Posted on 01/09/2013 7:36:18 PM PST by Kaslin
Vice President Joe Biden is meeting with victims of gun violence today. Speaking with reporters beforehand, Biden said President Obama may use an executive order to push through more gun control and Second Amendment restrictions. More from the Weekly Standard.
"The president is going to act," said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. "There are executives orders, there's executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet. But we're compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required."
Biden said that this is a moral issue and that "it's critically important that we act."
Biden talked also about taking responsible action. "As the president said, if you're actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly."
We knew this was coming. The White House has been saying for a month that they are acting "quickly" on new gun control measures. Senator Dianne Feinstein's sweeping new gun control legislation hasn't even been introduced yet and Obama isn't the kind of president who has shown a willingness to wait on Congress.
If Obama pushes through new regulations using executive powers, the process will unfold in different parts. After an order is signed, the Department of Justice led by Attorney General Eric Holder, will be in charge of enforcement through the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. Now, how far the order will go is the big question. You can bet it will ban semi-automatic rifles and large ammunition magazines, but how Obama grandfathers in old, lawfully purchases semi-automatic rifles remains unknown. Will he require citizens who already own these weapons to be fingerprinted as Feinstein's bill requires? Or will he go so far as confiscation as New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has suggested? Time will tell.
Oh, I believe that, just not that they would find it profitable to try to arrange an atrocity like Newtown rather than just lie back and wait for a Newtown to happen, and then promptly exploit it politically. After all, just in the last, what, two years? They've had both Jared Loughner's Arizona shooting and the Aurora theater shooting, plus one or two others.
Just this evening in casual conversation with a trio of strangers, it turned out that a couple of them agreed with you -- they believed Newtown was a planned op. I was surprised they thought, but it's sad that we've been brought so far down this road of societal "demoralization" (discouragement in their case, loss of morals in others'), that such a thing is believable.
(I think all three of them had been listening to the Troofers, too; they said things about 9/11 and planned demolitions, something I don't credit at all -- and we know that the Kunstler Center is where that stink came from, in an effort to tar and defame Pres. Bush.)
Actually, I don't think anyone's eye is anywhere but firmly on the ball, defense of the Second Amendment, which is the keystone of the arch of the Bill of Rights.
Yes, we all understand, grab the guns and you have the country by the throat.
Maybe Barky might want to read what Yamamoto said about taking over America by force. Lincoln said it 110 years earlier, too, in a slightly different way; it applies to foreign usurpers and homegrown aliens alike.
The bigger plan, however, isn’t just to take gun rights away, but ALL our rights. If he can get away with overriding the Second Amendment by executive fiat, that’s just the beginning for Caliph Hussein. The man seeks absolute power and has no conscience.
Well, I don't want to live in a society where one third of the population is stoned constantly.
I see the legalized marijuana bills negatively.
You like it.
So, guess we will have to wait for about ten years to see the effects.
What's wrong with that?
Well, I don't want to live in a society where one third of the population is stoned constantly.
The addictive mind-altering drug alcohol has been legal for generations - do we live in a society where one third of the population is drunk constantly?
"
"
Um - you do understand that marijuana is not injected, and that the most common effect of its use is not to unleash passions and lust in weird orgies but to sink the user into the nearest couch with a bag of Cheetos - right?
Well, maybe not one third are alcoholic, but the impact of alcohol is negative.
The difference is we have about 5,000 years of alcohol as part of culture. Can’t do much about that.
Marijuana is not part of traditional culture.
We can discourage people from using it.
Adding another harmful drug into the mix makes no sense.
And pot use is harmful — especially on the young. http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/pot/f/mjp_faq12.htm
I’ve seen what pot does to teenager’s mental abilities. They don’t call it dope for nothing.
The difference is we have about 5,000 years of alcohol as part of culture. Cant do much about that.
Marijuana is not part of traditional culture.
We can discourage people from using it.
A plausible theory - but the history of the War On Marijuana (which 42% of Americans have used) provides no evidence that we can do much more about marijuana than about alcohol.
Adding another harmful drug into the mix makes no sense.
"Adding" is not an issue ... marijuana is already here.
And pot use is harmful
Many things are potentially harmful - Big Gulps, bacon double cheeseburgers, rock climbing, etc. - shall we ban them all?
He doesn’t have the support of the entire military, nor local, state, or fed law enforcement.
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.