I don't want to believe this...

[tortoise1956]

Below is an excerpt from a news story. Before anybody starts in, I know it's from Fox news. However, the parts I displayed below were from statements from the WH press secretary. I think that would imply that it represents the administration position.

Friday marked six months since the Tucson rampage that killed six and injured 13, including Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. The White House noted Thursday that it is working on "common-sense measures" to improve public safety while protecting gun rights.

"That process is well under way at the Department of Justice with stakeholders on all sides working through these complex issues," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Thursday. "And we expect to have some more specific announcements in the near future."

Carney didn't say how soon those announcements would come, nor what they might entail. But it is expected that the president will take some type of “executive action” in the near future.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/11/gun-rights-advocates-wary-coming-obama-measures-in-wake-tucson-shooting/

Doesn't anybody remember the last time this was tried? Is this administration really going to drink the gun control Koolaid?

[WheelWalker]

1. So many people seem so very excitable these days.

[TreasonousBastard]

2. So, you don't know what it will be, except common-sense and improving safety while..

protecting gun rights...

WHAT THE FUCK IS THE PROBLEM?

[gejohnston]

3. it says nothing, and it is an easy way to lose an election.

When ever I ask what "common sense", "sane", "rational", or even "comprehensive" mean it is never defined. Most of the time the words are used by people who don't have the slightest idea what current laws are, the Al Qaida "you can get machine guns without background checks" is the perfect example. When it is defined, it is either been law since the 1930s or absurdly unreasonable. I would put most current federal law as common sense and reasonable. Some I would call absurd. I would define common sense as something that actually does something positive vs nothing. For example, registration is not common sense, because it does not justify the expense vs outcome. The AWB was absurd theater.

[jpak]

10. Sorry - most Democrats reject he GOP/NRA agenda

Who's afeared of the NRA?

not me

yup

[gejohnston]

16. It is not the NRA

it is the grass roots machine made up of people tired of being scapegoated.

[SteveM]

17. "Who's afeared of the NRA?" you ask? Not you. You ain't runnin' for office. nt

[krispos42]

4. Historically, "common-sense gun-control laws"...

...have been dumbass feel-good failures.

[slackmaster]

6. The problem is vagueness

...common-sense and improving safety while..protecting gun rights...

Doesn't mean a damned thing.

[Kennah]

5. Here's my prediction

Whatever is proposed, if something passes, it will be changes along the lines of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007--which Dubya signed and the NRA supported.

[DonP]

12. You're missing the point - there's nothing to "Pass"

These are all going to be "executive orders" with no involvement by Congress, you know, the kind Bush used to push through things he knew Congress would stop.

I can't think of anything politically more counter productive than trying to push through some executive orders, written by advisors that know nothing about firearms, through Eric Holder and company in the middle of an election cycle. Hell, if they push to get mental health record put into NICS, they could wind up with both the ACLU and the NRA side by side in court against them.

[pipoman]

7. If it doesn't

include some plan to allow access to NICS for private sales with a low statutory fee or no fee, it is nothing more than a feel good measure. This is the only 'common sense measure' not already in law.

[guardian]

8. Time to buy stock

in ammo companies. Look for another 2 year shortage of ammo.

[Ragnarok]

24. Word.

Wideners is selling Israeli IMI 5.56mm 1200 rounds for $318.00 + shipping as of 07/11/2011. I snag a case every month or so and this is the cheapest I've seen it in a while. I don't expect it will stay that way.

[jpak]

9. GOBAMA - Fuck the GOP/NRA

yup

:bounce:

[GreenStormCloud]

13. Not a wise idea. The NRA is extremely skilled in paybacks.

You may wish to notice that the NRA made large gains in congress in the 2010 elections. Over half of the House has an NRA rating of "A". That means that the NRA can block any national gun control laws that it doesn't like.

[virginia mountainman]

15. not only 2010

but every election cycle since 1994.

[jpak]

25. Yup, they are total assholes

n/t

[GreenStormCloud]

26. You deliberately miss the point.

Attempt to screw the NRA and you are very likely to end up getting screwed by them. Thay are not patsies who can be pushed around. They push back - HARD.

[SteveM]

18. You celebrate Obama's glance back at Sodom? My, my, my....

Do you really support the Democrats?

[aikoaiko]

11. These are politically dangerous waters for the Obama admin.

I welcome some creative ideas that won't restrict access to firearms to non-prohibited residents, but all too often we (Democrats) do not calculate the backlash to stupid gun laws well.

So far the President has abandoned all of his anti-gun friends, but we shall see if that continues.

[ileus]

14. next up laws against removing a firearm from the home...

[spin]

19. If Obama is for improving the NICS background check system ...

by insisting that the states input data on violent felons and those legally adjudged of having a disqualifying severe mental problem on a more timely basis, I'm all for it.

I am even for Obama opening up the NICS background check and requiring all purchases, including private sales and sales at a gun show, to be required to go through the NICS background check system (as long as the cost for the check is extremely reasonable and easily accomplished). That would effectively close the "gun show loophole." (I doubt if he can do this.)

If Obama is interested in enforcing existing laws and increasing the penalties for straw purchasing firearms that will end up in criminal hands, again he has my support.

There is much we can do improve existing laws. In all fairness, I can see no problem with the fact that I purchased multiple assault weapons (semi-auto rifles above .22 caliber with detachable magazines) in a short period of time being reported to the ATF.

I do have a problem if I am restricted to only purchasing one firearm a month or some similar scheme. I also have a problem if Obama imposes any form of gun registration or allows the federal government to compile a list of firearms purchased for future confiscation. The ATF is so incompetent and possibly corrupt that they probably have already done this. Any government agency that allows 3000 deadly weapons to be bought by straw purchasers for distribution to criminals doesn't inspire much confidence.

I seriously doubt that he can do something as drastic as reimplementing another assault weapons ban but he might ban the importation of certain firearms from foreign countries. This might involve declaring that some firearms are "non sporting" weapons. Of course, any attempt to implement that definition ignores the fact that the Second Amendment does not distinguish between classes of firearms and does not limit civilians to only owning sporting weapons. Many firearms designed for self defense are not useful for sporting purposes but using a firearm for self defense is legal if you are attacked by someone who intends to inflict serious injury or plans to murder you.

If Obama does try to impose some truly draconian requirements then it will reinforce my concern that he feels he is a one term President. So far while Obama (and the Democrats in Congress) have failed to live up to my expectations on many issues such as healthcare, Obama has been more than fair on the gun control issue.

We just have to wait and see what he has in mind.

[Logical]

20. Nice post Spin. And very reasonable!! n-t

[spin]

22. Thanks for your support. (n/t)

[spin]

21. Self delete. replied to wrong poster. (n/t)

[tortoise1956]

27. Excellent post!

You bring up many good points, although I still have problems with reporting ANY purchases to the ATF. the level of incompetence there is simply staggering.

The issue I see is that it wouldn't take executive action to enforce current laws. That is why the press statement is so worrisome to me. I'm afraid that the idea is to try to enforce sanctions that they don't believe Congress would enact. Also, the fact that Dennis Henigan is happy after talking to the president (correct?) doesn't bode well for 2A defenders...

I hope I'm mistaken on this. I will cheerfully admit it if I am. Please prove me wrong!

[lawodevolution]

23. I think he wants to stir things up but in the end the executive action is going

to be unimportant to gun owners.

Basically he is going to sell a few million extra guns to the public that would have otherwise not been sold.