Free: Contests & Raffles.
During the 8 years he was in office, George W. Bush issued 293 executive orders.Obama has issued less executive orders than any modern president: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/obama-executive-orders-guns.html
Another commie move by our corrupt government to satisfy THEIR wants, not ours. Like Bearpaw said, overstepping...............
SO xd, what exactly will this executive order do and how will it directly help ?
Quote from: CAMPMEAT on January 04, 2014, 01:38:25 PMAnother commie move by our corrupt government to satisfy THEIR wants, not ours. Like Bearpaw said, overstepping...............Seems you need to look up communism. And when you say "not ours," I don't know who you are referring to, but to be clear, that does not include me. I'm ok not giving felons or mentally ill firearms.
Quote from: xd2005 on January 04, 2014, 02:03:04 PMQuote from: CAMPMEAT on January 04, 2014, 01:38:25 PMAnother commie move by our corrupt government to satisfy THEIR wants, not ours. Like Bearpaw said, overstepping...............Seems you need to look up communism. And when you say "not ours," I don't know who you are referring to, but to be clear, that does not include me. I'm ok not giving felons or mentally ill firearms.............a progressive statement if I've ever read one.
Look up www.commieblast.com for some enlightenment.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised by the comments on here...Granted, csaaphill's comments are a given, considering his position that there should be absolutely no limits on types of firearms or who should possess them.And Wash, there's nothing for "We the People" to follow in regards to these Executive Orders, so your comment makes absolutely no sense.A year ago, everyone said how there should be no new laws, simply stronger enforcement of existing ones, including improvements to ensure the mentally ill were not able to obtain firearms. That is all this does, helps make it more difficult for the mentally ill to get firearms. Granted, I can understand why that would concern a few on here...As for chasing down those that attempted to purchase but were denied, sure, we can chase them. But why not focus on those that were not denied and able to purchase? Yes, those denied could have obtained elsewhere, but those not denied needed no further steps. Again, these are people that do not legally qualify for firearms purchases, but were able to make them regardless because information was lacking in the system. This helps solve that problem.And the argument that "people who intend to kill will find a way" is a bit old and too easily argued against. If Adam attacked an elementary school with rocks and knives, I guarantee the results would not have been the same. Small, intimate homicides can surely be carried out with alternative, legal weapons very easily. But mass casualty attacks are nowhere near as simple to conduct with these alternative weapons. There is a reason firearms are used. They are much faster and allow much more distance from an adversary. In fact, if you recall, at virtually the same time as the Sandy Hook incident, a knife attack occurred in China at a school. There, there were something like 23 injuries, no deaths. Tragic, of course, but you aren't going to convince me that a knife is a good alternative weapon in a mass attack.
