Obama/Biden's 23 executive orders on guns, gun violence, etc

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Obama has said he is going to pass the legislation regardless of approval or not. What kind of talking is he willing to do? His actions need a real response, need action taken. Talking about it won't make Obama magically stop pretending like he is a monarch. Legislation shall be introduced

 

 

Also, that popular mechanics article is about the biggest piece of trash to have hit the internet. It does say that jet fuel cannot melt steel, which is accurate. But it says that weakening the steel could have caused the collapse. A fair argument in my opinion... However that doesn't prove why molten steel was found in the wreckage. If the collapse was caused by weakened steel, not melted steel.. Why was the latter found? Secondly, Jet fuel alone wasn't hot enough, which it states. But REAL damage came when things like carpet and paper burned?! LMAO. Yes, all of those things would obviously burn and the fires inside the buildings lasted longer... But after the fuel source burns up, which PM says happened in 10 minutes (haven't fact checked this, so I am unsure) temperatures STILL rose above the maximum point of which jet fuel burns... after the jet fuel was gone? LOLOLOL. The burning carpet and paper brought those towers down. That is truly pathetic.

 

As far as the blasting caps debunking, there really offer no proof whatsoever. They claim it happened because of the pancaking effecting. If it was indeed the air being pushed out of the building as it collapsed, you would see these puffs coming out all directions in large horizontal streams. You would NOT get one little (little relative to the size of the building, surface area of the floors, etc) horizontal puff in one direction occupying the space of about a single window.

 

Furthermore, anyone who has actually watched a controlled demo of a building is in for quite a surprise. Being that the two are practically identical. Using terms like "The Pancake Effect" impress far too many people. They don't care to actually understand what it is, how it works, or what it looks like.

 

Quoting one guy.. and one guy that said it looked like a demo is not proof it wasn't a demo.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

I do not believe this to be a conspiracy. Every single one of our "leaders" agreeing on something....pssshhhh

 

Our president is just an asshole, that should be explanation enough.

[Thanatos 2,847]

*snip*

 

Wow, Favre, didn't realize you were also a conspiracy nut. Again, this is a prime example of people who know a little about a field refusing to listen to people who know a lot about the field. One of my best friends is an expert engineer, and he and I have gone through the "claims" of 9/11 being staged. His response was to laugh at how absurd their claims were. His words, and I quote, "These are the people who know just enough to be dangerous."

 

Leave the engineering to the people who actually know about engineering, please.

 

Molten steel wasn't found at ground zero, it was this:

 

"NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.

 

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface."

 

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

 

One of the glaringly OBVIOUS pieces of evidence is the place the flow is coming from. It just happens to be where the airliner crashed to a halt. You can tell by the way the perimeter columns look. They're bowed out like a catcher's mitt.

 

The conspiracy junkies always claim the fires weren't hot enough to melt aluminium. This displays a lack of knowledge that is frightening in its absurdity.

 

http://www.debunking911.com/images/runwayfire6.jpg - This is the plane mentioned in the article snippet below.

 

One of the arguments for thermite that conspiracy theorists use is the temperature of the fire. They say the fires at the towers weren't hot enough to melt aluminum, which suggests they need an unnatural source for the melted aluminum. (Hint, hint) Yet, the aluminum outer skin of other airliners have melted without even hitting anything. Sparked only by friction...

 

Air France flight 358 didn't hit a steel building at 500 miles an hour. It didn't even burn the fuel in the wings, yet its aluminum skin melted to the ground. It simply went off the runway and caught fire. What melted the airliner was its contents, like seats, clothing and other combustibles including chemical oxygen generators. It's not unreasonable to conclude the airliner and contents didn't even need the contents of the building to melt. Yet the NIST replicated the fires by burning office furniture in a controlled experiment and found the ceiling temperature to reach 1,100 degrees C. (They say "Yeah but that's the ceiling" to which I say "Now imagine what the actual flame is.. Do you think it's cooler?") More than enough to melt aircraft aluminum as well. Unfortunately, they weren't charged with putting conspiracy theorists fears to rest so they didn't include a piece of aircraft aluminum in the test.

