man. Meanwhile, good luck getting law enforcement to follow whatever decree he tries to pull off.

So you think it's for law enforcement to not enforce the law, but it's horrible for Obama to try to protect American citizens from gun violence? I don't get why you all rip Obama trying to find a solution to a major problem in our country.

 

[The Tradition]

My understanding is that law enforcement generally wants tougher gun control.

When it's your job to confront criminals who would just assume shoot you dead, that's a perfectly reasonable position.

I'd like there to be a law against crazy employees. It would make my job much easier. Instead, I have to dream up accommodations for their mental health disabilities.

 

[22*43*51]

Largest attack on American soil in the history of our country was done when a Republican was in charge. What were you saying again?

All eleven attackers were incubated for years by Clinton national security policy.(or lack thereof)

 

[Trevor4Iowa]

When it's your job to confront criminals who would just assume shoot you dead, that's a perfectly reasonable position.

I'd like there to be a law against crazy employees. It would make my job much easier. Instead, I have to dream up accommodations for their mental health disabilities.

It should be just as soon, not just assume.

 

[Jan Itor]

Largest attack on American soil in the history of our country was done when a Republican was in charge. What were you saying again?

I'm guessing he wasn't talking about banning guns. Maybe Jet Liners....

 

[The Tradition]

It should be just as soon, not just assume.

Whatever, Poindexter.

 

[CarolinaHawkeye]

Old Ned or Arb or whoever he is now is just gonna shit when the feds knock on his door!

 

[DrVenkman]

I keep forgetting that the Constitution is written in stone with no chance of ever amending it's, sometimes, archaic message. Maybe the 'as written' Constitutional right should be altered. While some on here will definitely argue that society is exactly how it was in the late 1700's, it really isn't.

 

[Trevor4Iowa]

I keep forgetting that the Constitution is written in stone with no chance of ever amending it's, sometimes, archaic message. Maybe the 'as written' Constitutional right should be altered. While some on here will definitely argue that society is exactly how it was in the late 1700's, it really isn't.

Most here are in favor of human rights abuse, so It feels like the 1700's sometimes, but I really agree with your statement. After all, the second amendment is a perfect example.

 

[Mattski]

What is ultra ridiculous about this whole debate is the executive order being discussed IS ALREADY IN PLACE IN CALIFORNIA! Person to person gun sales are not permitted without taking the gun to a dealer and having a background check done in CA. But guess what the would be murderers did? They bought them from a buddy anyway bc when you're hell bent on killing people you don't worry about laws like these. Gang bangers won't either. They'll simply keep doing what they already do which is have those with clean records, mainly girlfriends, buy the guns for them (which by the way is also illegal).
It's just unreal anyone believes this is anything more than Obama being able to say he "did something". It wouldn't have (didn't in CA) prevented any of the mass shootings nor will it prevent gang killings.

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

What is ultra ridiculous about this whole debate is the executive order being discussed IS ALREADY IN PLACE IN CALIFORNIA! Person to person gun sales are not permitted without taking the gun to a dealer and having a background check done in CA. But guess what the would be murderers did? They bought them from a buddy anyway bc when you're hell bent on killing people you don't worry about laws like these. Gang bangers won't either. They'll simply keep doing what they already do which is have those with clean records, mainly girlfriends, buy the guns for them (which by the way is also illegal).
It's just unreal anyone believes this is anything more than Obama being able to say he "did something". It wouldn't have (didn't in CA) prevented any of the mass shootings nor will it prevent gang killings.

Nailed it. ^^ Yet the emotional ones are clamoring for "something" to be done, never mind that the "something(s)" will do NOTHING to prevent these tragedies.

 

[22*43*51]

I keep forgetting that the Constitution is written in stone with no chance of ever amending it's, sometimes, archaic message. Maybe the 'as written' Constitutional right should be altered. While some on here will definitely argue that society is exactly how it was in the late 1700's, it really isn't.

There is a process. Why isn't being used?

 

[22*43*51]

Most here are in favor of human rights abuse, so It feels like the 1700's sometimes, but I really agree with your statement. After all, the second amendment is a perfect example.

Don't get overly emotional Trev.

 

[NoleandDawg]

My understanding is that law enforcement generally wants tougher gun control.

I've spent over a decade working in law enforcement and I can categorically say this is untrue. Most street level cops are gun guys and have no problems with legal firearms owners. The truth is that legal gun owners are by and large the most law abiding citizens there are. I know I've prosecuted probably hundreds of gun related crimes and I can only think of one where the perpetrator was a licensed concealed weapons permit holder. Contrast that with the average thug who is probably a felon and cannot legally have a gun anyway (but doesn't care).

You're a lib so I expect you to just make stuff up and have haven't let me down.

 

[ahawkfan91]

So he's going to close loopholes around background checks, even though none of the recent mass shootings can be linked to a gun that was purchased via said loopholes?

Brilliant. Way to really get out there and "do something", Mr. President.

 

[timinatoria]

Most here are in favor of human rights abuse.

I'm sorry, but WTF are you talking about? Shouldn't you be in school right now?

 

[rocketclone]

Pretty simple, like I have said. If the Dems want gun control you tie it with an abortion bill limiting abortions to XXX amount of weeks. Then the NRA folks are not happy and neither are the Planned Parenthood types and both are pissing off their base.

 

[Vroom_C14]

I've spent over a decade working in law enforcement and I can categorically say this is untrue. Most street level cops are gun guys and have no problems with legal firearms owners. The truth is that legal gun owners are by and large the most law abiding citizens there are. I know I've prosecuted probably hundreds of gun related crimes and I can only think of one where the perpetrator was a licensed concealed weapons permit holder. Contrast that with the average thug who is probably a felon and cannot legally have a gun anyway (but doesn't care).

You're a lib so I expect you to just make stuff up and have haven't let me down.

 

[DrVenkman]

There is a process. Why isn't being used?

I don't know. Honest answer.

 

[linkshero]

Ok! You have my attention you little vixen.

 

[TJ8869]

I keep forgetting that the Constitution is written in stone with no chance of ever amending it's, sometimes, archaic message. Maybe the 'as written' Constitutional right should be altered. While some on here will definitely argue that society is exactly how it was in the late 1700's, it really isn't.

Most here are in favor of human rights abuse, so It feels like the 1700's sometimes, but I really agree with your statement. After all, the second amendment is a perfect example.

So the 2nd Amendment is open to interpretation but the 14th Amendment is off limits to discussion?

 

[DrVenkman]

I've spent over a decade working in law enforcement and I can categorically say this is untrue. Most street level cops are gun guys and have no problems with legal firearms owners. The truth is that legal gun owners are by and large the most law abiding citizens there are. I know I've prosecuted probably hundreds of gun related crimes and I can only think of one where the perpetrator was a licensed concealed weapons permit holder. Contrast that with the average thug who is probably a felon and cannot legally have a gun anyway (but doesn't care).

You're a lib so I expect you to just make stuff up and have haven't let me down.

Are you a NYC police officer? I ask because tougher gun laws, coupled with a mayor that works with the police and keeps the dept well funded has shown that tougher gun laws can have a substantial impact. It isn't easy because a lot of factions have to work together.
Unfortunately unless a federal plan is put in place gun laws wont change in a great number of places. I do agree with you on the overall view of that many want more guns in the system- albeit legally- and that the police need to be better armed. After San Bern it was almost all you heard from the 'experts' they had reporting.