|
Because of congress basically refusing to take charge and leading the country into better gun control obama has to use executive action to start gun laws that work.
Loophole for background checks with gun shows.
Universal background checks
Better licensing.
Probably a limit of a week before receiving the gun |
|
|
His executive action will be met with judicial interpretation. |
|
|
i hope the executive action fails |
|
HateHouseJoin Date: 2013-08-27
Post Count: 8815 |
Supreme court usually shoots that down. |
|
|
the second amendment was only created to keep a well regulated militia
not so a bunch of goofs can walk around with m16s at walmart |
|
|
"i hope the executive action fails"
So you would rather someone with a mental disability to be allowed to get a licensed gun easier then harder?
The loophole being removed eliminates that
Background checks eliminates that
|
|
ChanellerJoin Date: 2011-07-26
Post Count: 1162 |
No, the second amendment was created so that we can defend ourselves with arms. People with mental disabilities, that would seek to harm others, would likely not be subdued by a mere background check, especially if they're pathological.
The places with the most background checks, and where it is hardest to get a licensed gun, ironically have the highest amounts of homicide by arms. For example, Washington D.C. and Chicago both fit the bill as having some of the worst gun homicide rates in the nation, yet these states have the toughest, most unyielding regulation in the continental United States. What does that tell you? More regulation is not helpful, and, in fact, it's often hurtful, to taxpayers, because of its steep cost. |
|
|
Ever heard of gangs? Yeah that is a thing.
Look at any european country or australia. They have cut down shootings massively by implementing stricter control. What obama wants to do is only a small dent.
|
|
ChanellerJoin Date: 2011-07-26
Post Count: 1162 |
Those countries are a lot different, a lot less diverse politically and socially, than the United States. It makes more sense to look at ingrown examples of more regulation in our own very states: Washington and Chicago, two states notorious for their gangs and homicides. Regulation almost never helps, and if it does, then it usually involves a violation of freedom.
For example, my dad lives in New York, and I in middle America, and it's basically impossible for a non-police officer to get a gun there. Licensing bureaus are specifically told to reject the vast, vast majority of licensing requests, unless it's someone who is a former police officer, who has combat training, etc. Although New York might have ridiculously strict control and corresponding average amounts of homicides by arms, there is a terrible limitation of peoples' freedom there. |
|
|
That isn't impeding rights, that is just them trying to limit the amount of legal arms being used for homicide.
Like I said, gangs are the cause of your statistics in the stated areas for homicide by firearms. They are usually illegal weapons and would have to be enforced by the government to stop them.
|
|
|
"Those countries are a lot different, a lot less diverse politically and socially, than the United States..."
Those countries are a LOT more diverse politically and socially. |
|
|
|
And yeah actually your comment about diversity with policies/politics is far from right
Britain alone has more in parliament then we have in congress together.
Has more parties then we have together too. |
|
NickyJ3Join Date: 2011-12-23
Post Count: 3563 |
Personally, I identify myself as a Democrat.
I believe what Obama is doing is right.
The Republicans are opposing it because the National Rifle Association (NRA) lobbyists are putting money in their pockets.
~Storm~ |
|
|
I think that its absurd that obama has to take this step, it should of been congress that did this not him. |
|
ChanellerJoin Date: 2011-07-26
Post Count: 1162 |
In my opinion, if the common man is virtually unable to get a firearm, even though he has no criminal record, then that is a limitation of a freedom rightfully owed to that man. If the statistics I am referring to follow from having gangs that have surpluses of illegal firearms, then doesn't that prove my point that more regulation doesn't stop criminals from getting guns? Criminals will get guns irregardless of whether or not there is a law saying that they cannot; if there is a will, there is a way.
European countries are a lot less diverse than the United States, and I'm seriously not sure how you could say otherwise, but I'll try to find some statistics on it.
And even if you agree with tougher regulation, more executive action, in a way not unlike that of a tyrant, paves the path to higher, more dangerous levels of power in the hands of the President, as he has already used his executive authority quite enough, and quite foolishly, throughout his terms. |
|
pandatobyJoin Date: 2011-10-01
Post Count: 10351 |
Anyone saying gun control does not work.
One day Australia said no more guns, its schools are not shooting ranges. |
|
|
|
It isn't just illegal guns killing people. Such as the recent shooting in california, because that man had no background check he was given a gun. |
|
|
Gun laws would do nothing most guns are owned illegally anyway honestly you could buy one on the internet right now all this would be doing is making a lot of hunters/collectors upset
Don't cut yourself on all my edge |
|
ChanellerJoin Date: 2011-07-26
Post Count: 1162 |
I will admit though that Britain may be an exception, but they are just about as diverse as the United States, if not less. And just because the United Kindom merely has more in parliament does not necessarily mean that they have more political diversity, especially when you look at how they have a bicameral, bipartisan parliament just like the United States, with two domineering parties winning most votes. |
|
|
In one google search i found over 7 different major parties in the UK
That means 7 different parties voted into the parliament.
And 7 different views to combat.
WE HAVE TWO
posted on wrong thread |
|
pandatobyJoin Date: 2011-10-01
Post Count: 10351 |
@Chaneller.
True. Although changing.
The UK Parliaments main flaw is the fact it is based on region and NOT proportional representation. This means votes for smaller parties can potentially add up to large amounts, but win little seats
E.G UKIP won 1/6th of the vote or something, and got 1 seat.
Whereas SNP won less votes, by 50 or something seats.
|
|
NickyJ3Join Date: 2011-12-23
Post Count: 3563 |
Quit falling for the NRA propaganda. He isn't going to take away guns from anybody. He is simply going to make sure that people who don't deserve guns don't get them.
~Storm~ |
|
|
@john
How do you make a standard for who should and shouldn't have guns though
Don't cut yourself on all my edge |
|