Pages

  • Sharebar

With the new gun control executive orders, we have a slew of new privacy issues to deal with disguised as additional checks on gun owners. I don't want to sound like Alex Jones here, but signing an executive order to violate HIPA privacy for the sake of gun ownership background checks doesn't feel right to me. The 23 executive orders are below:

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."

Link to the full article here: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/obama-to-anno...

Discuss!

The WSO Advantage - Land Your Dream Job

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation. Learn More.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions. Learn More.

Resume Help from Finance Pros

Land More Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic Mock Interviews. Learn More.

Comments (51)

  • OkComputer's picture

    It seems like he did what he could, touching as many bases as possible, and left the big stuff for Congress where it belongs.

    TNA will probably be in soon and ruin any chances of a civil discussion though, but you've been here longer than me so you already know that

    "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." --Abraham Lincoln

  • In reply to OkComputer
    TNA's picture

    OkComputer:
    It seems like he did what he could, touching as many bases as possible, and left the big stuff for Congress where it belongs.

    TNA will probably be in soon and ruin any chances of a civil discussion though, but you've been here longer than me so you already know that

    Wow, cry a little more.

    Obama did what the government should have been doing all along. Wow, share information, follow up on crimes, pursue conviction. Shocking. Where was Obama on pushing the government to actually, I don't know, do its job in the first place.

    So let me understand something. We needed an executive order to actually have shit get done, something that should have normally happened for years now, but we are talking about additional laws and restrictions? Makes perfect sense.

    Guns are safe, statistics show this. End the drug war if you want to reduce gun violence. Plain fact is inner city black kids dying doesn't get air time like a isolated school shooting. Kids are at greater risk of dying on the way to school than in school, but irrational fear is what guides people.

    Sorry if I don't go lock step with your desire to further restrict a fundamental freedom of Americans. Doesn't mean it is less civil. In fact, your preemptive and unnecessary personal attack on me and my stance is the core of incivility.

  • BTbanker's picture

    In 2011, the FBI concluded there were 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. I say we ban hammers!!! It's the gateway weapon to guns!!!

    40,000 people die each year from car accidents.

    400,000 people die each year from smoking. 600,000 from second-hand smoke.

    What the fuck is wrong with you Democrats? If you're going to ban something, don't make it Big Gulps and Guns.

  • TNA's picture

    Gun control is just like school spending. There is never an absolute point where people say enough.

    If Obama passes every gun control measure he wants, the sheep will bleat out with joy, until the next shooting which we all know will happen.

    Then the drones will cry out for more rules to keep them safe and the dance will continue. Gun control is about gun confiscation. Any compromise is one step closer to the the destruction of one of this countries most important rights.

    First they came for the communists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

    Then they came for the socialists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

    Then they came for me,
    and there was no one left to speak for me.

  • WilliamLee2014's picture

    Thank you for posting this summary.
    Really really lame Executive order, and the Legislative proposals are typical and without imagination.
    I guess the NRA propposal to have an armed guard in school wasn't so crazy after all, since one of Obama's 4 proposals was to provide money for "resource officers."

  • TNA's picture

    Our irrationality and fear based society is what led us to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. It got us Homeland Security and is leading to the further erosion of our rights.

  • In reply to BTbanker
    TheKing's picture

    BTbanker:
    In 2011, the FBI concluded there were 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. I say we ban hammers!!! It's the gateway weapon to guns!!!

    40,000 people die each year from car accidents.

    400,000 people die each year from smoking. 600,000 from second-hand smoke.

    What the fuck is wrong with you Democrats? If you're going to ban something, don't make it Big Gulps and Guns.

    Red herrings everywhere!!!!!

  • In reply to OkComputer
    CaliforniaAssociate's picture

    OkComputer:
    It seems like he did what he could, touching as many bases as possible, and left the big stuff for Congress where it belongs.

    TNA will probably be in soon and ruin any chances of a civil discussion though, but you've been here longer than me so you already know that


    agreed on this. TNA just cant handle a civil discussion about politics
  • In reply to CaliforniaAssociate
    TNA's picture

    CaliforniaAnalyst:
    OkComputer:
    It seems like he did what he could, touching as many bases as possible, and left the big stuff for Congress where it belongs.

    TNA will probably be in soon and ruin any chances of a civil discussion though, but you've been here longer than me so you already know that


    agreed on this. TNA just cant handle a civil discussion about politics

    You guys want to get a room or something. I've been debating politics on this site far longer than both of you combined.

    But please continue making catty comments.

  • In reply to TheKing
    BlackHat's picture

    TheKing:
    BTbanker:
    In 2011, the FBI concluded there were 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. I say we ban hammers!!! It's the gateway weapon to guns!!!

    40,000 people die each year from car accidents.

    400,000 people die each year from smoking. 600,000 from second-hand smoke.

    What the fuck is wrong with you Democrats? If you're going to ban something, don't make it Big Gulps and Guns.

