Obama Trying Executive Order to Dis Arm Us Again

[HKGuns]

Where is the EO? Oh, there isn't one.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...osed_executive_orders_and_legislation_on.html

 

[gc70]

I would guess that most readers of this thread also read the GOA article; it paints a grim picture.

Instead, Secretary Kathleen "ObamaCare" Sebelius - and her Department of Health and Human Services - has promulgated regulations which would, by executive fiat, waive all federal privacy laws and encourage you doctor to report you to the FBI.

But who read the "regs" cited in the GOA article? The Federal Register document cited is dull and tedious, but relatively short.

ACTION: Go to the Federal Register - at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-04-23/pdf/2013-09602.pdf - and respond to the regs entitled “HIPAA Privacy Rule and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).”

The Federal Register document is not even a proposed regulation - it is only a Request for Comments about HIPAA barriers to States' reporting to NICS of prohibited persons (as defined under existing laws and regulations).

 

[gym]

It's not a gun issue, many people who go to shrinks do so because no one will listen to them anyplace else. After having dozens of them as clients over 25 years, most don't take what they do seriously, after a while it's a business, and hit or miss at best.

 

[joeschmoe]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...osed_executive_orders_and_legislation_on.html

Where are the EO? Not there either. Guess you don't know the difference between EO's and "executive actions". EO's have the force of law (on the executive branch), EA's are meaningless newspeak.

Just what is an executive action?
By NBC's Shawna Thomas

The phrase of the week at the White House has been "executive action." That's what the administration has termed the announcements the President has made about changes to government mortgage and student loan programs.
The thing is, no one is quite sure what an executive action is. What is clear is that these Presidential moves have not been "executive orders." According to the C-Span Glossary an executive order is "a presidential directive with the force of law” that doesn’t need congressional approval. And the White House clarifies that executive orders are "binding because as Chief Executive the President has the power to command the executive branch."
But the trusty C-Span Glossary has no entry for "executive action" and tonight the White House clarified why, it's because it's kind of a catch all term. "It just means something the executive branch does. The use of any of a number of tools in the executive branch’s toolbox," said one administration official.
Executive actions can include "regulation, enforcement, statements of policy...and numerous other things," the official continued.
So, basically, it's anything the President does that doesn't modify a law. Multiple officials have said this is a continuation of changes President Obama has called for in various departments throughout his presidency.
It's just that this week, the packaging is a little prettier.
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/10/28/8528035-just-what-is-an-executive-action?lite

 

[itsa pain]

what about the many police on steroids and a lot of them being they are a military force that are at war with us must have PTSD with the combat involved in manning a roadblock or giving a soccer mom a seatbelt ticket

 

[bigdaa]

Can we have 100 threads about Obama's use of sorcery, witchcraft, EO's to take our guns and eat our children? Doesn't seem to matter that none of that is true.

I suppose you can dismiss the Presidents actions as simply business as usual, but I can't.

He wants no guns in America and has said such in the past. It's of public record. Please go look it up. Do the footwork (fingerwork).

If you mix ridicule in your terse response to those of us who have genuine concern for the future landscape of America, what does that make you?

Answer: Complicit.

 

[Sam1911]

bigdaa, I don't really want to speak for joeschmoe, but many of us are very tired of "OUR" side using as much disinformation, hyperbole, and sloppy reporting as the other side does.

Obama using an Executive Order? Oh, he's not? But we said he was to trick people into getting riled up?

And it's been going on for a long time -- long enough for most of us to be thoroughly sick of it. Obama makes a real enough "bogeyman" just based on what he's really done and really tried to do. But when we pull the Alex Jones routine of just making up stuff to generate hits and raise people's blood pressure... it's nearly as destructive to our efforts and dissipates our strength and focus as much as anything the other side could hope for.

That's not being "complicit." That's being thoroughly exasperated with "OUR" own stupidity. And I AM.

 

[bigdaa]

Sam, I've followed this guy Obama from the beginning and do know of his tactics so well it is truly sickening. That said, I am intensely concerned about these constant and unprecedented pushes to gain control of so many things that are private and personal to we citizens. It isn't imagination nor is it paranoia. It's as real as a sunrise and Obama Care is the looming example.

We all know the old Pelosi "We have to pass it before we know what's in it" gaff. Well, we are all getting a taste "What's in it", like it or not.

Plus, we are seeing things for the first time that allow (albeit in very 'creative' ways for end around possibilities on of all things) infringement on our right to bear arms.

