executive order on gun laws

vlagrl29

I've already seen memes on FB from my more conservative pro gun friends, but how does it make it harder for citizens to get guns?  I thought it was was just broadening the background checks and loop hole at gun shows.  Am I missing something.  If you get your background check you still get the gun right?  I don't understand how it makes it harder. DH and I were talking about this over the weekend - we kind of differ on gun views.

smerka

I know this is a bad analogy, but I have always thought gun laws and abortion laws were similar. People who are against restrictions of any kind don't want anything getting in the way of someone getting a gun or an abortion. And in a lot of situations, the proposed restriction may be reasonable, but they feel like if they give an inch, the other side will take a mile

BlueBirdMB

I don't know the specifics for the order at all.  I'm just bothered that Obama likes to use executive action to create legislation that he knows would never pass through the legislative branch.  Typically executive orders are use in situations where time is limited, not just because the president wants to pass an unpopular law quickly.

We need to get a president who understands his limited power.

emily1004

I struggle with this argument. I like to think of myself, sometimes as a, "Southern Democrat". (Even though, I live in Detroit, and I'm Jewish). But honestly, SOMETHING, needs to be done. The NRA and the majority of republicans will not budge on gun issues. However, the NRA represent the gun manufactures. NOT you or me, and our right to own a gun. I have a hard time, solely basing the argument on "something needs to be done about mental health", alone. Mostly because, not everyone with a mental illness has the desire or a thought to "shoot up and kill" a bunch of people. Sometimes that includes meeting in the middle and compromising. I don't know about you, but 20 dead children from a mass shooting sickens me to core, and no one seems to want to listen to their parents. 

vlagrl29

DH will tell me "but it won't prevent the mass shootings because those people get their guns from elsewhere" which I understand but how could more background checks hurt?  I also think that the person that gives the killer a gun should be arrested in jail in those circumstances.

I don't know all the specifics on the law either but I am under the thought that its minor things nothing major regarding guns.  DH also told me that its something the next president can overturn once they are in office.

smerka

There's a Frontline (PBS) about the NRA and what happened after Sandy Hook with gun regulation. It was a travesty. They need to close the gun show loophole

BlueBirdMB

smerka said:

There's a Frontline (PBS) about the NRA and what happened after Sandy Hook with gun regulation. It was a travesty. They need to close the gun show loophole

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I'm really curious.  How is Sandy Hook related to gun shows?  I thought the guy stole the guns from his parents?

BlueBirdMB

vlagrl29 said:

DH will tell me "but it won't prevent the mass shootings because those people get their guns from elsewhere" which I understand but how could more background checks hurt?  I also think that the person that gives the killer a gun should be arrested in jail in those circumstances.

I don't know all the specifics on the law either but I am under the thought that its minor things nothing major regarding guns.  DH also told me that its something the next president can overturn once they are in office.

True, which is why I don't even understand Obama's need to create controversial legislation via executive order.  It's not a permanent action.

vlagrl29

BlueBirdMB said:

vlagrl29 said:

DH will tell me "but it won't prevent the mass shootings because those people get their guns from elsewhere" which I understand but how could more background checks hurt?  I also think that the person that gives the killer a gun should be arrested in jail in those circumstances.

I don't know all the specifics on the law either but I am under the thought that its minor things nothing major regarding guns.  DH also told me that its something the next president can overturn once they are in office.

True, which is why I don't even understand Obama's need to create controversial legislation via executive order.  It's not a permanent action.

Its his last year in office and I believe gun control is close to his heart so he probably wants to do something even if its temporary

vlagrl29

BlueBirdMB said:

smerka said:

There's a Frontline (PBS) about the NRA and what happened after Sandy Hook with gun regulation. It was a travesty. They need to close the gun show loophole

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I'm really curious.  How is Sandy Hook related to gun shows?  I thought the guy stole the guns from his parents?

Yeah I'm interested in this as well.  What happened?

