Executive Actions on Gun Control

[Chicken Dinner]

Other than being a little confused about #'s 20, 21 and 22, none of this gives me a lot of heartburn. In fact, I'd say that if the POTUS was truly serious about enforcing existing gun laws he would have already done most of them.

The following is a list, provided by the White House, of executive actions President Obama plans to take to address gun violence.

1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.

4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.

11. Nominate an ATF director.

12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.

13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.

14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.

22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/list-executive-actions-obama-plans-to-take-as-part-anti-gun-violence-plan/#ixzz2IAK3sfWq

[BarryBobPosthole]

Agreed. There's no infringement on the Bill of Rights anywhere in this, no act of going around congress, no infringement of anyone's constitutional rights. Much ado about nothing. So I guess the folks planning insurrection can go back to doing whatever it is they do normally. What he has done is place this hot potato right squarely in congress' hands, where nothing whatsoever will be done at all.

BKB

[Buckrub]

16 WILL cause your rights to be violated. I can give first hand example from a Paramedic's direct involvement if you like. 17 could be also.

Don't know what 6 and 13 mean. They could mean nothing (to you) or a whole lot of something (to me).

Don't know what 3 means either, but I'd bet Wyoming and Montana, et al, will say "bite me" to it.

But forget all this, why hasn't someone asked the Bozo "Why did it take you 5 years to propose actually enforcing existing laws?" Followed by "Can you not nominate an ATF Director yourownself without burying the concept deep inside some list of EO's?"

[LJ3]

the last 4 are why I detest managers almost as much as Bucky does :) It's meaningless in every way except to create an illusion for the weakminded.

[Buckrub]

I'd like to launch a national dialogue....................

[Big Muddy]

#7---this is a great idea, which prolly would have avoided the Sandy Hook shootings, completely....the crazy shooter's mama is as much to blame, as the crazy shooter, himself....she KNEW the boy was "tetched in the haid", and left her guns just laying around, anyday'umway!!!

Think I'll buy some stock in gun safe-manufacuring companies, if this becomes a mandate. ;)

[Chicken Dinner]

16. How so? It seems like they can ask and I can tell them to stuff it.

17. I thought they were already mandatory reporters in a lot of cases.

6. I assume they're going to try (and some States probably will) to close the "gun show loop hole" which means private sales would be subject to a background check. In VA all non-private sales (even long guns) are subject to an instant background check and it's not big deal. I guess sort of like needing an FFL to do an interstate transfer, FFL's will need to know how to do this for private sales. (NOTE: I'm not at all keen on doing this, but it's probably a lost cause...)

13. Shame on them if they aren't already doing so.

3. "Improving incentives" is sure better than requiring. States are free to tell them to stuff it.

Not trying to cause an argument at all. I think others have said it, but this list is a complete crock and it's just "management" trying to make it look like they're doing something...



16 WILL cause your rights to be violated. I can give first hand example from a Paramedic's direct involvement if you like. 17 could be also.

Don't know what 6 and 13 mean. They could mean nothing (to you) or a whole lot of something (to me).

Don't know what 3 means either, but I'd bet Wyoming and Montana, et al, will say "bite me" to it.

But forget all this, why hasn't someone asked the Bozo "Why did it take you 5 years to propose actually enforcing existing laws?" Followed by "Can you not nominate an ATF Director yourownself without burying the concept deep inside some list of EO's?"

[DeputyDog]

16 stuck out to me right away. Unless I go to my doctor because I've been shot, it's not relevant to anything whether or not there are guns in my home.

12 has been happening since Columbine so that's nothing new.

13 should have been happening right along. Will anyone question him why this hasn't already been happening?

14 Gun violence isn't a disease. Doesn't the CDC have better things to do like research cancer, ect..?

[Buckrub]

It is relevant if you answer YES. If so, you may be denied coverage from Medicare or Medicaid. In fact, this is actually ongoing already. It's part of Obamacare. It IS happening. Not everyone is following it (yet) but they now will. This relates to #20 for Medicaid. #13 is for Medicare, is how I read it. On #17, I'm sure the letter will not be phrased that way. It will say "YOU WILL REPORT........."

The CDC is the most Liberal group of people on earth short of HSUS or PETA. If they can find a way to eliminate guns, they will do so.

And I have no clue how an FFL dealer is involved if I sell Hank a gun. I don't get that, so clearly something is there that is unseen.

