Quantcast

Biden: Obama Might Use Executive Order to Deal With Guns. Foul OR Fair?

jt 2013/01/09 18:07:02
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Vice President Joe Biden revealed that President Barack Obama might use an executive order to deal with guns.

"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."

Biden, as he himself noted, helped write the Brady bill.

Eric Holder was scheduled to be at the meeting that's currently take place at the White House.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-exe...

A fwd article: -jt

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Free Spirit 2013/01/12 07:22:11
  • Callaway 2013/01/11 10:43:59 (edited)
    Foul
    Callaway
    +1
    Anyone who marked this as fair should live in a dictatorship apparently a democracy is too much for you to handle.
  • yaaarrrggghhh 2013/01/10 16:02:17
    Foul
    yaaarrrggghhh
    He'll lose many of his base voters that were certain he would do no such thing.
  • santa6642 2013/01/10 15:07:44
    Foul
    santa6642
    He can't , end of story, unless he claims dictatorship.
  • Bali 2013/01/10 12:30:53
    Foul
    Bali
    I think anyone with half a brain is already armed to the teeth and it wont matter what the kenyan cricket tries to do....he will never hinder our ability to fight the gubmint should the need arise....sorry cricket.
  • Maynard 2013/01/10 12:28:46
    Undecided
    Maynard
    I don't believe this one to be true.


    Then again, JOE is not the brightest bulb in GE's POCKET.
  • mwg0735 2013/01/10 12:16:07
  • Cat 2013/01/10 08:53:03
    Foul
    Cat
    Another winning idea from Joe. LOL
  • Erok 2013/01/10 07:02:47
    Foul
    Erok
    Hey all you bleeding heart libbies....you do realize cars killed an astronomical number higher than guns last year....are you ready to take the bus? Guess what hammers killed more people than guns....are you ready to drive those nails with a rock? They might come get those too.....morons!
  • observer 2013/01/10 05:26:07 (edited)
    Foul
    observer
    If Obama REALLY tries to take guns from the Americans, he will create many more enemies for himself, than he already has. The majority of the American people, including those who voted for Obama, are gun owners.
  • Paige 2013/01/10 05:21:04
    Foul
    Paige
    Gun ownership is a "moral" issue? So Biden is the epitome of morality now?
  • gary Paige 2013/01/10 08:23:49
  • Sal Monella ~PWCM~JL 2013/01/10 05:20:07
    Foul
    Sal Monella ~PWCM~JL
    But as I've said before, I'll say it again ............ so go ahead Progressives, step off that curb and you have NO IDEA how the law of unintended consequences will come into play.
  • Kat ♪.BTO-t-BCRA-F~PWCM~ 2013/01/10 05:19:12
    Foul
    Kat ♪.BTO-t-BCRA-F~PWCM~
    We might need a citizens order to deal with the illegal invaders in the government.
  • ☆astac☆~PWCM 2013/01/10 05:17:53
    Foul
    ☆astac☆~PWCM
    +1
    That would be an act of war
  • Studied 2013/01/10 05:15:05
    Foul
    Studied
    +1
    Anyone who still believes our president is not a dictator is not paying attention. It is the same with everything from no budget for four years now, fiscal crisis, etc. etc. etc. It is his way or the highway and never will there be a compromise.
  • redhorse29 2013/01/10 05:15:01
    Foul
    redhorse29
    +1
    Foul? You bet foul. It is even putrid.
  • boneman1 2013/01/10 04:33:53
    Foul
    boneman1
    +1
    There's very little Obama's done since he's taken office that hasn't been bad for this country. Why would anybody think the leopard would change his spots now.
  • joe keeney 2013/01/10 03:47:35
    Foul
    joe keeney
    +1
    Good luck with that.
  • kaZappoo 2013/01/10 03:32:35
    Foul
    kaZappoo
    +1
    it is a foul ,,,and were not the only ones who are out raged by this ..



    everyone see obie's next plan ,,,

    exeuctive orders for gun bans ,,

    this will start a war the govt cant control ..

    which is their intent !

    *****************************...
    With today's news that Barack Obama plans to use executive orders in his effort to cut down on the number of guns in America, rock legend and longtime 2nd Amendment advocate Ted Nugent is now unloading his thoughts.

    Look what strategy Nugent is taking in what's building to be an epic struggle.
    Read the latest now on WND.com.
  • HatinOnHaters;~} 2013/01/10 03:20:20
    Foul
    HatinOnHaters;~}
    +1
    of course it is foul...but when is the last time the Progressive Democrats followed rule of law anyways?
  • DuncanONeil 2013/01/10 03:09:40
    Foul
    DuncanONeil
    +2
    Just how does an Executive Order compel me to do anything?
  • Popeye 2013/01/10 02:28:41
  • KG 2013/01/10 01:31:56
    Foul
    KG
    +1
    And completely unconstitutional. He is like a f*n dictator.

    I wonder what all his drones will say to that.

    Weren't they saying that middle class taxes were not going up? LOL Lame brains trying to vote or order us into slavery.
  • realist 2013/01/09 23:40:43
    Foul
    realist
    +2
    Disgusting. If he does it, get rid of him by whatever means you have at your own personal disposal.

    It might just be the last chance you get.
  • snipe 2013/01/09 23:39:22
    Foul
    snipe
    +4
    If a President is allowed to override a Constitutional Amendment by executive order we might as well burn the Constitution on the WH lawn. Huh? barack already did that?
  • Catnip 2013/01/09 22:30:35
    Foul
    Catnip
    +5
    He is rapidly becoming a dictator.
    Emporer Obama
  • kaZappoo Catnip 2013/01/10 03:36:29
    kaZappoo
    +2
    this is his plan ,,,,and his sheeples wont do anything about it ,,,

    BUT those who own guns wont give up without a fight !