You all must know that the fight is constant, and never as intense as now.

People should have their blood boiling at this time. We should all be in resist and fight mode.

I did not start the belittling here, I only challenged it's source.

Those real concerns I have extend to my children's future. The ridicule and belittling seen in another members response is of heightened concern beyond Old Me. I believe I dealt with it with civility.

Where you take it from here is a reflection of whatever policy of THR that is placed on it.

 

[Yo Mama]

You all must know that the fight is constant, and never as intense as now.

Like Sam said, misinformation does not help us fight the real issues. It only helps the other side scatter us. Then when the real issue comes up it's much harder to focus the troops.

Those real concerns I have extend to my children's future. The ridicule and belittling seen in another members response is of heightened concern beyond Old Me.

There was no ridicule here. Just educated dialogue. I agree that you should teach your children to be aware and involved. They are the best hope we have to continue freedom for the next generations.

 

[gc70]

Those real concerns I have extend to my children's future so the ridicule and belittling seen in another members response has been dealt with on my part with civility.

Concern over the government's attacks on our rights is fully justified. But we have to separate real concerns from fearful fantasies.

The basis for this thread -the GOA article- is an example of promoting fearful fantasies that only makes us look as devious, irrational or uninformed as our opponents. Nevertheless, many of the comments in this thread have accepted the exaggerated claims in the GOA article without challenge. While ridicule is not the most polite means to get someone's attention, it is absolutely necessary that we challenge false claims.

 

[Sam1911]

Right! What I'm saying is that if the danger is from a bear, shouting about how the danger is a'coming and it's from bears, wolves, and zombies ... with rabies... is just distracting and blunts the sharpness of our response.

No-one here is saying what the current President, and all those antis around him and who predate him, are trying to do are not very dangerous. We're saying, don't make crap up! Dig until you find out what they're really doing -- and report THAT. THAT is bad enough.

There's so much NOISE in the news and political arenas that it is very hard to separate out what anyone is ACTUALLY doing or trying to do from the pure crap that the opposition is spraying about the issue. And the "right" is just as guilty of this as the "left." Don't ever believe otherwise -- not for a second. We don't want that to happen here any more than is inevitable.

Fight smartly, not stupidly. That's all.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Here's a hint boys and girls. Take a bit of salt with the crap spewed out by BOTH sides. Gun lovers and gun haters. Really, I kid you not. Go out into the real world and do some research on your own. Specifically, start by reading foreign news sources. You will see how screwed up our country is and it isn't just due to the current administration.

If all y'all are that paranoid about going to the pshrink, pay by cash and use an alias. If you can't afford it, there are groups like AA or your local church groups. Oh, and if you really need to take anti-psychotics to keep the demons and voices at bay, well....maybe...just maybe, you shouldn't be playing with firearms.

 

[razorback2003]

I believe you can only be judicially committed/declared by a judge insane to lose your firearm rights. That is how I understand the federal firearms law.

Someone who is stressed out from a divorce, job loss, death in family does not fall in that category.

There is a big difference between life stresses and needing someone to talk to and someone bouncing off the walls that a judge commits.

 

[bigdaa]

"the GOA article- is an example of promoting fearful fantasies"

Well guys, I never read it. So, I cannot be a part of spreading what I don't know is being spread.

I will go back and read the linked article with an eye for sensationalistic prose.

But...............right now, a fast bike is calling out from my garage "Ride me, big boy. Ride all of my 160 plus HP if you dare"


I dare to ride only about 90 of hers.


Have a great Saturday gents.

 

[joeschmoe]

I suppose you can dismiss the Presidents actions as simply business as usual, but I can't.
He wants no guns in America and has said such in the past. It's of public record. Please go look it up. Do the footwork (fingerwork).
If you mix ridicule in your terse response to those of us who have genuine concern for the future landscape of America, what does that make you?
Answer: Complicit.

I can dismiss the thread title as a lie and more Chicken Little claims the sky is falling. He has not issued an EO's on this. Go look it up. The Chicken Little's need to be ridiculed to stop this non-sense.

The gun grabbers thank you for distracting gun owners from the real issues. While they are retrying for UBC's in Congress, your distracting people with lies about EO's. What does that make you?
Answer: Complicit.

 

[Sam1911]

I believe you can only be judicially committed/declared by a judge insane to lose your firearm rights. That is how I understand the federal firearms law.