    Red herrings everywhere!!!!!

    Agree. But a sincere question for the crowd that's in favor of more and more gun control just to actually see what the belief is... does you guys think that gun control laws making it harder to buy assault rifles will actually stop people from getting assault rifles? And that if guns aren't as readily available people won't kill the people they want to kill? Just want to get a picture of the level or lack of cynicism on the other side of the coin. I tend to think a lot of these arguments boil down to one's faith in the human race.

    I hate victims who respect their executioners

  • In reply to TNA
    CaliforniaAssociate's picture

    TNA:
    CaliforniaAnalyst:
    OkComputer:
    It seems like he did what he could, touching as many bases as possible, and left the big stuff for Congress where it belongs.

    TNA will probably be in soon and ruin any chances of a civil discussion though, but you've been here longer than me so you already know that


    agreed on this. TNA just cant handle a civil discussion about politics

    You guys want to get a room or something. I've been debating politics on this site far longer than both of you combined.

    But please continue making catty comments.


    the longer doesnt mean the better
    ive watched enough political debates on this site. almost every time its pretty much TNA vs. TheKing or TNA vs. SirTradesaLot
    but yea, who cares. just for fun
  • TNA's picture

    And by "handle" I am sure you mean simply agree with additional, ineffective measures that restrict freedom for law abiding citizens.

    If this was about saving human lives and reducing gun deaths the answer would be simple and in the vein of freedom and what this country is about. Stop the war on drugs. Legalize marijuana. Increase policing in inner city areas. Stop arresting everyone and simply provide safety so kids can go to school and parents can work.

    Spend money to reach out to the black community to increase birth control and reduce single family households. Stuff like that. Because gun violence is predominately concentrated in these areas.

    But that doesn't get CNN coverage. No one wants to talk about that. People want to ban scary looking rifles or reduce clip sizes, yet it only takes one or two bullets to kill someone and the majority of violence and deaths are will illegal handguns, which already have strict regulations.

    Naaaa, continue to push for rules that wont be enforced, as is apparent by Obama issuing exec. orders to start fully enforcing rules on the books. Continue to act like chicken little when a school gets shot up, but ignore the daily onslaught of deaths in Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington, New Orleans, Detroit, etc. All caused by drugs, poverty and lawlessness, not crazy people with rifles.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    CaliforniaAssociate's picture

    BlackHat:
    TheKing:
    BTbanker:
    In 2011, the FBI concluded there were 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. I say we ban hammers!!! It's the gateway weapon to guns!!!

    40,000 people die each year from car accidents.

    400,000 people die each year from smoking. 600,000 from second-hand smoke.

    What the fuck is wrong with you Democrats? If you're going to ban something, don't make it Big Gulps and Guns.

    Red herrings everywhere!!!!!

    Agree. But a sincere question for the crowd that's in favor of more and more gun control just to actually see what the belief is... does you guys think that gun control laws making it harder to buy assault rifles will actually stop people from getting assault rifles? And that if guns aren't as readily available people won't kill the people they want to kill? Just want to get a picture of the level or lack of cynicism on the other side of the coin. I tend to think a lot of these arguments boil down to one's faith in the human race.


    i would say it helps prevent an average person to obtain assault rifles. And the ct shooting incident and the like will be less likely to happen. but if u really want a gun and try hard enough, u can always get one 4sho.
  • In reply to CaliforniaAssociate
    TNA's picture

    CaliforniaAnalyst:
    BlackHat:
    TheKing:
    BTbanker:
    In 2011, the FBI concluded there were 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. I say we ban hammers!!! It's the gateway weapon to guns!!!

    40,000 people die each year from car accidents.

    400,000 people die each year from smoking. 600,000 from second-hand smoke.

    What the fuck is wrong with you Democrats? If you're going to ban something, don't make it Big Gulps and Guns.

    Red herrings everywhere!!!!!

    Agree. But a sincere question for the crowd that's in favor of more and more gun control just to actually see what the belief is... does you guys think that gun control laws making it harder to buy assault rifles will actually stop people from getting assault rifles? And that if guns aren't as readily available people won't kill the people they want to kill? Just want to get a picture of the level or lack of cynicism on the other side of the coin. I tend to think a lot of these arguments boil down to one's faith in the human race.


    i would say it helps prevent an average person to obtain assault rifles. And the ct shooting incident and the like will be less likely to happen. but if u really want a gun and try hard enough, u can always get one 4sho.

    Prevent a law abiding citizen from obtaining a rifle. The ultimate goal of all this. Assault Rifle = Less powerful hunting rile, painted black with a pistol grip.

    And we are giving away freedoms to prevent lightning strikes. Lets ignore the massive gun violence in inner cities, all things which are easier to fix and might actually have an impact.

  • In reply to CaliforniaAssociate
    BlackHat's picture

    CaliforniaAnalyst:

    i would say it helps prevent an average person to obtain assault rifles. And the ct shooting incident and the like will be less likely to happen. but if u really want a gun and try hard enough, u can always get one 4sho.