 

Edit: Source: http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm

Edited January 17, 2013 by Thanatos19

[WindyCitySports 407]

Most people don't understand what the President doing this by Executive Order means. It is very similar to the metaphor in which you turn the heat up on a frog very slowly and it does not flee, yet it would flee if you increased to deadly temperatures right away. The American people have slowly come to accept the President being head of the government and head policy-maker. As a result of this, he is now able to get away with passing gun control legislation by E.O. Curbing gun rights with the executive's pen is by-passing the checks and balance system and creating a king.

 

 

Are you happy, America?

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Most people don't understand what the President doing this by Executive Order means. It is very similar to the metaphor in which you turn the heat up on a frog very slowly and it does not flee, yet it would flee if you increased to deadly temperatures right away. The American people have slowly come to accept the President being head of the government and head policy-maker. As a result of this, he is now able to get away with passing gun control legislation by E.O. Curbing gun rights with the executive's pen is by-passing the checks and balance system and creating a king.

 

 

Are you happy, America?

 

Obama takes care of us. Why wouldn't we be happy?

[blotsfan 2,112]

Wow, Favre, didn't realize you were also a conspiracy nut.

 

[Thanatos 2,847]

Most people don't understand what the President doing this by Executive Order means. It is very similar to the metaphor in which you turn the heat up on a frog very slowly and it does not flee, yet it would flee if you increased to deadly temperatures right away. The American people have slowly come to accept the President being head of the government and head policy-maker. As a result of this, he is now able to get away with passing gun control legislation by E.O. Curbing gun rights with the executive's pen is by-passing the checks and balance system and creating a king.

 

Are you happy, America?

 

When he bypasses the Constitution and sets himself up for life, that would be creating a king. What he is doing is using Article II.

[WindyCitySports 407]

When he bypasses the Constitution and sets himself up for life, that would be creating a king. What he is doing is using Article II.

No...he isn't. Nowhere in Article II does it say that he can do these things. Just because it establishes E.O.'s doesn't mean he can make laws with them. Some of his E.O.'s were legitimate, such as ordering Holder to do certain things. However, many of the E.O.'s do not fit under his power.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

Thanatos shame on what? If we dont care that we kill children over in the Middle East, whats different here? A kid is a kid. Theres no difference except location. Ok, so if you have a better inside view, what has your fathwr shown you? Has he shown you gagdets they have that arent know by the public? Ive seen em. Some weird type movie shit. Ive been shown other things too. IJS. I just dont get, people act like our Government wouldnt do anything like that. We all human, so if we see bullshit from daily people on the street, people in office are no different.

 

To me theres no debunking common sense. Thats what the Government has, plausible deniablilty. You hear something against them and your the type who will go no, no way. Its part of your American pride i get that. This is something people are either with it or against it. Do you honestly think something this serious WOULDNT be covered up? Its happened before. Every big conspiracy, from WW2 to 9-11 to this, have all been very sketchy. If something seems sketchy, most of the time something is going on. The thing with u, like previous debates, is you go against what i think and say for another post you agree with. While i go with mine. So theres no difference between your action and mine. Just opinions.

 

Shit like this i hate and hope i never have to say i told you so one day. But this shit goes on around the world. if we all know the world is fucked up, why is it so easy to deny everything. People living in their perfect little worlds. Its ok though, everyone has their opinions. And dont call me exteme,the problem with America also is people believing everything the government says lol. Thats a two way street Thanatos saying whats wrong with this country. Anything you say or put down, is just the opposite of me. Id call u a extreme gullible person lol. It goes both ways. But since no one on here agrees ima stop posting on this.