ETA - was it when they offered the administration of the school to be taught how to shoot a gun and arm the school instead of gun free?

smerka

There was a huge push to enact gun legislation after Sandy Hook. The Frontline shows what happened and how much influence the NRA has in Congress. Yes the show is biased against the NRA. The Columbine kids got at least one gun from a friend who bought it at a gun show. It is just crazy that anyone can walk into a gun show and walk out with a gun

vlagrl29

smerka said:

There was a huge push to enact gun legislation after Sandy Hook. The Frontline shows what happened and how much influence the NRA has in Congress. Yes the show is biased against the NRA. The Columbine kids got at least one gun from a friend who bought it at a gun show. It is just crazy that anyone can walk into a gun show and walk out with a gun

I saw that.  It was crazy to me how much power the NRA has.  I felt bad for the parents of some of those kids who were working with washington to regulate guns.

MommyLiberty5013

BlueBirdMB said:

I don't know the specifics for the order at all.  I'm just bothered that Obama likes to use executive action to create legislation that he knows would never pass through the legislative branch.  Typically executive orders are use in situations where time is limited, not just because the president wants to pass an unpopular law quickly.

We need to get a president who understands his limited power.

This. I wonder too how much push back the POTUS gets on this real issue (gun control) versus people just pushing back on his unconstitutional behavior (regardless of what the issue is). If I were PRO all this stuff Obama wants, I would still fight him because he is not behaving correctly per the governing ways of the nation. Yes, this started with W, but that doesn't mean a past POTUS did something a future POTUS has carte blanche.

vlagrl29

I heard a detail in the gun law - if you sell even one gun you would have to have a license to sell.  Which doesn't bother me either.  I really think that gunshow loop hole should be closed.

vlagrl29

I found a clip of Obama talking about gun control on YouTube in case anyone is interested

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myfByN5p928

For me I don't see anything wrong with what he wants to do - how can it make it harder to purchase guns?  Regarding executive action - I really don't see anything wrong with that either.  What if a R president wanted something done that the Ds made impossible and made and executive action?  I don't think I would see anything wrong with that either.

nkjacobsma

As far as I understand it, all Obama is doing is closing loopholes. The law that states who has to get a license to sell firearms and conduct background checks has a huge loophole because it's a very vague law. Obama is clarifying it so that people who are using the loophole can actually get prosecuted. The POTUS is our chief executive, meaning he executes the law. This doesn't seem to be outside his jurisdiction because he is changing the wording to better execute the already existing law that isn't being executed properly.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

vlagrl29

I believe he had 4 main points - not remembering them all right now.  I know more background checks, helping the mentally ill, gun licenses to those who sell guns, can't remember the last one.

catsareniice1

Wiping a tears from his eyes...This is by far the most hypocritical, disingenuous president in my memory. When he refers to the murders than take place daily in Chicago, he fails to mention Chicago has one of the most restrictive set of gun laws in the nation. The claim is often made the high murder rate is due to the easy access to guns in nearby areas. There is no explanation offered for the murder rate being much lower in these nearby areas where it is much easier to access guns.

Study after study after study has shown violent crime/murder rates are higher in areas with the most restrictive gun laws, lower in areas with the least restrictive gun laws. When states began issuing concealed carry permits, the following year violent crime/murder rates in that state dropped by an average of 11.5%

Virtually all mass shootings take place in gun free zones. When these mass shootings are stopped by a legally armed private citizen, the average number of deaths is 2.3. When they are stopped by law enforcement authorities, the average number of deaths is 7.8.

There is a mountain of evidence that confirms more restrictive gun laws enhance the violent crime/murder rate. There is not a single shred of evidence that even remotely indicates more restrictive gun laws lessens the violent crime/murder rate.

Obama's statement that 90% of Americans favor his more restrictive gun laws and 90% of NRA families support them, set a record for the boldest, most obvious lie ever told by an American president as well as the greatest insult to the intelligence of the American people.
As for the mentally ill, granted, there should be steps to ensure they don't have access to guns (or any other potentially lethal weapon). However, until humans develop the infallibility gene, one person should not have the power to deny another person that access. Even when there is massive evidence a person committed murder, their fate is determined by a unanimous consent of twelve people. How logical is it for a potentially mentally ill person to have less constitutional rights than a murderer?

