Gun law changes from Obama?

HOW can there be a discriminatory system of gun control
if everyone has the Constitutional right to "equal protection of the laws" ???

If a cougar or a bear pounces upon and begins eating a counterfeiter,
or a perjurer (like Bill Clinton), or someone who misrepresented his tax liability,
while he is out fishing, or hiking, by WHAT Constitutional reasoning
must he offer himself up for the slaughter, in a state of helplessness??

or with regard to murderous gangs of young criminals in the streets, instead of cougars ????

Every person has a Natural Right and a Constitutional Right of self defense.


The same question applies to people below voting age?
There r no age limits in the 2nd Amendment





David

Yeh, lets arm the two year olds with nice '177's just so they can put their eyes out, and the eyes of their playpen pals

Morally, everyone has the same right to defend his life from predatory violence,
but use of human technology requires some minimum of mental development.

I 'm not sure that a person of 2 years woud understand the concept at hand,
but assuming arguendo that he DID,
then YES: his life span shoud not be cut off.
He shoud live to see 3.

I REGRET that Andrea Yates was successful with her lethal bathtub
and that her victims coud not defend themselves.
( Her 7 year old discovered what she was DOING and fled,
but she dragged him back, to his death. )

He was in FULL obedience to ALL gun control laws
(to the GLEE of all gun control supporters).

Thay shoud give him CREDIT for that on his tombstone. Right, Farmer ??





David

Bullshit thread . . . Mr. Obama is the executive officer of the government, changing laws is a legislative function. Mr. Obama cannot change the law, only Congress can do that.

The way that it has always been done
is that one of a President's supporters
in each house of Congress introduces the bill for him.

If he can't find one guy in each house to help him out with it,
then the bill does not have much chance.





David

I understand the process, David. My point is that you won't be seeing any gun law changes from Mr. Obama, they can only come from the Congress.

Yes, and I believe that the Congress is more disposed toward personal freedom of self defense.





David

consider DAves calendrical abundance, he has probably forgotten these obvious points.

No comment on my response to u ?

You are correct.

The ability to exercise ones constitutional right of self defense should remain available to all legal American citizens.

Bullshit!

Changing the constitution is not a job for PrezBO.

Have you suffered brain damage at some point in your life? Nothing i have written even remotely suggests that Mr. Obama ought to or even can change the constitution.

Or is that you're already drunk today, even though the sun isn't even close to crossing the yard arm?

You are such a little ignoranus,when do you plan to move out of your parents basement?

You're hilarious. You can't even make a remark germane to what i have actually posted, and you want to denigrate my intelligence. You crack me up, water boy.

Setboy, don't let your ignorance guide you.

When it comes to disarming the public, do you really think Obama wouldn't like to change the constitution to meet his needs?
He has already ignored it... why wouldn't just change it?

I'd say you're the champion of ignorance here. Whether or not Mr. Obama would want to change the constitution has nothing to do with it. Why don't you actually read the constitution some time. The executive and judicial branches have absolutely no say in the amendment of the constitution.

But quite apart from that, this is typical of the kind of mindless hysteria which gripped rightwingnuts from the day Mr. Obama was elected. Who carew what anyone alleges Mr. Obama would like to abouit guns? He is powerless in the matter.

As i doubt that you ever actually would read the constitution (too inconvenient for your hysterical rants), here is the entire text of Article V, which provides for the amendment of the constitution:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Neither the executive nor the judicial branches have a thing to do with it.

Setboy, it sounds like you have less faith in Obama today than you did yesterday... there is hope for you yet.

Typical lunacy from you. You have no idea how much "faith" i have ever had in Mr. Obama on any day. The difference between you and i is that i know what the constitution says, and how it creates the governance of our country. The excuative branch has no law making power, and no power to amend the constitution. That is true no matter who the president is.

I don't see any reason to assume that there is or ever was any hope for you.