    But doesn't someone stop becoming the average person when they decide they want to mow down a handful of people? I think at the end of the day even a 21 year old from white collar suburbia is going to effectively kill a classroom of kids if he sets out to do it. Just running through the stuff in my house, I could have probably done just as much damage as the Newtown kid with my putter and a hunting knife.

    I hate victims who respect their executioners

The WSO Advantage - Land Your Dream Job

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation. Learn More.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions. Learn More.

Resume Help from Finance Pros

Land More Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic Mock Interviews. Learn More.

  • TNA's picture

    Lets not forget this interesting thing called facts.

    1) CT shooter was denied when he went to buy a gun - law worked

    2) He committed a crime to obtain his weapons.

    a) He murdered his mother
    b) He stole her guns

    So a criminal obtained weapons to use in an unlawful act. No law would stop this. Nothing short of gun confiscation would have stopped this. Obama is using a horrible event to further his political agenda.

  • wolverine19x89's picture

    It does seem like some of these executive orders... shouldn't have to be executive orders? lol

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

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

    ... it takes an EO to do this? (there may be more, I just looked for two examples real quick)

    also.. I don't particularly dislike Obama, but way to play the kid angle with those four kids behind him... and reading letters from them asking for change...? What was that for? Those kids weren't exactly being specific, was reading the sympathetic letters from those kids supposed to be cute? Or were we actually supposed to listen to what these grade schoolers have to say about gun control?

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

  • TNA's picture

    I wish we could have read all the letter from the children of dead soldiers who died fighting for the ideals of this country. Those would be equally moving.

    But I expect this from Obama. Maybe if Obama took economic policy from children also things would be better.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    TheKing's picture

    BlackHat:
    TheKing:
    BTbanker:
    In 2011, the FBI concluded there were 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. I say we ban hammers!!! It's the gateway weapon to guns!!!

    40,000 people die each year from car accidents.

    400,000 people die each year from smoking. 600,000 from second-hand smoke.

    What the fuck is wrong with you Democrats? If you're going to ban something, don't make it Big Gulps and Guns.

    Red herrings everywhere!!!!!

    Agree. But a sincere question for the crowd that's in favor of more and more gun control just to actually see what the belief is... does you guys think that gun control laws making it harder to buy assault rifles will actually stop people from getting assault rifles? And that if guns aren't as readily available people won't kill the people they want to kill? Just want to get a picture of the level or lack of cynicism on the other side of the coin. I tend to think a lot of these arguments boil down to one's faith in the human race.

    The argument that "people will still kill people, people will still die" is not an argument against basic gun control laws. It is a distraction technique. I'm not a hawk on gun control, but my view is that we should have a universal set of laws, reasonable waiting periods, and require background checks for all gun purchases. Note that I'd like to also see an end to the drug war, as it would do a lot of good in terms of preventing inner-city gun violence.

    No one who is serious is arguing that gun control laws will end all gun violence. That would be silly. But, in order to drive a car on public roads, you need a license and you need car insurance. There are plenty of laws to prevent / limit smoking as it is hazordous to public health. I'm not arguing that we should take away people's guns, but let's make sure that guns stay in the hands of law abiding citizens. The funny part about the kind of red herring nonsense put forth by our BTBanker friend is that we actually DO have laws that help to prevent automotive accidents and smoking deaths. We crack down on those who don't wear seatbelts and those who drink and drive. This is also completely disregarding the fact that equating a transportation device and a recreational stick of nicotine to a weapon is completely asinine.

    Again, I understand that this won't stop all gun violence. But, why not take some reasonable steps to prevent SOME of it and to make it a little bit harder for the wrong people to get guns?

    Additionally, so many of the anti-gun control at all costs crowd have absolutely NO issue with taking away the rights of others. i.e.) indefinite detention without charging a crime against "terrorists" (brown people). They are also very often outspoken social conservatives who fight against gay marriage. So, the same group that is going ape shit about civil liberties and civil rights has no issue taking the rights of others away, as long as they are in another "different" group. Not to mention the guys like Ted Nugent that are involved, draft dodging assholes who didn't do jack shit to fight for the rights they now claim to care so much about.

    Last point - I realize that some on the left are ridiculous. "Assault weapons" is a bit of a silly term because it just basically means that the gun is matte black and looks like a military rifle, but really functions no differently from a normal hunting rifle. With that said, the macho "look at me and my sweet gun" culture that comes along with the AR-15 rifle crowd is unbearable and, frankly, pretty embarrassing.

  • TNA's picture

    One thing to note that gay marriage isn't in the Bill of Rights. We have Rights and we have things we'd like to have happen.

    Guns are a right of Americans. Marriage was never something the government got involved in, not until around the Civil War. And the same irrational fear that is pushing for gun control is the fear that led us to having Gitmo.