The agenda is not to deny private citizens access to guns? Obviously the agenda of more restrictive gun laws is not to reduce violent crime/murder rates since evidence abounds that they do not.

nkjacobsma

vlagrl29 said:

I believe he had 4 main points - not remembering them all right now.  I know more background checks, helping the mentally ill, gun licenses to those who sell guns, can't remember the last one.

I figured out the fourth-health professionals can now report to the government if their patient has a mental health issue so that they can't buy a gun. This one I'm a little weary about. I get it, but it violate doctor-patient privacy. It's good in that it helps solve the problem of how people with mental illness are getting guns, but also violates privacy for a lot of people about something very personal.

smerka

You are wrong about Chicago, Cats. Illinois was recently forced to enact a concealed carry law by the decision of the Supreme Court. Illinois was the last state to get a concealed carry law. Guess what? The shootings in Chicago have gone up. But honestly that mess is all about the gangs fighting each other and it won't be solved by stricter gun laws. Obama teared up at the mention of the first graders being gunned down at Sandy Hook. Some the Sandy Hook parents were there. It is surprising that you have so many stats on gun violence because Congress has passed laws prohibiting the federal funding of research on gun violence thanks to the NRA.

smerka

Oh and I do think the polls show that most people are in favor of reasonable gun control

vlagrl29

nkjacobsma said:

vlagrl29 said:

I believe he had 4 main points - not remembering them all right now.  I know more background checks, helping the mentally ill, gun licenses to those who sell guns, can't remember the last one.

I figured out the fourth-health professionals can now report to the government if their patient has a mental health issue so that they can't buy a gun. This one I'm a little weary about. I get it, but it violate doctor-patient privacy. It's good in that it helps solve the problem of how people with mental illness are getting guns, but also violates privacy for a lot of people about something very personal.

Yes that's it!  Thanks!  I was weary about this too - though I never have the desire to buy a gun.  I am on zoloft - small dosage once a day for anxiety - so would they not let me buy a gun?

vlagrl29

smerka said:

You are wrong about Chicago, Cats. Illinois was recently forced to enact a concealed carry law by the decision of the Supreme Court. Illinois was the last state to get a concealed carry law. Guess what? The shootings in Chicago have gone up. But honestly that mess is all about the gangs fighting each other and it won't be solved by stricter gun laws. Obama teared up at the mention of the first graders being gunned down at Sandy Hook. Some the Sandy Hook parents were there. It is surprising that you have so many stats on gun violence because Congress has passed laws prohibiting the federal funding of research on gun violence thanks to the NRA.

when I think about it I almost get teared up myself 2 years later.  I wonder what if that was DD  - she's our only kid right now and i would just want to die - I can't imagine it.  His tears were real I belive

BlueBirdMB

vlagrl29 said:

nkjacobsma said:

vlagrl29 said:

I believe he had 4 main points - not remembering them all right now.  I know more background checks, helping the mentally ill, gun licenses to those who sell guns, can't remember the last one.

I figured out the fourth-health professionals can now report to the government if their patient has a mental health issue so that they can't buy a gun. This one I'm a little weary about. I get it, but it violate doctor-patient privacy. It's good in that it helps solve the problem of how people with mental illness are getting guns, but also violates privacy for a lot of people about something very personal.

Yes that's it!  Thanks!  I was weary about this too - though I never have the desire to buy a gun.  I am on zoloft - small dosage once a day for anxiety - so would they not let me buy a gun?

Who knows?  It's a slippery slop. 

catsareniice1

BlueBirdMB said:

vlagrl29 said:

nkjacobsma said:

vlagrl29 said:

I believe he had 4 main points - not remembering them all right now.  I know more background checks, helping the mentally ill, gun licenses to those who sell guns, can't remember the last one.

I figured out the fourth-health professionals can now report to the government if their patient has a mental health issue so that they can't buy a gun. This one I'm a little weary about. I get it, but it violate doctor-patient privacy. It's good in that it helps solve the problem of how people with mental illness are getting guns, but also violates privacy for a lot of people about something very personal.