 

I dont care if you dont agree and everything, everyone has opinions. But i hope after this post, theres no name calling of crazy or anything among those lines. Then ill have a problem. ( Me calling you gullible isn't the same as crazy )

 

In all, I wish none of this were true. I don't believe in god either and I wish/hope that were true. Because the way things go on in this world is ugly and I don't like it. But I don't deny or close any doors, I keep an open mind to everything. Theres nothing wrong with that. Not extreme, Im just a man who isn't a pussy to throw this stuff out there. BTW I disagree with extremists out there who do crazy shit to prove a point.

Edited January 18, 2013 by 56AceInDaPlace

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Disappointed but not really surprised this has devolved into a conspiracy thread. Can a global mod branch that bullshit off into a separate thread please? It's unrelated.

 

No...he isn't. Nowhere in Article II does it say that he can do these things. Just because it establishes E.O.'s doesn't mean he can make laws with them. Some of his E.O.'s were legitimate, such as ordering Holder to do certain things. However, many of the E.O.'s do not fit under his power.

 

Er...it's legal because Article II doesn't say he CAN'T do it a la Article I for Congress. The term "herein granted" is missing from Article II, giving vast expansive executive power to sitting Presidents which, if you study the constitutional convention careful enough, is probably what the Framers intended, or at least the most influential ones anyway (Hamilton and Madison).

 

People don't like it now (they didn't before the Constitution was ratified either...and at the time people like Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams were already calling the power given to the executive monarchical in nature) but part of having a government with a system of checks and balances includes giving more than one branch the ability to enact change if the legislative branch refuses to do so. Hence, executive orders. Congress can repeal executive orders so the idea that they're dictatorial or what have you is silly. It's not an end-all, be-all law.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Phailadelphia

[Thanatos 2,847]

Had to single this one out because this is a beauty when combined with this one from earlier:

 

But I don't deny or close any doors, I keep an open mind to everything.

As soon as I read, a certain post or newspaper said whatever I stopped reading. Course I been up all night so im sure I may not be seeing completely straight but anything from a paper I disprove.

 

*rest of post snipped for length*

 

My point was that just because you know someone in the military doesn't give you any "insider" information. Anything truly revolutionary would be classified.

 

You are the extremely gullible one, refusing to listen to any newspaper simply because its a newspaper, but instead following guys who would put the National Enquirer to shame, (more on that later, the person who came up with your video is a nutcase). You are nothing but the very definition of a conspiracy theorist.

 

Do you honestly think the government would go through all this trouble to cover this up and create a hoax to advance gun control, and then be so sloppy that they would do the incredibly stupid things that video claims they did? If they are competent enough to pull this off, why were they so stupid as to leave these incredibly easy tracks? I mean come on. If what he says is true, then why on earth would the government fail to cover their tracks this spectacularly?

 

Now for your source, your man who has put all this together. He is a crackpot.

 

He believes he is the New Age Messiah, who has a personal message from the Egyptian goddess Nefertiti, and he chose 12/21/2012 as his date to release this because of special importance to the Egyptian solar year or something like that. His proof of this is that he is the only person in the world to solve the TV show LOST. He is a complete loonybin.

 

If that's not enough for you, let's systematically destroy the insane arguments he brings up.

 

He claims there were facebook pages made asking people to mourn for the children days before the Sandy Hook incident. (First off, this is incredibly sloppy, and again, boggles belief that the government would do this if they were actually involved in said cover-up). He neglects to mention that you can change the "formed" date of any group or business. This is done so that people can make a facebook page for their business, say, and then backtrack the date to when the business was actually started. Thus, he could have easily created these pages in two minutes, changed the formed date to Dec. 10, took a screencap of the page, and then deleted it.

 

He also claims that a dead girl was photographed with the President. (Again, how stupid can this cover-up get?) He neglects to mention that the girl in question has two sisters, one of whom is two years younger than the dead girl. The picture he uses to compare the two was taken in 2010. So now, in 2012, the youngest sister is the same age as Emilie, (the dead girl), was when the photograph was taken and she is wearing the *same dress* because the family got all three of their daughters that dress. Thus they look rather similar.