  • wolverine19x89's picture

    Can someone help me understand why "assault rifles" have to be outlawed if high capacity magazines are? What makes a 30-06 with a 10 round magazine any better than an AR-15 with a 10 round magazine? The 30-06 has more powerful bullets... it just looks like an actual hunting rifle. It's like banning sports cars and seizing my Chevy Malibu after I do some cosmetic work and make it look like a Ferarri... it just doesn't make sense and it makes me think twice about listening to people who want "assault rifles" banned so much when it's obvious that they have no understanding of guns.

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

  • TNA's picture

    People are irrational and motivated by fear. Handguns kill the majority of people, but right now it isn't possible to go after them. So the gun confiscation army attacks the low hanging fruit.

    You know how you bury someone alive? One shovel of dirt at a time. Same thing with removing an American freedom. One little law, one little restriction at a time.

  • In reply to TNA
    TheKing's picture

    TNA:
    One thing to note that gay marriage isn't in the Bill of Rights. We have Rights and we have things we'd like to have happen.

    Guns are a right of Americans. Marriage was never something the government got involved in, not until around the Civil War. And the same irrational fear that is pushing for gun control is the fear that led us to having Gitmo.

    ...except that Gitmo involves indefinite imprisonment and is cheered on by the anti-gun control crowd. The amount of cognitive dissonance on the far right is truly mind blowing. I do not know how their heads don't explode other than they just don't care because it's muslims and not white "good moral christian" males that get sent to Gitmo.

  • In reply to TheKing
    wolverine19x89's picture

    TheKing:
    TNA:
    One thing to note that gay marriage isn't in the Bill of Rights. We have Rights and we have things we'd like to have happen.

    Guns are a right of Americans. Marriage was never something the government got involved in, not until around the Civil War. And the same irrational fear that is pushing for gun control is the fear that led us to having Gitmo.

    ...except that Gitmo involves indefinite imprisonment and is cheered on by the anti-gun control crowd. The amount of cognitive dissonance on the far right is truly mind blowing. I do not know how their heads don't explode other than they just don't care because it's muslims and not white "good moral christian" males that get sent to Gitmo.

    I think there's too much generalizations of anti-gun and anti-gun control crowds going on

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

  • TheKing's picture

    To add: one of the biggest problems I have with so many complaints on the right is that they literally sat silently from 2001 - 2008.

    Silent on spending. Silent on war. Silent on the debt. Silent on the PATRIOT ACT. Silent on the use of Executive Orders. Etc. Etc.

    It just comes off as transparently partisan bullshit because of all the rights that were "trampled" under Bush. All the sudden we have a Tyrannical President? What a laughable joke.

  • CaliforniaAssociate's picture

    interesting to see TNA and TheKing can always pull out informational and persuasive reasonings
    pretty entertaining while educational to some extent

  • In reply to TheKing
    BlackHat's picture

    TheKing:
    The argument that "people will still kill people, people will still die" is not an argument against basic gun control laws. It is a distraction technique. I'm not a hawk on gun control, but my view is that we should have a universal set of laws, reasonable waiting periods, and require background checks for all gun purchases. Note that I'd like to also see an end to the drug war, as it would do a lot of good in terms of preventing inner-city gun violence.

    No one who is serious is arguing that gun control laws will end all gun violence. That would be silly. But, in order to drive a car on public roads, you need a license and you need car insurance. There are plenty of laws to prevent / limit smoking as it is hazordous to public health. I'm not arguing that we should take away people's guns, but let's make sure that guns stay in the hands of law abiding citizens. The funny part about the kind of red herring nonsense put forth by our BTBanker friend is that we actually DO have laws that help to prevent automotive accidents and smoking deaths. We crack down on those who don't wear seatbelts and those who drink and drive. This is also completely disregarding the fact that equating a transportation device and a recreational stick of nicotine to a weapon is completely asinine.

    Again, I understand that this won't stop all gun violence. But, why not take some reasonable steps to prevent SOME of it and to make it a little bit harder for the wrong people to get guns?

    Additionally, so many of the anti-gun control at all costs crowd have absolutely NO issue with taking away the rights of others. i.e.) indefinite detention without charging a crime against "terrorists" (brown people). They are also very often outspoken social conservatives who fight against gay marriage. So, the same group that is going ape shit about civil liberties and civil rights has no issue taking the rights of others away, as long as they are in another "different" group. Not to mention the guys like Ted Nugent that are involved, draft dodging assholes who didn't do jack shit to fight for the rights they now claim to care so much about.

    Last point - I realize that some on the left are ridiculous. "Assault weapons" is a bit of a silly term because it just basically means that the gun is matte black and looks like a military rifle, but really functions no differently from a normal hunting rifle. With that said, the macho "look at me and my sweet gun" culture that comes along with the AR-15 rifle crowd is unbearable and, frankly, pretty embarrassing.

