“Throw Up Your Hands, I Want Your Guns”

Smug Obama

Barack Obama is preparing 19 executive orders to enact sweeping gun control, according to a Politico story. Buh-bye, Second Amendment.

The White House has identified 19 executive actions for President Barack Obama to move unilaterally on gun control, Vice President Joe Biden told a group of House Democrats on Monday, the administration’s first definitive statements about its response to last month’s mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Later this week, Obama will formally announce his proposals to reduce gun violence, which are expected to include renewal of the assault weapons ban, universal background checks and prohibition of high-capacity magazine clips.

The focus on executive orders is the result of the White House and other Democrats acknowledging the political difficulty of enacting any new gun legislation.

He’s not my president.

As Sebastian explains, this is not an end-run around Congress. It does, however, set a disturbing precedent. While gun-control advocates and liberals – but I repeat myself – will cheer Obama’s actions, one wonders if they will cheer executive orders from a future GOP president? My guess is no.

36 thoughts on ““Throw Up Your Hands, I Want Your Guns”

  1. Wyatt Earp Post author

    LDIV – I want to know how New York will deal with its 7-round only magazine problem. Will they confiscate your magazines? Good luck with that.

    L Frame – Nor will any of the high-powered liberal elite (read: Hollywood).

    1. John D

      Wyatt – here’s a link to the NY Bill that Emperor Cuomo shoved through the legislature in the dark of night: http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld&bn=S02230&term&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Votes=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y

      According to the law, we have one year to turn in the magazines or sell them to someone out of state. After that, possession of one will be a class A misdemeanor (up to a year in jail and a $1k fine). As far as I can tell, there are no 7 round magazines for a lot of these guns. I think the intent here was to let us keep our guns, but make them useless. All “assault” rifles will have to be registered. Registrations will have to be updated every five years. I’m sure there’ll be a hefty fee for that too.

      This is how Andrew Cuomo works. He won’t confiscate guns from law abiding citizens, he’ll just make them impossible to own or use. He’s as clever as he is evil.

      1. Wyatt Earp Post author

        I think Sebastian interpreted it thusly: You can keep the magazine, but you can only load it with seven rounds. A ridiculous rule, and one that could almost never be enforced.

      2. John D

        I just reread the law. It’s clear as mud. But my interpretation is that mags that hold ten rounds or less, provided they were possessed prior to this law, are okay as long as they are loaded with only seven rounds. Mags that hold more than ten need to disappear within one year of passage of the law.

  2. Jim Scrummy

    If Sebastian is right about shotties, that’s stupid. I love shooting skeet/trap/sporting clays. Use a semi-auto shotgun to “kill” those evil clay pidgeons. NY is stupid, will never ever move there (along with CA, IL, MA, CT, NJ, RI, NH, VT, MD, and any other liberal oasis). Seven rounds? Huh? More stupidity.

    I’ll give up my weapons when the bad guys (and girls) give up there weapons.

  3. Deputy Polarbear

    What is he going to do when the majority of the law enforcement officers and military stay true to their oath to the Constitution?

    I foresee a LOT of blood being spilled in the near future.

  4. Wyatt Earp Post author

    Jim – You’ll start seeing conservatives flee the state. mark my words.

    DP – LE will probably be immune to the regs for their personal weapons, mostly because Obama wants to curry our favor. As for enforcement, if I was in patrol and saw someone with an “illegal” magazine, I would most likely “unsee” it and ask the driver to have a nice day.

  5. Deputy Polarbear

    It also sounds like at least one congressman has articles of impeachment already drawn up if the dipshit in charge files even ONE executive order regarding firearms

    Several states have also either passed or drawn up state level laws mandating the arrest and prosecution of any federal agents who so much as set foot in their state to enforce any new federal gun control laws.

    That high pitched giggling sound you hear is Hitler and Stalin laughing in their graves….as we are going to destroy ourselves if we are not careful

  6. Jim Scrummy

    Zero’s talking about gun control, and the USA is out of money? All this debt zero and the dhimmis have run up is a bigger concern than gun control, according to Gallup. Amazing times. I just hope I can buy the Glock I’ve had my eye on, when it becomes available in 6 months???

  7. Fenway_Nation

    This is what happens when you have the hacks and race hustlers in the Democrat Party whose starting point is basically ‘NOBODY should ever own a firearm’ craft what they market as ‘common sense gun laws’

  8. Jon Brooks

    I can see many little cottage industries springing up though. Time to get mine and your reloading equipment out of the attic after all these years. Also people might want to buy new magazine followers to replace the ones in 15 round or 10 round mags. There just may be alot of ways to make money also providing hand loads and modifications to meet the new laws till we get them overturned. Then funnel the profits back to the NRA lawyers to sue the b*stards. Or more direct……Molon Labe.

  9. Jon Brooks

    I also see where obambi is going to surround himself with human shields during his ‘kick the 2nd in the balls’ speech tommorrow. One of our talk jocks here in Cleveburg (WTAM 1100) made one simple point: “we fund guards for bars, football games, banks, large outdoor gatherings, parks, abortion clinics, you name it but the left is opposed to funding guards for schools. Why?
    The left also fights tooth and nail (as well as the right) for every civil right against the encroaching government tyranny, such as survailence issues, search and seizure issues, internet freedom of speech rights, rights lost to NDAA (where the gov’t can now disappear you like it was party time in Argentina) etc.
    etc. ….but…. in the face of all this obvious tyranny…they want to disarm us???? Why?
    I don’t want to believe it, I am fighting believing it since I cannot envision humans that evil here in America, or maybe I just don’t want to fully believe it yet but I think the people that gave us Fast and Furious also gave us Sandyhook.