Yes that's it!  Thanks!  I was weary about this too - though I never have the desire to buy a gun.  I am on zoloft - small dosage once a day for anxiety - so would they not let me buy a gun?

Who knows?  It's a slippery slop. 

I have anxiety due to having Fibromyalgia. So, I am on Zoloft too. I feel anxious when my body does crazy things. Fibro gives you all sorts of terrible symptoms. It's the only reason I'm on it. My records also state depression but it's situational due to the fact that I am not well enough to go out as much as I used to. I'm not clinically depressed. I am of no danger to myself or anyone.

vlagrl29

catsareniice1 said:

BlueBirdMB said:

vlagrl29 said:

nkjacobsma said:

vlagrl29 said:

I believe he had 4 main points - not remembering them all right now.  I know more background checks, helping the mentally ill, gun licenses to those who sell guns, can't remember the last one.

I figured out the fourth-health professionals can now report to the government if their patient has a mental health issue so that they can't buy a gun. This one I'm a little weary about. I get it, but it violate doctor-patient privacy. It's good in that it helps solve the problem of how people with mental illness are getting guns, but also violates privacy for a lot of people about something very personal.

Yes that's it!  Thanks!  I was weary about this too - though I never have the desire to buy a gun.  I am on zoloft - small dosage once a day for anxiety - so would they not let me buy a gun?

Who knows?  It's a slippery slop. 

I have anxiety due to having Fibromyalgia. So, I am on Zoloft too. I feel anxious when my body does crazy things. Fibro gives you all sorts of terrible symptoms. It's the only reason I'm on it. My records also state depression but it's situational due to the fact that I am not well enough to go out as much as I used to. I'm not clinically depressed. I am of no danger to myself or anyone.

years ago I was on ativan when my first husband passed away - it was the only way I could function. Fast forward to when I got pregnant - it gave me anxiety and depression so they put me on zoloft which made me happy again.  I have kept saying I would get off it because I really have a happy life right now but we are to TTC again soon and I'm think I may just stay on it because pregnancy did crazy things to me.  I don't see a therapist any more so that's the only way they could see the issues I had.  

I understand the slippery slope thing and why some are very concerned about this.

nkjacobsma

I was a psychology major and now a psychology graduate. If there is one thing that I learned, it's that a LOT more people than you think are on anxiety or depression medication. The West has an epidemic of mental health problems that no one talks about or recognizes. Which is why this part of the gun control executive order is a very slippery slope....

Republicans often blame mass shootings on mental health-well, this country needs to change it's entire outlook on mental health (and the things that cause it) for anything to change.

MommyLiberty5013

smerka said:

You are wrong about Chicago, Cats. Illinois was recently forced to enact a concealed carry law by the decision of the Supreme Court. Illinois was the last state to get a concealed carry law. Guess what? The shootings in Chicago have gone up. But honestly that mess is all about the gangs fighting each other and it won't be solved by stricter gun laws. Obama teared up at the mention of the first graders being gunned down at Sandy Hook. Some the Sandy Hook parents were there. It is surprising that you have so many stats on gun violence because Congress has passed laws prohibiting the federal funding of research on gun violence thanks to the NRA.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/24/chicago-crime-rate-drops-as-concealed-carry-gun-pe/

The crime rates are down in Chicago since the conceal carry thing went through. But as you pointed out the shootings in gang violence are up, which if you have 2 or more illegal groups fighting one another, that's not dealing with the legal CCW permit holders anyway.

BlueBirdMB

Actually, as a country, we're at historical low violent crime rates... I couldn't believe it when I read that.  What does that say about how the news is reported?  I know I thought that violent crime rates must be sky high considering what I hear about all day long.

MommyLiberty5013

It's interesting in all of this that now Texas has started legal open carry. Apparently 45 states allow open carry! I had no idea.

BlueBirdMB

MommyLiberty5013 said:

It's interesting in all of this that now Texas has started legal open carry. Apparently 45 states allow open carry! I had no idea.

We have open carry in NH.  It never occurred to me that it would be illegal actually until I heard about the Texas thing.