    I like this argument because it actually makes sense. I would argue though that the gun control debate is one that very few if any of us should really care about just because we probably wouldn't have a problem obtaining a gun (even legally) if we wanted one. But where I start to have a problem is that it's an inefficient use of our tax dollars to enforce something that I think very few would argue is effectively enforceable, and the government could probably be spending its time on things that would be a lot more beneficial for the people/save more American lives than tighter gun restrictions. Like you said, far more lives are cut short by auto accidents and things like that, but we already have traffic laws and safety standards that help with that. Which brings me to my personal take on the matter - maybe lots of this stuff is a waste of time. Maybe the faggots in DC should be fixing the debt ceiling and gosh, I dunno, spending more time enabling the private sector to do their jobs?! If anything's been proven time and time again, it's that nothing the public sector does is ever successful, so they should stick to facilitating the private side, where the smart kids hang out.

    And the "assault weapons" thing is hysterical. Love how people will just go after whatever was the cause of the most recent problem. Again, my shotgun with a box magazine conversion would do wayyyyyy more damage than a similarly equipped assault rifle in a public area. Might as well get rid of all guns if you wanna put a Band-Aid on us and claim the problem's solved.

    I hate victims who respect their executioners

  • In reply to wolverine19x89
    TheKing's picture

    wolverine19x89:
    TheKing:
    TNA:
    One thing to note that gay marriage isn't in the Bill of Rights. We have Rights and we have things we'd like to have happen.

    Guns are a right of Americans. Marriage was never something the government got involved in, not until around the Civil War. And the same irrational fear that is pushing for gun control is the fear that led us to having Gitmo.

    ...except that Gitmo involves indefinite imprisonment and is cheered on by the anti-gun control crowd. The amount of cognitive dissonance on the far right is truly mind blowing. I do not know how their heads don't explode other than they just don't care because it's muslims and not white "good moral christian" males that get sent to Gitmo.

    I think there's too much generalizations of anti-gun and anti-gun control crowds going on

    If you are anti-gun control of any kind but also anti-gitmo, you are in the minority.

    I also believe that I'm in the minority when it comes to the gun control crowd because I'm not even asking for any bans on "assault weapons," because I realize that it's a drummed up word. I simply think that universal background checks and waiting periods are worthwhile.

    There will always be tragedy, that comes with a free society. That doesn't mean we can't take some common-sense steps towards better regulating a system while encouraging freedoms for law abiding citizens.

  • In reply to TheKing
    TNA's picture

    TheKing:
    TNA:
    One thing to note that gay marriage isn't in the Bill of Rights. We have Rights and we have things we'd like to have happen.

    Guns are a right of Americans. Marriage was never something the government got involved in, not until around the Civil War. And the same irrational fear that is pushing for gun control is the fear that led us to having Gitmo.

    ...except that Gitmo involves indefinite imprisonment and is cheered on by the anti-gun control crowd. The amount of cognitive dissonance on the far right is truly mind blowing. I do not know how their heads don't explode other than they just don't care because it's muslims and not white "good moral christian" males that get sent to Gitmo.

    C'mon now. Plenty of people who pull the lever for Democrats have little sympathy for Gitmo and bombings. NYC overwhelmingly voted for Obama, but probably support all the strong arm measures. Look at Bloombergs Constitutionally bullshit "Stop and Frisk" policy which keeps NYC safe (which is grey zone allowed I suppose).

    And I suppose one could argue that the Constitution protects Americans, not foreign nationals.

    Plenty of cognitive dissonance on the left. A bunch of highly educated white people who support gay marriage and green energy, voted into office by people who are not educated, don't support gay marriage and are impacted by the higher costs associated with green energy.

    I am 100% supportive of solar and wind. I don't care if my energy bill doubles or my food prices triple. I can afford it. But you know who bitches? Poor people.

    Can Republicans and Democrats just merge into a group that disenfranchises all poor (Dem Voters) and dumb (Republican Voters) people with a bifurcated freedom structure?

  • In reply to BlackHat
    CaliforniaAssociate's picture

    BlackHat:
    TheKing:
    The argument that "people will still kill people, people will still die" is not an argument against basic gun control laws. It is a distraction technique. I'm not a hawk on gun control, but my view is that we should have a universal set of laws, reasonable waiting periods, and require background checks for all gun purchases. Note that I'd like to also see an end to the drug war, as it would do a lot of good in terms of preventing inner-city gun violence.

    No one who is serious is arguing that gun control laws will end all gun violence. That would be silly. But, in order to drive a car on public roads, you need a license and you need car insurance. There are plenty of laws to prevent / limit smoking as it is hazordous to public health. I'm not arguing that we should take away people's guns, but let's make sure that guns stay in the hands of law abiding citizens. The funny part about the kind of red herring nonsense put forth by our BTBanker friend is that we actually DO have laws that help to prevent automotive accidents and smoking deaths. We crack down on those who don't wear seatbelts and those who drink and drive. This is also completely disregarding the fact that equating a transportation device and a recreational stick of nicotine to a weapon is completely asinine.

    Again, I understand that this won't stop all gun violence. But, why not take some reasonable steps to prevent SOME of it and to make it a little bit harder for the wrong people to get guns?

    Additionally, so many of the anti-gun control at all costs crowd have absolutely NO issue with taking away the rights of others. i.e.) indefinite detention without charging a crime against "terrorists" (brown people). They are also very often outspoken social conservatives who fight against gay marriage. So, the same group that is going ape shit about civil liberties and civil rights has no issue taking the rights of others away, as long as they are in another "different" group. Not to mention the guys like Ted Nugent that are involved, draft dodging assholes who didn't do jack shit to fight for the rights they now claim to care so much about.

    Last point - I realize that some on the left are ridiculous. "Assault weapons" is a bit of a silly term because it just basically means that the gun is matte black and looks like a military rifle, but really functions no differently from a normal hunting rifle. With that said, the macho "look at me and my sweet gun" culture that comes along with the AR-15 rifle crowd is unbearable and, frankly, pretty embarrassing.

    I like this argument because it actually makes sense. I would argue though that the gun control debate is one that very few if any of us should really care about just because we probably wouldn't have a problem obtaining a gun (even legally) if we wanted one. But where I start to have a problem is that it's an inefficient use of our tax dollars to enforce something that I think very few would argue is effectively enforceable, and the government could probably be spending its time on things that would be a lot more beneficial for the people/save more American lives than tighter gun restrictions. Like you said, far more lives are cut short by auto accidents and things like that, but we already have traffic laws and safety standards that help with that. Which brings me to my personal take on the matter - maybe lots of this stuff is a waste of time. Maybe the faggots in DC should be fixing the debt ceiling and gosh, I dunno, spending more time enabling the private sector to do their jobs?! If anything's been proven time and time again, it's that nothing the public sector does is ever successful, so they should stick to facilitating the private side, where the smart kids hang out.

    And the "assault weapons" thing is hysterical. Love how people will just go after whatever was the cause of the most recent problem. Again, my shotgun with a box magazine conversion would do wayyyyyy more damage than a similarly equipped assault rifle in a public area. Might as well get rid of all guns if you wanna put a Band-Aid on us and claim the problem's solved.


    kinda agree with this
    it will potentially be a huge waste of money and lead to marginal improvement
  • In reply to TheKing
    TNA's picture

    TheKing:
    To add: one of the biggest problems I have with so many complaints on the right is that they literally sat silently from 2001 - 2008.

    Silent on spending. Silent on war. Silent on the debt. Silent on the PATRIOT ACT. Silent on the use of Executive Orders. Etc. Etc.

    It just comes off as transparently partisan bullshit because of all the rights that were "trampled" under Bush. All the sudden we have a Tyrannical President? What a laughable joke.


    http://www.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-app...

    Bush had a 90% approval rating. You think Congress is going to buck him (which it should have). The sheep called for blood and blood was given.

    I just finished reading Fiasco and the real scumbags of the Iraq war were Wolfowitz, Brenner and Rumsfeld.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wolfowitz

    This piece of trash is a traitor to the USA and should be brought to trial. All reports showed that Bush, pre 9/11 and pre Wolfowitz had no desire to get into Iraq.

  • TNA's picture

    What I think the saddest side effect of all of this will be is the stigma that mental illness is getting. Just wait until we require doctors (thanks Obamacare) to report mental illness or duress and it prevents people from getting guns.

    Already done with the MIB. Go to the doctors and have potential cancer indications? Reported to the MIB and good luck trying to get insurance (life/health). Same will happen. Depressed cause your dog died? No gun for you.

    Further stripping rights away. While I agree mental illness needs to be focused on, normal people get bummed out. I think you will see people avoid much needed help out of the fear that it will be reported. Only only needs to look at the military to see this in action.

  • In reply to TNA
    TheKing's picture

    TNA:
    C'mon now. Plenty of people who pull the lever for Democrats have little sympathy for Gitmo and bombings. NYC overwhelmingly voted for Obama, but probably support all the strong arm measures. Look at Bloombergs Constitutionally bullshit "Stop and Frisk" policy which keeps NYC safe (which is grey zone allowed I suppose).

    And I suppose one could argue that the Constitution protects Americans, not foreign nationals.

    Plenty of cognitive dissonance on the left. A bunch of highly educated white people who support gay marriage and green energy, voted into office by people who are not educated, don't support gay marriage and are impacted by the higher costs associated with green energy.

    I am 100% supportive of solar and wind. I don't care if my energy bill doubles or my food prices triple. I can afford it. But you know who bitches? Poor people.

    Can Republicans and Democrats just merge into a group that disenfranchises all poor (Dem Voters) and dumb (Republican Voters) people with a bifurcated freedom structure?

    I agree with much of what you said. I guess the proper conclusion would be that most people are dumb and don't think very hard about what they believe or why they believe it and just want to be told what they can or can't do (until it's something that impedes them.)

    It's actually deeply depressing, but I suppose it's nothing new.