Someone who is stressed out from a divorce, job loss, death in family does not fall in that category.

There is a big difference between life stresses and needing someone to talk to and someone bouncing off the walls that a judge commits.

Right, but that's an issue that has come up (scarily) in some of these proposed new bills -- that we should open the matter up so that a psychiatrist or doctor COULD submit your name to the prohibited persons list, on their own diagnosis or belief that you shouldn't be trusted with guns.

That would be pretty alarming.

 

[Fishslayer]

There's so much NOISE in the news and political arenas that it is very hard to separate out what anyone is ACTUALLY doing or trying to do from the pure crap that the opposition is spraying about the issue. And the "right" is just as guilty of this as the "left." Don't ever believe otherwise -- not for a second.

One thing I've noticed is that the Left is much more adept at the out of context sound bite. You know. Where they edit together statements to make the opposition sound like raving lunatics or Hitler clones. Some of the stuff the Right cobbles together are downright amateurish and more than a little embarrassing.

 

[gym]

Most things shrinks say in their reports are words like "possible", or under the right conditions" it's very rare for a psychiatrist to say that someone he is treating is an imminent threat to society, "if so they have to report it anyhow". I don't see this becoming an issue, as all these actors that back him, are all seeing some type of therapist, or scientology, "which is a form of brainwashing", and most do so their entire lives. This goes for politicians also.
If this is made public, it would ruin a lot of aspiring political careers. I don't think it's in their best interest to press this.
On the other hand where are they going to get the manpower to review millions of cases?
I think all of this is getting too over the top, it's impossible to tell who is lying and who is not any more.

 

[gc70]

The GOA article does our cause harm because it contains so much misinformation.

"Obama Administration Trying to Grab Guns Through Executive Order" Other than being in the title of the article, there is no further mention of Executive Orders in the article.

"Remember how their [Senators Toomey, Manchin and Schumer] amendment would have encouraged your psychiatrist to turn you in to the FBI's gun ban list?" The Manchin-Toomey Amendment contained no provisions weakending the standards for determining prohibited persons. Sec. 115 actually provided for the creation of a formal review board or access to judicial review in Federal court for veterans wrongly denied their 2A rights.

"Instead, Secretary Kathleen "ObamaCare" Sebelius - and her Department of Health and Human Services - has promulgated regulations which would, by executive fiat, waive all federal privacy laws and encourage you doctor to report you to the FBI." What the GOA article points to as "regulations" are not regulations at all, but a request for public comment on whether changes are needed in regulations. And even the potential changes for which comments are requested are not about what the GOA article claims.

"Also, be sure to tell your congressmen that you oppose the "see a shrink, lose your guns" regs issued by the HHS." HHS has not issued a regulation. Writing to members of Congress to oppose something that has not been proposed would look pretty silly.

 

[Sam1911]

Very nicely illustrated, gc70. Exactly what I'm talking about.

We rail against "Left-Wing Liberal MSM propaganda" journalists for going off half-cocked, rushing to the "scoop" without checking to see if what they're reporting is even broadly factual, and giving the public wrong ideas and false information. And then we go and do the same thing (to) ourselves!

If it was only an embarrassment, that would be bad enough. But this kind of thing actually hurts us!

 

[Certaindeaf]

Sounds like most things are written by lawyers for lawyers/moneyed folk. I wonder if the elite/government class medical insurance plans will "have to" sell their payors out/limit their freedoms. I really don't think so.

 

[herrwalther]

A good friend of mine (NAVY vet) swore up and down that HIPAA is an iron clad agreement that says nothing bad ever happens to people who have mental health issues and firearm disarmament. What a nice fantasy world he lives in.

 

[MAKster]

These executive actions are the same wet noodles Obama announced 3 months ago. It's all a big nothing.

 

[Bruno2]

Someone who is stressed out from a divorce, job loss, death in family does not fall in that category.

Not yet anyways.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Obama Trying Executive Order to Dis Arm Us Again

Have any of you ever thought all this anti-gun stuff Obama is spouting right now is only to DISTRACT people from his cowardly actions at Benghazi and Syria?

See he, Biden, Reid, etc.. all know it will never pass Congress but he is trying and trying and getting the press to notice that and not the hearings on his very actions (and Hilary's to.)

Executive orders? Last time he waved that stick it turned into a wimpy grass weed in his hands and it will do the same this time.

He is a lame duck and getting lamer all the time and everyone is staring to notice.

Deaf