You can call me a Sky Crier if you want.........but at some point in the future many of these are going to be interpreted to mean something that is NOT as innocuous as Posthole thinks. That's just how this idiot works. It's how he rolls. Can you deny that?

[Bwana]

The only one that really jumped out at me was #16. The remainder seem to not be a big deal or infringement of any kind from the way I read them.

[Buckrub]

*snort*

YoMamma said that 900 people have been killed by guns in the last month.

I had to laugh.

Yeah, and how many of them are innocent folks getting shot by idiots? I'll bet 899 of 'em are gang shootings where one law breaker shot another law breaker. So what.........we are gonna stop that by a bunch of EO's?

I just want to puke.

[Buckrub]

http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=e88190f6-631b-4e48-98d9-260285817a62

It appears this guy is actually doing more to help private gun ownership than Wayne LaPierre could ever dream of doing.

[DeputyDog]

It doesn't help that a lot of the "children" killed by guns are also gangbangers and sometimes includes people up to 21 years old.

[Buckrub]

My Remington .22 holds 18 cartridges.

So, by "clip" or "magazine" do they mean ONLY DBM's?

[LJ3]

on 16... I have been asked and simply replied with that's none of your bidness. The Doctor then said it was their responsibility to ensure my home was safe for my children to which I replied "It is, in fact, NOT your responsibility. It's mine. Your responsibility is to see to their health when I bring them here and ask you to do so." I shit you not... that was probably 8 years ago and I still shake my head on that one.

[Buckrub]

It is now his LEGAL responsibility to ask and require an answer.

Saying "No" won't cut it.

This one will be a big one.

Course, no one seems to believe you that this even happened, right?

[Chicken Dinner]

So, he's supposed to deny coverage if they don't respond?

[Buckrub]

Not sure about a) Not responding, or b) lying on your response. But what HAS happened at SOME doctor's visits (my experience is via the emergency route, not a normal doc visit) is that they ask, and if you ask WHY, they say they can refuse your claim if you are Medicare. NOW, I am NOT sure about the ramifications under Obamacare if you have other private insurance. I don't know. I do know Obama care is 2200 pages, and it ain't all some innocuous list of drug names.

[Gunther]

1. It's a REPUBLIC
2. What does it have to do with health care?
3. Bribe states to enact all sorts of shit. BS, It will withhold funds from the Non compliant states.
4. The AG gets to make all sorts of new "prohibited people."
5. A cop grabs my legal weapon during a traffic stop say, and now I get to wait to get it back.
6. WTF? Make it tougher on everyone.
7. Another gov't run program. Wow. How much is this gonna cost? How about the NRA and whatnot?
8. So the gov't can make you buy more stuff.
9. Does a hell of a lot of legislation that way..
10. Another useless law, if a piece gets stolen in New York and shows up in LA so friggin' what?
11. Already have one.
12. Be just like they taught us what to do in case of nuclear war.. crouch under the desk.
13. Shit, we could just make murder and stuff illegal. Oh we did? How's that workin' out?
14. Does a hell of a lot of legislation that way..
15. Again let's make another expensive requirement to infringe on the rights.
16. Oh, come on. Everything else is under HIPPA and if this is too then what could it do except maybe make a liberal doc want to withhold treatment?
17. It's already known.
18. Good, tax states like ND to pay for towns like LA.
19. Yep, the efficient fed gov't is gonna tell you to do anything but defend yourself.
20-24. How about putting up with all the bullshit the gov't is putting out. I feel some issues coming on..........


It's all, every bit an infringement.

[Thumper]

Well, I'll tell ya' something surprising. When my medical problems became a major life-changing event ... I was a bit lost as to what I was going to do to get by financially and was in a bit of mild panic. I talked to a counselor about what benifits I should/could apply for and was told Social Security Disability and "Food Stamps".

I applied for Social Security Disability (which I've paid for my whole adult life) and had to jump through all sorts of hoops to get it, but I was eventually "awarded" disability. When I applied for food stamps, I had to answer a zillion questions. One of the questions was how many guns I own and how much are they worth. Once I answered (truthfully), the interview came to an abrupt halt and I was denied food stamps (actually, more like a reloadable debit card). I was told once I sell my guns I could reapply.

Ok, I understand that guns can be considered an asset and if I have them, I'm obviously not destitute because I can sell them and buy food with the proceeds. BUT ... I could have had a garage full of truck tires (worth a considerable amount of $$$) ... or I could have had a storage unit full of racecar parts or rocket motors ... whatever, but evidentally those type things don't matter. The ONLY thing that tripped me up and caused my claim to be denied was the fact I owned numerous firearms and that's the honest to God truth.