    I do think that many people who are pro-renewable energy aren't anti-fossil fuels, though. But, again, I suppose it's a minority of folks who just want to do anything we can to find a long-term solution while most people fall into buckets like sheep.

    One last thing - I'd argue that we already do have a bifurcated freedom structure. If you have a fuck-ton of money, you already live by a different set of rules. If you don't, best of luck to you, because you're going to need it.

  • In reply to CaliforniaAssociate
    duffmt6's picture

    CaliforniaAnalyst:
    BlackHat:
    TheKing:
    The argument that "people will still kill people, people will still die" is not an argument against basic gun control laws. It is a distraction technique. I'm not a hawk on gun control, but my view is that we should have a universal set of laws, reasonable waiting periods, and require background checks for all gun purchases. Note that I'd like to also see an end to the drug war, as it would do a lot of good in terms of preventing inner-city gun violence.

    No one who is serious is arguing that gun control laws will end all gun violence. That would be silly. But, in order to drive a car on public roads, you need a license and you need car insurance. There are plenty of laws to prevent / limit smoking as it is hazordous to public health. I'm not arguing that we should take away people's guns, but let's make sure that guns stay in the hands of law abiding citizens. The funny part about the kind of red herring nonsense put forth by our BTBanker friend is that we actually DO have laws that help to prevent automotive accidents and smoking deaths. We crack down on those who don't wear seatbelts and those who drink and drive. This is also completely disregarding the fact that equating a transportation device and a recreational stick of nicotine to a weapon is completely asinine.

    Again, I understand that this won't stop all gun violence. But, why not take some reasonable steps to prevent SOME of it and to make it a little bit harder for the wrong people to get guns?

    Additionally, so many of the anti-gun control at all costs crowd have absolutely NO issue with taking away the rights of others. i.e.) indefinite detention without charging a crime against "terrorists" (brown people). They are also very often outspoken social conservatives who fight against gay marriage. So, the same group that is going ape shit about civil liberties and civil rights has no issue taking the rights of others away, as long as they are in another "different" group. Not to mention the guys like Ted Nugent that are involved, draft dodging assholes who didn't do jack shit to fight for the rights they now claim to care so much about.

    Last point - I realize that some on the left are ridiculous. "Assault weapons" is a bit of a silly term because it just basically means that the gun is matte black and looks like a military rifle, but really functions no differently from a normal hunting rifle. With that said, the macho "look at me and my sweet gun" culture that comes along with the AR-15 rifle crowd is unbearable and, frankly, pretty embarrassing.

    I like this argument because it actually makes sense. I would argue though that the gun control debate is one that very few if any of us should really care about just because we probably wouldn't have a problem obtaining a gun (even legally) if we wanted one. But where I start to have a problem is that it's an inefficient use of our tax dollars to enforce something that I think very few would argue is effectively enforceable, and the government could probably be spending its time on things that would be a lot more beneficial for the people/save more American lives than tighter gun restrictions. Like you said, far more lives are cut short by auto accidents and things like that, but we already have traffic laws and safety standards that help with that. Which brings me to my personal take on the matter - maybe lots of this stuff is a waste of time. Maybe the faggots in DC should be fixing the debt ceiling and gosh, I dunno, spending more time enabling the private sector to do their jobs?! If anything's been proven time and time again, it's that nothing the public sector does is ever successful, so they should stick to facilitating the private side, where the smart kids hang out.

    And the "assault weapons" thing is hysterical. Love how people will just go after whatever was the cause of the most recent problem. Again, my shotgun with a box magazine conversion would do wayyyyyy more damage than a similarly equipped assault rifle in a public area. Might as well get rid of all guns if you wanna put a Band-Aid on us and claim the problem's solved.


    kinda agree with this
    it will potentially be a huge waste of money and lead to marginal improvement

    I would be interested to see the eventual costs for these orders, but I imagine they would be pretty marginal.

    If anything comes out of all this, hopefully it will be some beneficial research and awareness on mental health in America.

    "For I am a sinner in the hands of an angry God. Bloody Mary full of vodka, blessed are you among cocktails. Pray for me now and at the hour of my death, which I hope is soon. Amen."

  • In reply to TheKing
    wolverine19x89's picture

    TheKing:
    wolverine19x89:
    TheKing:
    TNA:
    One thing to note that gay marriage isn't in the Bill of Rights. We have Rights and we have things we'd like to have happen.

    Guns are a right of Americans. Marriage was never something the government got involved in, not until around the Civil War. And the same irrational fear that is pushing for gun control is the fear that led us to having Gitmo.

    ...except that Gitmo involves indefinite imprisonment and is cheered on by the anti-gun control crowd. The amount of cognitive dissonance on the far right is truly mind blowing. I do not know how their heads don't explode other than they just don't care because it's muslims and not white "good moral christian" males that get sent to Gitmo.

    I think there's too much generalizations of anti-gun and anti-gun control crowds going on

    If you are anti-gun control of any kind but also anti-gitmo, you are in the minority.

