Posted on 01/17/2013 4:52:15 AM PST by LD Jackson
By now, I am sure most of us have read through the list of the 23 executive orders President Obama signed yesterday. If you are like me, you were left shaking your head and wondering what good any of them will do. If you would like to read a breakdown of all 23 orders, along with a common sense response to each one, you should visit Texas Fred. Be warned, he is very plain-spoken, but maybe that's just what we need.
I have only watched a small portion of the news conference in which President Obama made his announcement, but there are two things I want to highlight. Emphasis added is mine.
(Mediaite) During the major press conference introducing his 23 executive actions on gun violence, President Obama took a swipe at the pro-gun media figures and politicians who he believes will scream “tyranny” and resist any proposed reforms.“Let me be absolutely clear: like most Americans, I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. I respect our strong tradition of gun ownership and the rights of hunters and sportsmen,” the president said before praising “law-abiding gun owners” who he believes would be supportive of “common sense measures”
However, he added, reforming gun laws “will be difficult” because “there will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists, publicly warning of a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty. Not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes they’ll do everything they can to block any common sense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.”
“The only way we will be able to change is if their audience, their constituents, their membership says, ‘This time must be different, that this time we must do something to protect our communities and our kids,’” he concluded.
Anyone who has watched President Obama in action for the past four years should not be surprised at the tact he is taking to push his agenda of stricter gun control laws. When you read the above quote, pay special attention to the portions I have highlighted. They tell us a lot about how President Obama plans to go ahead with his agenda of stricter gun control laws. The first portion I have highlighted tells us one thing. President Obama completely misses the point of the 2nd Amendment. He mentions the rights of hunters and sportsmen and in another section he mentions the right to self-defense, but he dances all around the real purpose of the 2nd Amendment. It was written to help protect American citizens from the tyrannical actions of their own government, as well as to provide for a means of defending the country.
Secondly, he immediately goes on the attack against those of us who will raise our voices in protest to any gun ban proposals he, or his liberal counterparts in Congress, may come up with. He accuses us of trying to "gin up fear", for the purpose of higher ratings or revenue. Excuse me, Mr. President, but you couldn't be further off-base with your remarks and your attacks. The reason we are raising our voices in protest is because of the fear we have of an attack on the 2nd Amendment. I am not writing about this issue to increase my blog traffic or to increase the clicks on the Google ads you find on these pages. I am writing because we have to take a stand. If we do not, little by little, our rights will be erased.
If we allow a gun ban to go into effect, removing assault type weapons and high-capacity magazines from the general population, where will that lead our nation? When those weapons and magazines are banned and gun violence refuses to abate, what weapons will they want to ban next? Some call this the slippery slope argument and may decry its use, but I contend it is a legitimate argument. Look at our history. See how many of our liberties have already been removed and you should realize just how valid this argument is.
Speaking about "ginning up fear", what about the President's use of children as a backdrop during his news conference. Couldn't that be classified as "ginning up fear"? I'm just saying...
These stupid mass shootings are statistically NONEXISTANT events. the news media has made this mass shooting the event that everyone is talking about for the last month.
Less than 100 people get killed in mass shootings per year.
Criminals rape 300,000 women per year in the U.S.
Criminals invade 2.5 million homes per year . These last 2 are real events and threats.
100,000 Americans dies each year in accidents.
millions of Americans die in the U.S. each year of causes not by a mass shooter only less than 100 do.
There are 50, events per year where lighting kills Americans. There are just a handful now of mass shooting events. but the news media makes sure that every mass shooting is reported on trillions of times to every American and that the shooter is world famous more so than any star.
Mass shootings didn't happen in the 1800’s or did so with even less frequency then. the news media causes these “events” now as that is where they get the idea to copy cat and also some to become famous
Maybe Congressman Darrell Issa ought to hold his next press conference about Fast and Furious with some widows and orphans of the hundreds of Mexican victims as backdrop. That would be very fitting.
Obama can issue an executive order to his officials to completely explain Fast and Furious. He could also issue and executive order expressing his shame about the number of mainly Mexican lives that program cost, and to pay survivor’s pensions to the several thousand wives and orphans the program leaves in its wake.
The crazy thing is that we really haven’t heard any new information about the shooting itself in almost a month. We only hear about gun control.
There is no evidence that Barack has any familiarity with either “common sense” or “fairness”.
WIth that frame of reference, it becomes clear that when HE uses those terms, it is with the purpose of calming, as he prepares to implement policies to destroy our culture and our freedoms.
the news media makes it the event of the century, a fluke a statistically nonexistent event out of the trillions of trillions of events.
House Speaker Mike Chenault says federal law enforcement officers should be arrested in Alaska if they attempt to enforce any future federal law banning personal possession of assault rifles or large ammunition clips or if they attempt to register any Alaska firearm.
On Wednesday, just as President Obama was announcing new firearm-control initiatives in the aftermath of the child murders at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., Chenault offered his countermeasure in House Bill 69.
His bill would extend the reach of a law passed in 2010 by asserting that any firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition possessed by anyone in Alaska was not subject to federal law. The 2010 law only covered firearms and ammo manufactured in Alaska and it already was of dubious constitutional validity, though it’s never been challenged because no firearm is known to have bee
Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2013/01/16/2755382/federal-agents-would-face-arrest.html#storylink=cpy
I fear no man - because i am armed and can defend myself and my loved ones. I fear and distrust the government.
He does love exploiting OTHER people’s children almost as much as he loves spending other people’s money. But ain’t no one allowed to mention or ‘exploit’ his except him.
So he has called us the enemy more or less. I consider that an honor.
Those whom they wish to enslave they first disarm.
Obama is a tyrant. He has sown the seeds of a civil war. Damn him all to hell!
I weep for my country.
When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is freedom. We need the government to fear us.
But ain’t no one allowed to mention or ‘exploit’ his except him.
It’s his own fault for punishing himself with children.
If folks in Alaska are not subject to federal law does that mean I can move there and own a fully automatic AK-47? Or has state law already covered that?
And, if this is true, and I wish it was, Alaskans wouldn’t have to follow ANY federal laws. Or do they get to pick and choose?
I agree with what these guys are trying to do. But I wish they choose their words more carefully.
Just in case you might have missed this. Be sure to take the time to read TEXAS FRED.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.