    ME INCLUDED !
  • Catnip kaZappoo 2013/01/10 03:50:24
    Catnip
    +2
    Neither will I!
    American Eagle sharpening his claws
  • Grandpa 2013/01/09 21:54:09
    Foul
    Grandpa
    +4
    What has happened to the Congress we the people elected to represent "US" >. Guess we no longer have a say as everything is now done by EXECUTIVE order >>. That my friends is a DICTATOR SHIP >>>>>. Welcome all you who voted for obama >>. HAPPY NOW
  • Mr. Smith 2013/01/09 21:48:05
    Foul
    Mr. Smith
    +5
    It would be an impeachable offense, a direct violation of the 2nd Amendment, not to mention that he would be knowingly and willfully violating the separation of powers. Not that it matters anymore, our government has already proven to be illegitimate.
  • Balladeer-PWCM-POTL 2013/01/09 21:40:57
    Foul
    Balladeer-PWCM-POTL
    +5
    and it won't sit too well with we in the Heartland....and woe be it upon the Governor of a Heartland State that rolls over and fails to challenge this
  • OPOA912 2013/01/09 21:39:27
    Foul
    OPOA912
    +4
    First it will be the 2nd Amendment, then the 1st Amendment, the the 4th, then the 10th, etc., etc., etc.,,,,,,, "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
    --Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
  • GERMAN 2013/01/09 21:38:49
    Fair
    GERMAN
    +1
    i mean it's much safer without gun case almost every fifth person has mental issues in some lvl and i would not letting my kids walk home from school knowing that almost everyone outside might have a gun
  • DuncanO... GERMAN 2013/01/10 03:10:48
    DuncanONeil
    +2
    Anytime guns are eliminated violent crime increases. Therefore it is much less safe without guns.
  • JCD aka... DuncanO... 2013/01/10 08:12:47
    JCD aka "biz"
    Wrong. BTW, what's your source?
  • DuncanO... JCD aka... 2013/01/11 01:17:56
    DuncanONeil
    Crime statistics for the locality involved!

    For example, after Australia banned & destroyed firearms the violent crime rate increased 19%. For that same period in the US violent crime DECLINED 9% Heard on the radio.
    But here is some written material.
    "It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

    Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

    In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
    Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

    At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
    Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

    Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both exper...








    Crime statistics for the locality involved!

    For example, after Australia banned & destroyed firearms the violent crime rate increased 19%. For that same period in the US violent crime DECLINED 9% Heard on the radio.
    But here is some written material.
    "It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

    Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

    In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
    Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

    At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
    Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

    Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

    Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent."

    http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/i...

    Source: Howard Nemerov, "Australia experiencing more violent crime despite gun ban," D.C. Examiner, April 8, 2009.

    For text:
    http://www.examiner.com/x-287...
    (more)
  • JCD aka... DuncanO... 2013/01/11 08:59:10
    JCD aka "biz"
    Thanks. More recent figures show that the murder rate is down in Australia, and you do know that the intentional homicide rate is several times lower than in America. And how many mass shootings have occured since 1996?
  • DuncanO... JCD aka... 2013/01/11 17:51:36
    DuncanONeil
    Look I do not dispute homicide rates. To continually refer to this single statistic is to ignore both the facts and the information I provide.

    Let me make it a bit more simple. Ban guns and firearm homicides decline, but rapes increase! As well as robbery & assaults. I.e. VIOLENT CRIME! And the rise in these ancillary crimes more than offsets the drop in firearm homicides.

    Data studies show that the amount of "mass shootings"

    http://www.latimes.com/news/n...
    "Although some indications suggest the American public has reached a breaking point after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting -- yet another tragic mass shooting in a particularly tragic year -- such attacks have long been a part of American history, and some experts say they are happening not much more often than usual.

    'There is one not-so-tiny flaw in all of these theories for the increase in mass shootings,' James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University in Boston, wrote for Boston.com in August. 'And that is that mass shootings have not increased in number or in overall body count, at least not over the past several decades.' A particularly broad set of FBI and police data that counted shootings between 1980 and 2010 The average pace was about 20 mass murders per year, with a death toll of about 100."

    ...
    Look I do not dispute homicide rates. To continually refer to this single statistic is to ignore both the facts and the information I provide.

    Let me make it a bit more simple. Ban guns and firearm homicides decline, but rapes increase! As well as robbery & assaults. I.e. VIOLENT CRIME! And the rise in these ancillary crimes more than offsets the drop in firearm homicides.

    Data studies show that the amount of "mass shootings"

    http://www.latimes.com/news/n...
    "Although some indications suggest the American public has reached a breaking point after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting -- yet another tragic mass shooting in a particularly tragic year -- such attacks have long been a part of American history, and some experts say they are happening not much more often than usual.

    'There is one not-so-tiny flaw in all of these theories for the increase in mass shootings,' James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University in Boston, wrote for Boston.com in August. 'And that is that mass shootings have not increased in number or in overall body count, at least not over the past several decades.' A particularly broad set of FBI and police data that counted shootings between 1980 and 2010 The average pace was about 20 mass murders per year, with a death toll of about 100."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    There have been 102 rampage killings from 1996, world wide. Not all of them were firearms though.
    (more)
  • ☆astac☆... GERMAN 2013/01/10 05:19:19
    ☆astac☆~PWCM
    +1
    You do realize the 2nd was put in place so the people can protect themselves from people like you

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/28 04:17:03

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals