Obama Executive Orders on guns

[rainsdrops]

Chicago (chi-raq) has tough gun laws compared to most cities.   Assault weapons are banned in some suburbs, 10 round magazine maximum, and yet it has extremely high gun violence numbers.
Tougher buyer /seller / traceability laws will not work.  Criminals will continue to buy and sell firearms illegally.   If you make a desired object harder to obtain, you increase it's cost.  Increasing its cost provides the seller, with a greater profit.  Increase profits, will promote more people to sell illegally.
Any form of gun contol only affect law abiding citizens.
  Let's look at our current drug war.  The US has not and cannot, irradiate illegal drugs in this country.  The greater number of drug laws, the greater the risk is on the drug dealer, who interns increases his profits, thus seducing more people into the drug industry.  The only victim is the non drug using citizen. 

Shall be infringed, means no changes, restrictions, or amendment to our right to bear arms.  Did restricting felons from owning guns, really remove firearms from their hands, or create a black market for it.
Does NFA laws truly prevent criminals from using vertical handgrips on pistols, taping a coke bottle to a barrel, or adjusting sears in semi rifles? No!!!!!

Gun laws of any kind, any nature, only affect law abiding citizens.  It's their intention to disarm you.

[Charlie_Zulu]

Battle over reporting lost or stolen guns?

Oh boy Democrats will love to see that happen.

One sentence of this article is related to reporting lost or stolen guns.  No doubt that's a great diversion they've formulated.  The game being played is re: background checks.

You guys don't get it. Hillary is way worse for us on guns. Obama is a narcissist and will force another EO upon us to get something done. Once Hillary gets in, she needs just one more Democrat judge and its all over for us.

Fixed it for you.  Pragmitist?!?  Yeah... right.  Seriously?!  What a freakin' apologist!

Will be interested to see if you vote (D) or (R) then.  I'm guessing you're going to reply with you're voting for Webb as an (I).  That's a cop-out.  At the end of the day no (I) will be elected in 2016.  I could give 2 sh#ts less about anything else other than the 2A in 2016.  One issue voter this time around.  Discount the "shall not be infringed" crowd if you will, however, alot of folks like me are just as energized.

If I lost $100 and was offered $80 back for a $20 reward, I would do it.  Yes, the right thing would be for the finder to just return my stuff.  But I would rather be out $20 than $100.

Wow.....   just wow!   


SMH.......

[10-4]

In my opinion it doesn't matter what any of them say right now.  They ALL say whatever they need to say to get elected, and then they do as they wish.  Again, in my opinion it all comes down to the Supreme Court - the next confirmation will decide the direction this country takes for the remainder of our life.  We must get a true Conservative in the White House and maintain a majority in the House and Senate.  The Constitution, as written, is what matters. 

[Rich10]

1. Bush played more golf than Obama.

2. Gun deaths in NYC are due to guns being bought down south and moved up north via proxies with no background checks. Most NYPD gun deaths are this route.

You debate like a liberal.

1. Throw something out there whether or not true.  Make people disprove you.

2. No, they are due to criminals. 
Your east coast bias is sad.  Don't try to force everyone else to live under the same gulag rules you follow.

[Wolfie]

Man Rich I guess you do not watch FOX News or listen to Rush. Because I do and I intertwine that style of debating into the issue.

I am a real conservative, pro life, gun, family values, national security and police. I used to be Republican ever since I could vote under Reagan. But The Republicans failed to protect us, blew out the economy and let gay marriage happen.

My voting issues at the presidential level are economic and foreign policy. Thats whats most important to me. And the Democrats win on both counts.

[Rich10]

You're right.  I've seen about 3 hours of Fox News in the last 15 years.  I have directv and don't even know what channel it is.

[Wolfie]

Rich you need to do the following. Join your local/county Republican committee. This way you will have direct access to them. Force them not only to prevent more gun laws from happening, push them to expand gun rights or change those electeds out for those that will.

Trusting them to do the right thing is a very bad thing.

[Gunhacker]

This is carefully being engineered to make the GOP look bad and an effort to enhance the likelihood of a Democrat remaining in the White House.

Interlace (and I hate to use the term) common sense or logical sounding requirements like reporting lost or stolen guns, that really have no bearing on the 2A right to bear arms, with the ones that will do serious 2A damage, and when the GOP tries to circumvent the Executive Order, the Dems will cry foul hiding behind the "benign" provisions asking why the GOP is against the reporting of stolen guns.

To many voters that only go by the liberal News media snippets, that will sound reasonable and the GOP comes off sounding like a bunch villains.

The GOP needs to be smarter than Obama on how they handle his antics.   

[sauermash]

I am really anticipating the end of the darkest era in American history; I can only pray that next January marks the beginning of a leadership tenure supportive of the basic principles and freedoms that have historically driven prosperity and international respect.

[Captain O]

Can't wait until the White House is devoid of the worst most destructive, Un American POTUS ever!
BTW, none of my guns killed anyone last year or the many many years before...I hope that 2016 they are not needed either!
I have a fire extinguisher for the same reasons...

Yes sir! I concur wholeheartedly!

[Rich10]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/gun-poll-half-say-gun-control-wont-stop-violence-59-dont-trust-feds-on-guns/article/2580384#.VpacFQkocIo.twitter

[sqlbullet]

While Rassmussen Reports is a solid polling company, the article doesn't say who commissioned the poll, what the methodology was or what the question text(s) were.  It is likely that the poll was therefore paid for to provide evidence to support a pre-determined conclusion, and the methodology and question text(s) were structured to that end.

We all get these calls all the time.  They present a question that has closed answers, none of which match with our actual feelings.

I would like to believe this poll was on the up and up, and I do generally agree that a majority of Americans don't think more gun control laws will stop or slow violence.  I do question the 59% number and would really like to know the question text(s) that fed that response rate.