Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by MilitantBEEMER, Jan 9, 2013.
DRUDGE REPORT 2013®
Let me interpret for those that don't understand liberal speak. We must act while the emotional wave is there. The US Constitution is out dated. Executive orders trump the US Constitution. The all knowing all caring Obama knows what is best for his subjects. Good intentions trump everything even the order of law.
Can they actually use an executive order for something like this?
Does anyone know to what extent an executive order can be used to control guns? IE, ban, outlaw, etc?
Who is going to stop the order? The people we elect to represent us? The SCOTUS? Does Obama Care ring a bell?
Wikipedia on "Executive Orders"
Executive order - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have a point there.
It will never happen. Remember what happened to the last king who decided that we didn't deserve to be part of the legislative process.
I wouldn't put it past him. He has nothing to lose, cement his legacy.
ding ding ding! Winner winner chicken dinner! Nailed it!
Pretty soon there will be an "executive order" to suspend voting...
One Executive order at a time in the right sequence and you could be correct... Never use to think this was possible til now.
Nothing really new, it was brought up long before the election and the idiots still re-elected him.
If he doesn't get the votes he wants to get the bill he wants, he probably will executive order it. He gets away with everything.
Presidents are not emperors. He just cant wave a pen and ban a constitutionally protected right, that has been settled law in the US Supreme Court. He will be sued so fast and from so many states and organizations, that if he really wants this fight, he will get a huge, knock-down, drag-down fight. While I suspect many gun owners see themselves obeying any new laws because they are honest, law abiding citizens, but many currently law abiding gun owners will find themselves as newly minted criminals and will actively disobey any new executive order. Just like in the military, there is no obligation to follow an unlawful order. And an executive order banning the possession, sale, or transfer of certain firearms will be an unlawful order in my opinion.
I would actually like to see a huge fight over guns. It will do more to kick Democrats out of office than the Tea Party can.
keep in mind... the threat of an executive order, or other such huge action, say a sweeping ban ala Feinstien... a possible great distraction from something seemingly minor in comparison that they could slide through while everyone's attention is focused on the EO possibility.
SO... say the focus and fear are directed towards an EO or Feinstein's ban. not as much attention goes to the flanks, where they push a magazine ban or something similar through.
ANYTHING, absolutely anything that gets onto the books just opens the future for more; an eventual total ban, in baby steps.
My wife said it could never happen, and I replied that it will happen in small steps. Little by little they chip away at our right's. let's not forget what happened to the Jews in the 30's. Disarm, and then harm.
I am not a lawyer, but my read is that any Executive Order would be limited to within government and its processes. Therefore, one might imagine a valid Executive Order to be something like:
- require a secondary background check for certain weapons
- require a secondary background check for any weapon with a magazine capacity of more than 10 rounds
The above are both hypothetical examples that I just made up. I have no crystal ball on what might happen...
I agree with you that he isn't suppossed to do those things, that doesn't mean he won't do it and that doesn't mean he'll be held accountable, at least by those who are suppossed to hold him accountable.
No, not legally anyway.