Biden suggests White House could act without Congress as part of gun control plan. Is this a good idea or bad idea?

OBAMA AND THE LIBERALS GUN CONTROL WOULD HAVE KILLED THIS FAMILY!


DON'T EVEN EVER EVER EXPECT THE POLICE TO PROTECT YOU AND YOUR FAMILY
ITS THE LAW THAT POLICE ARE NOT HERE TO PROTECT AND SERVE THE INDIVIDUAL ! THE SUPREME COURT SAYS SO.

THE DANGEROUS MISTAKE OF THE LEFT!
NO MATTER WHAT RHETORIC THE LEFT COMES OUT WITH, THEY SPIN THE TRUTH TO GAIN CONTROL OVER GOOD HONEST PEOPLE!
The government can't place a personal police man on every man woman and child in the USA!.. We as Citizens are tasked and responsible for our families and our own personal safety. The US Supreme court has issued the order that the police are not responsible for individual protection of citizens and the citizens of the USA are ordered to not expect police personal protection and to protect themselves.
"It is well-settled fact of American law that the police have no legal duty to protect any
individual citizen from crime, even if the citizen has received death threats and the police have negligently failed to provide protection."

Sources:
7/15/05 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 04-278 TOWN OF CASTLE
ROCK, COLORADO, PETITIONER v. JESSICA GONZALES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT
BEST FRIEND OF HER DECEASED MINOR CHILDREN, REBECCA GONZALES, KATHERYN GONZALES, AND LESLIE GONZALES On June 27, in the case of Castle Rock v.Gonzales, the Supreme Court found that Jessica Gonzales did not have a
constitutional right to individual police protection even in the presence of a restraining order. Mrs. Gonzales' husband with a track record of violence, stabbing Mrs. Gonzales to death, Mrs. Gonzales' family could not get the Supreme Court to change their unanimous
decision for one's individual protection. YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN FOLKS AND
GOVERNMENT BODIES ARE REFUSING TO PASS THE Safety Ordinance.
(1) Richard W. Stevens. 1999. Dial 911 and Die. Hartford, Wisconsin: Mazel Freedom Press.
(2) Barillari v. City of Milwaukee, 533 N.W.2d 759 (Wis. 1995).
(3) Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982).
(4) DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989).
(5) Ford v. Town of Grafton, 693 N.E.2d 1047 (Mass. App. 1998).
(6) Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981). "...a government and its agencies are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen..." -Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.1981)
(7) "What makes the City's position particularly difficult to understand is that, in conformity to the dictates of the law, Linda did not carry any weapon for self-defense. Thus by a rather bitter irony she was required to rely for protection on the City of NY
which now denies all responsibility to her." Riss v. New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579,293 N.Y.S.2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 806 (1958).
(8) "Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect
individuals from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to
preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the
general public." Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)
New York Times, Washington DC Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone By LINDA GREENHOUSE Published: June 28, 2005 The ruling applies even for a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order
against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.