 

He claims that Adam Lanza left the assault rifle in the trunk of the car, and bases this on the fact that the media at first erroneously reported this, and then attributes the media's rush to report things and thus getting some things wrong, (as they have done on every public tragedy for the past decade), as evidence that this is a cover-up. Anyone with a knowledge of guns can clearly see that it is a shotgun in the trunk of the car, not an assault rifle.

 

He claims that there being no wounded is very fishy. It almost brings tears to my eyes to even think this through, but anyone who gives it a moment's thought would figure this out instantly- a six-year-old child isn't going to survive a gunshot wound very well. The rate of fatality will be far higher than shooting at an adult.

 

Oh yes. One other thing. The *reason* for there being no wounded, according to him, is so that if this ever does come out, the government can't be sued. If that reasoning doesn't convince you that this person is entirely nuts, nothing will. Lawsuits would be the least of the government's worries if this were true and it eventually came out that they *murdered 20 children.*

 

I could go on. And on. This is a loony conspiracy theory, completely preying on the people involved. You are, if you subscribe to this theory, accusing all the currently grieving parents of being paid actors complicit in the deaths of those children. Your source wants to put them all in jail as accessories to murder. That is why I said shame on you. These parents, who have gone through this horrific tragedy, are now receiving emails and other correspondence from morons who believe the nutcase who came up with this theory, accusing them of exactly that. Snide remarks such as "how much is the government paying you?" This is along with jokes making fun of them crying at their children's funerals. (Check the Huffington Post for details. Oh wait, I forgot, they're a newspaper, so obviously they are making all this up too, since you won't read anything that comes from a newspaper.) This is the basest, most disgusting form the internet takes, and to become a part of it, as you apparently have, is indeed a crying shame.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Thanatos19

[Thanatos 2,847]

Disappointed but not really surprised this has devolved into a conspiracy thread. Can a global mod branch that bullshit off into a separate thread please? It's unrelated.

 

 

 

Er...it's legal because Article II doesn't say he CAN'T do it a la Article I for Congress. The term "herein granted" is missing from Article II, giving vast expansive executive power to sitting Presidents which, if you study the constitutional convention careful enough, is probably what the Framers intended, or at least the most influential ones anyway (Hamilton and Madison).

 

People don't like it now (they didn't before the Constitution was ratified either...and at the time people like Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams were already calling the power given to the executive monarchical in nature) but part of having a government with a system of checks and balances includes giving more than one branch the ability to enact change if the legislative branch refuses to do so. Hence, executive orders. Congress can repeal executive orders so the idea that they're dictatorial or what have you is silly. It's not an end-all, be-all law.

 

The Courts can also repeal executive orders, correct?

 

It's just a way to get something done if there's a gridlock and something needs to be done, but if it truly is unconstitutional, I believe either one of the other branches can stop it.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

My point was that just because you know someone in the military doesn't give you any "insider" information. Anything truly revolutionary would be classified.

 

You are the extremely gullible one, refusing to listen to any newspaper simply because its a newspaper, but instead following guys who would put the National Enquirer to shame, (more on that later, the person who came up with your video is a nutcase). You are nothing but the very definition of a conspiracy theorist.

 

Do you honestly think the government would go through all this trouble to cover this up and create a hoax to advance gun control, and then be so sloppy that they would do the incredibly stupid things that video claims they did? If they are competent enough to pull this off, why were they so stupid as to leave these incredibly easy tracks? I mean come on. If what he says is true, then why on earth would the government fail to cover their tracks this spectacularly?

 

Now for your source, your man who has put all this together. He is a crackpot.

 

He believes he is the New Age Messiah, who has a personal message from the Egyptian goddess Nefertiti, and he chose 12/21/2012 as his date to release this because of special importance to the Egyptian solar year or something like that. His proof of this is that he is the only person in the world to solve the TV show LOST. He is a complete loonybin.

 

If that's not enough for you, let's systematically destroy the insane arguments he brings up.