BTW, I simply made major adjustments to my lifestyle and have never reapplied.

[BarryBobPosthole]

That doesn't make any sense to me either.

Hope you can pass a drug test!

BKB

[Thumper]

Ha! I'd test positive for most everything these days ... BUT, at least I have scripts for all of them! I wish medicinal Mary Jane was legal here! To be honest, with all the pills I'm on, I'm afraid to so much as drink a beer, much less hit anything REALLY fun. Heck, I don't even know if it's safe for me to eat grapefruit these days! :(

But, back to the gun issue. When I was told to sell my guns and re-apply, I said, "No problem ... I'll just transfer ownership to Lynn or my son". I was told, "Nope, that won't do it .. I have to sell them!" Now this is where the registration issue comes into play. I starting wondering, how do they know what I own anydamnway? How 'bout I simply do nothing, then come back in 6 months, re-apply and tell them they've been sold? Will they send the men in black helicopters to storm my house looking for guns, then throw me in jail for "Welfare Fraud"? Then it hit me ... I really have no clue which guns are registered to me and which ones are not. Some I bought at gun stores or sporting goods places like BPS, Walmart, etc, so paperwork has been done on those. Most were purchased at local gun shows, but over the past 30+ years of "collecting" ... I have no clue which ones were purchased from private parties (no paperwork) and which were purchased from licensed dealers (registered) at these shows. That made me a bit nervous and I decided I didn't really want to "test the system".

What it boils down to is the fact that this is an actual example of how many of the "good" gun laws only affect us law abiding citizens. Do you think some crack dealer with a cashe of unregistered Uzi's, AR's and AK's under his bed would disclose what he has and be denied "benifits"? I won't even lie about it to try to beat the system ... do you think that crack dealer would hesitate to lie about what he has? WE are the only one's affected in a negative way by all these gun laws because WE are the only one's who abide by them ... criminals are criminals because they don't abide by the law, so what's the point?

[Buckrub]

So, two people (Thump and Len) have provided first hand accounts that these questions ARE indeed asked by doctors.

Yet, I'm an idiot for mentioning the fact that this occurs and is a problem. I am NOT calling Posthole a "sheep", he is the smartest guy I know.........but still, the sheep are going to read all this and say, as he has, "This is much ado about nothing, there's no problems here".

Yet there are. No black helicopters. Nobody is arresting me.

But it's a problem. A constitutional problem. And it WILL be noticed by MANY people in the days to come. And even if it isn't real, we WILL have another big fight over Left vs. Right on these issues. And if it IS real, even the Left will start to scream eventually.

Meanwhile, I am scared, mad, upset, and tired. Mostly tired.

[Chicken Dinner]

I hope you didn't think I was calling you an idiot. (When I do, I'm usually much more direct.) Mine have never been asked, but are quite prepared with how they should respond should it ever come up.

[Buckrub]

You called me a name too?

I hurt so bad.

[Buckrub]

More 'slippery slope' stuff from all this.

I swear. I have beat down a ton of folks on other sites who say "the end is near", or "the big fight is about to start"...........by calling them wrong.

But I don't know anymore. There just can't be any compromise on any of this. Just this website here proves there are those who don't care, or don't believe there's any substance to anything, and those who thing this is bigger than a bread basket. Surely everyone on both sides is not insane.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/obama-end-long-fight-over-gun-violence-research-201708897.html?_sr=1

[Sunshine]

I posted a long time ago, I hoped everyone was getting prepared for whatever kind of disaster might be coming. Being prepared is better then NOT! :D

Tornado, Earthquake, Hurricane, whatever could happen where you live.
Don't rely on anyone to take care of you and your family!!

[Chicken Dinner]

Sunny, I still vividly recall the news footage of the Rodney King riots. There was a big area of LA that was burning and being looted. It got so out of hand that the Fire Fighters and Police had to completely pull out in order to protec the safety of their personnel. There was video of at least one (and news coverage of others) Korean store owner up on the roof of his store with an assault rifle protecting his livelyhood. The aftermath of Katrina is another great example of how thin the line between order and anarchy truly is. I know we wish it wasn't so, but it is.

[Buckrub]

Well at least some temporary good is coming out of Obama's speech:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/18/16570552-gun-stores-running-low-on-weapons-as-sales-surge-owners-say?lite=

But there is no .22 LR ammo available on this Planet. . . Period.