  10. Mike47

    IMHO the only issue to be addressed is how to keep weaponry out of the hands of crazy people… ONLY! If there is no clear solution to this, then work on as much of the problem as possible WITHOUT infringing on the 2nd Amendment. Anything else is a fool’s errand.

    If Obummer wants to act like a tyrant, he should be treated accordingly. We have provisions for that.

    He has NEVER been MY president.

  11. Jon Brooks

    It is good that Braveheart is playing on AMC tonight the American people could use some inspiration and a tale of bravery before tommorrow.

    “We cannot beat them, they have an army.”
    “It does not matter if we win or not. We must fight them.”

  12. Wyatt Earp Post author

    D.P. – And people wonder why Texas is getting an influx of new citizens every day.

    Jim – I saw a poll where people were asked what the country’s most pressing issue was right now. 4% of Americans claimed it was gun control. Four. Percent.

    Ralph – Cuomo wants to be president in 2016. This will probably dash those hopes.

    Jack – My search terms were “Barack Obama arrogant.” Mission accomplished.

    Fenway – No, no, no. The “commoners” can’t have guns. Hollywood and the libtard elite most surely can!

    Jon – That’s a great point. The man was gave “assault weapons” to Mexican drug lords is lecturing us about gun control. Laugh. Riot.

    Mike47 – Byberry State Hospital in Philly closed in 1990. While some of the more seriously mentally ill were transferred to Norristown State Hospital, far too many patients ended up on the streets. When we respond to mental cases, local facilities can only hold them for 72 hours. Then? Back on the streets.

  13. Bob G.

    What gets me is WHY he has to enact an EO for things like ENFORCEMENT of the CURRENT LAWS…wouldn’t that BEST se served by state or local municipalities???

    As to the rest?
    VERY unconstitutional…and TX rep Steve Stockman wants to call to IMPEACH the “great one”,…got MY vote already!!!
    But, hey, those EOs worked for FDR when he herded ALL the Japanese-Americans into INTERNMENT CAMPS (reference EO 9066).

    ANd that’s why I have nicknamed Obummer as the NEW:
    ( Even got a picture on my blog, too – very fitting)

    Roll safe and hang onto your guns) out there.

  14. Randal Graves

    Why does ANYONE in the U.S. need an assault rifle? The 2nd Amendment was meant to protect the citizen against a tyrannical government. An assault rifle won’t protect you against a tyrannical government; a tank might.

    Want to follow the Constitution? Go buy a musket. If you’re all that proficient at shooting, one shot is all you’ll need.

    You think that you’re protecting the Constitution, yet you sound just as bad as the far left wing jackasses. Go buy a handgun; if you need more than that to protect yourself from the”bad guys” of today, you’re a bad shot.

  15. Wyatt Earp Post author

    Randal – It’s not about “need.” It’s about the freedom to acquire a gun if you so desire. And that one-shot bravado is simple ignorance. Like I replied to you above, I am currently working a home invasion where three thugs kicked in a family’s door, and all were armed with handguns. Unless the father was using magic bullets, he’s not hitting – and more importantly, stopping – all three (moving) targets.

    I’m a pretty good shot, but I’m probably not hitting and stopping three armed toads who kick in my door with no warning.

    1. Randal Graves

      I totally understand your point of “the freedom to acquire a gun”. Only the extremists are trying to ban all guns. Banning assault weapons (or whatever you want to call the) does not prevent you from acquiring a gun. Is only prevents you from buying a weapon that kills many people very quickly.

      Why does anyone need an assault rifle?

      1. Wyatt Earp Post author

        Why do you need a huge house in the suburbs with a giant backyard? You have a small family, so isn’t that excessive? You don’t. But you wanted one, so you purchased it with your hard-earned money. I applaud that.

        As far as the assault weapons point, if you want to ban civilians from acquiring military-issued, fully automatic rifles, I’m all for that. Except that law is already on the books. The assault weapons Obama is talking about are semi-automatic. One trigger pull, one round fired.

        My neighbor has an AR-15. I’ve used it at the range. Fantastic gun. Now say that AR-15 has a 20-round magazine. Scary, right? My city-issued Glock holds 18 rounds. In theory, that is also a gun that could also kill people very quickly. Are we going to ban them now, too?

        And what happens when these guns are banned? That’s it, right? There’s no way some thug from North Philly with 10 priors will ever get his hand on one (or many)? Drugs are basically “banned,” and we handle about a dozen arrests a day in my division. Don’t even get me started about the homicides. 337 last year in Philadelphia, and we have some of the toughest gun laws in the nation.

        Banning assault weapons will only result in law-abiding citizens losing their access to them; not criminals. But what do I know? It’s not like I have any experience with gun violence.

  16. Smite A. Hippie

    I’m going have to start looking at houses and repatriate myself back in God’s country (ie. The Great State/Republic of Texas), where they’ve threatened to give the finger to the Feds on that (and even arrest those agents on site!)

    Long live the Republic, because God blessed Texas!!

    1. Randal Graves

      I guess the homeowner should have been a better shot, especially if they “chose” to live in a high crime area. (which they probably didn’t. but WE don’t give a shit about the innocents because we’re all NIMBYs)

    1. Smite A. Hippie

      because they’re “evil”… they are EBRs… “evil black rifles”, that while are functionally the same, have cosmetic differences that make them just damned evil, ya know.

Comments are closed.