 

He claims there were facebook pages made asking people to mourn for the children days before the Sandy Hook incident. (First off, this is incredibly sloppy, and again, boggles belief that the government would do this if they were actually involved in said cover-up). He neglects to mention that you can change the "formed" date of any group or business. This is done so that people can make a facebook page for their business, say, and then backtrack the date to when the business was actually started. Thus, he could have easily created these pages in two minutes, changed the formed date to Dec. 10, took a screencap of the page, and then deleted it.

 

He also claims that a dead girl was photographed with the President. (Again, how stupid can this cover-up get?) He neglects to mention that the girl in question has two sisters, one of whom is two years younger than the dead girl. The picture he uses to compare the two was taken in 2010. So now, in 2012, the youngest sister is the same age as Emilie, (the dead girl), was when the photograph was taken and she is wearing the *same dress* because the family got all three of their daughters that dress. Thus they look rather similar.

 

He claims that Adam Lanza left the assault rifle in the trunk of the car, and bases this on the fact that the media at first erroneously reported this, and then attributes the media's rush to report things and thus getting some things wrong, (as they have done on every public tragedy for the past decade), as evidence that this is a cover-up. Anyone with a knowledge of guns can clearly see that it is a shotgun in the trunk of the car, not an assault rifle.

 

He claims that there being no wounded is very fishy. It almost brings tears to my eyes to even think this through, but anyone who gives it a moment's thought would figure this out instantly- a six-year-old child isn't going to survive a gunshot wound very well. The rate of fatality will be far higher than shooting at an adult.

 

I could go on. And on. This is a loony conspiracy theory, completely preying on the people involved. You are, if you subscribe to this theory, accusing all the currently grieving parents of being paid actors complicit in the deaths of the children. Your source wants to put them all in jail as accessories to murder. That is why I said shame on you. These parents, who have gone through this horrific tragedy, are now receiving emails and other correspondence from morons who believe the nutcase who came up with this theory, accusing them of exactly that. Snide remarks such as "how much is the government paying you?" This is along with jokes making fun of them crying at their children's funerals. (Check the Huffington Post for details. Oh wait, I forgot, they're a newspaper, so obviously they are making all this up too, since you won't read anything that comes from a newspaper.) This is the basest, most disgusting form the internet takes, and to become a part of it, as you apparently have, is indeed a crying shame.

 

One, you proved my point on the government. They could fuck up every thing and still get away with it. WHY? Plausible deniability. You could have evidence against them and they would still get away with it. When you run everything in this country, its hard for anyone to have a compressing case against them. Also you ignored the part on us killing kids over in the Middle East. So no I don't feel bad saying that when we kill kids over there. Im not for killing anybody, let alone kids, but guns is the LAST FUCKING THING between slavery and freedom for the people. Either way, nobody is taking guns away from us, good luck trying that. But if they did, there would be nothing from them completely taking over us, as they already have slowly and surely.

 

Now whatever else he stands for, IDC. I didn't view those nor know about it. Im talking this case. I do find it funny how the dad could be laughing days later after his kid was killed. Any parent wouldn't be laughing for the next year or so AT LEAST.

 

All im against is corruption, which is clearly in America. I look everywhere else in the world, the governments fear the people, not here. Not to mention bills that are passed behind closed doors and not know to the public. Taking rights away from us right underneath us. You would have to do some serious researching to find any of that out. Things like that are kept secret.

 

Call me a conspiracy theorist, that's fine. I consider myself open minded, but whatever. For the record as well, I don't believe in everything I read either.

But for the 9-11 thing. The base in the middle of the tower looked CUT to me. Do u know how a demolition works? They cut the beam in the middle of the structure to ensure it falls off and straight down and doesn't fall over. Not tto mention they interviewed the people who build those buildings and they even said it would take FIVE or more planes to bring that structure down. So how is it a plane hits the top and the beam in the middle, only a few stories up is cut diagonally the way it was?

 

THAT is enough to QUESTION something fishy is going on. Maybe not enough to say hey, this is a hoax etc etc. But its enough to question it and I do. If you don't that's you. Certain details are enough to question and I am doing so. Will we ever know for sure? maybe. Maybe not. But like I said, the Government doesn't have to worry about fucking up. Because majority of people here think like you. They don't question big serious shit like this. they just go along with the story. When the Pat Tillman case came out, and you found out they lied and eventually came out and said he was killed by friendily fire, what did that do for you? If they lie about one story, what makes you think they wouldn't for any other story?

 

Im not asking you to change your opinion, but I am asking you to think OUTSIDE the box for a minute. But see, most people don't even really care. This is America, in todays world its like this. People go to work, come home, wanna enjoy their free time, spend time with their kids even and go to sleep and do it again the next day. Subjects like this, they listen to the news or newspaper and then leave it alone. I don't. People only care about their own lives and not what goes on. So in todays world, anything corrupt going on, will be very hard to stop.

 

Humans lie, cheat etc, and humans run the government last time I checked so, some bullshit going on there wouldn't surprise me.

 

Like I said this is something we don't agree on, so continuing to fight or debate on it is pointless. We are totally opposites of mindframe and views. It happens. I can tell because our methods from our replies are the same, just different opinion on the whole thing. You agree with one source, I agree with the other. Unlike the CJ thread, I wont carry this one on any longer. You can reply to this if u like, ill read it and be on my way to another thread. Either way, we both against shit like this either way. ( Corruption, crazy shit )

[Guest Phailadelphia]

The Courts can also repeal executive orders, correct?

 

Yup.

 

Fun historical note: The judicial branch was never intended to have the power to repeal/overturn EOs or legislation. As designed by the Constitution it was actually incredibly weak to begin with. If anyone nerds out over this stuff like I do, research the context and history surrounding both Marbury v Madison and Stuart v Laird. Those cases exposed many of the inherent flaws with our Constitution. They also fundamentally changed the way the Court system in this country works, giving it a lot of power it wasn't supposed to have.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Phailadelphia

[Duck Fallas 209]

While most of the things pointed out in this video could be reasonably explained by anyone with half a brain and NOT motivated by bias, I don't feel like gong into it point-by-point, so here is what the good folks at Snopes.com uncovered.

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp

 

Its a hoax the way I see it. Please watch the whole thing before giving your statement or opinion on it. Scary shit, people don't even understand whats going on under their noses!

Edited January 18, 2013 by Duck Fallas

[Thanatos 2,847]

Yup.

 

Fun historical note: The judicial branch was never intended to have the power to repeal/overturn EOs or legislation. As designed by the Constitution it was actually incredibly weak to begin with. If anyone nerds out over this stuff like I do, research the context and history surrounding both Marbury v Madison and Stuart v Laird. Those cases exposed many of the inherent flaws with our Constitution. They also fundamentally changed the way the Court system in this country works, giving it a lot of power it wasn't supposed to have.

 

I completely agree with that last part. The Courts are way too powerful compared to the other two branches.

[Guest tOSUBUCK3Y3]

Funny that a man who supports civil uprisings in Egypt,Syria and Libya can be so adamant about controlling what firearms his own countries citizens can own. This President is a joke. Voter fraud works like a charm.

[OSUViking 505]

That's John Marshall for you. @rise of the Court's authority

[Thanatos 2,847]

Funny that a man who supports civil uprisings in Egypt,Syria and Libya can be so adamant about controlling what firearms his own countries citizens can own. This President is a joke. Voter fraud works like a charm.

 

You think Obama's landslide victory over Romney was a result of voter fraud? It was a result of Romney being a piece of shit fake that anyone could see. The Republicans didn't put up a strong opponent, and it wouldn't have needed much of one to oust Obama. They gave us a person who I'm unsure would even have better than Barack. Sure he might not have done this thing on guns, but he wanted to go into Iran and had military views that were simply idiotic. It's time we get out of wars, not go into more of them.