    I also believe that I'm in the minority when it comes to the gun control crowd because I'm not even asking for any bans on "assault weapons," because I realize that it's a drummed up word. I simply think that universal background checks and waiting periods are worthwhile.

    There will always be tragedy, that comes with a free society. That doesn't mean we can't take some common-sense steps towards better regulating a system while encouraging freedoms for law abiding citizens.

    yeah I read what you said wrong, I didn't know when you meant "anti-gun control" you mean people that want absolutely no gun control. As for universal background checks and waiting periods while not banning assault rifles, according to one survey that Obama even mentioned (and I've seen before), most people in the NRA agree on the background checks part.

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

  • In reply to wolverine19x89
    TheKing's picture

    wolverine19x89:
    yeah I read what you said wrong, I didn't know when you meant "anti-gun control" you mean people that want absolutely no gun control. As for universal background checks and waiting periods while not banning assault rifles, according to one survey that Obama even mentioned (and I've seen before), most people in the NRA agree on the background checks part.

    Oh yeah, that's for sure. The problem is that the guys that run the NRA, including Wayne LaPierre, seem more eager to serve the gun manufacturers than their members and gun owners at large. It's really disappointing. As with so many issues in gov't, big time money is corrupting.

  • Amphipathic's picture

    GSElevator: #1: If guns were illegal, no one would get shot. Sort of like how no one can buy drugs.

  • In reply to duffmt6
    BlackHat's picture

    duffmt6:

    If anything comes out of all this, hopefully it will be some beneficial research and awareness on mental health in America.

    Sadly I fear this won't be the case... I'm afraid it might be the opposite. Well, come to think of it, the awareness will increase, but the stigma is going to keep increasing as people continue to point to signs of depression or mental illness as reasons why someone "snapped" or is horribly disturbed. Mental illness has enough of a bad rep as it is, we don't need people continually pointing to it saying "save the mentally ill! They don't want to shoot up schools but they can't help it!" It's a very small fraction of people that end up that way, yet every kid who lets slip that they're depressed is going to get lumped into that bucket of people. That doesn't make for a very natural childhood/adolescence and any benefit from additional research won't be enough to offset that. We missed the boat on nipping the mental illness thing in the bud, and we're kind of fucking up the damage control part too.

    I hate victims who respect their executioners

  • lasampdoria's picture

    Sad day for America.

    "Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."- Benjamin Franklin

  • In reply to BlackHat
    West Coast rainmaker's picture

    BlackHat:
    TheKing:
    The argument that "people will still kill people, people will still die" is not an argument against basic gun control laws. It is a distraction technique. I'm not a hawk on gun control, but my view is that we should have a universal set of laws, reasonable waiting periods, and require background checks for all gun purchases. Note that I'd like to also see an end to the drug war, as it would do a lot of good in terms of preventing inner-city gun violence.

    No one who is serious is arguing that gun control laws will end all gun violence. That would be silly. But, in order to drive a car on public roads, you need a license and you need car insurance. There are plenty of laws to prevent / limit smoking as it is hazordous to public health. I'm not arguing that we should take away people's guns, but let's make sure that guns stay in the hands of law abiding citizens. The funny part about the kind of red herring nonsense put forth by our BTBanker friend is that we actually DO have laws that help to prevent automotive accidents and smoking deaths. We crack down on those who don't wear seatbelts and those who drink and drive. This is also completely disregarding the fact that equating a transportation device and a recreational stick of nicotine to a weapon is completely asinine.

    Again, I understand that this won't stop all gun violence. But, why not take some reasonable steps to prevent SOME of it and to make it a little bit harder for the wrong people to get guns?

    Additionally, so many of the anti-gun control at all costs crowd have absolutely NO issue with taking away the rights of others. i.e.) indefinite detention without charging a crime against "terrorists" (brown people). They are also very often outspoken social conservatives who fight against gay marriage. So, the same group that is going ape shit about civil liberties and civil rights has no issue taking the rights of others away, as long as they are in another "different" group. Not to mention the guys like Ted Nugent that are involved, draft dodging assholes who didn't do jack shit to fight for the rights they now claim to care so much about.

    Last point - I realize that some on the left are ridiculous. "Assault weapons" is a bit of a silly term because it just basically means that the gun is matte black and looks like a military rifle, but really functions no differently from a normal hunting rifle. With that said, the macho "look at me and my sweet gun" culture that comes along with the AR-15 rifle crowd is unbearable and, frankly, pretty embarrassing.

    I like this argument because it actually makes sense. I would argue though that the gun control debate is one that very few if any of us should really care about just because we probably wouldn't have a problem obtaining a gun (even legally) if we wanted one. But where I start to have a problem is that it's an inefficient use of our tax dollars to enforce something that I think very few would argue is effectively enforceable, and the government could probably be spending its time on things that would be a lot more beneficial for the people/save more American lives than tighter gun restrictions. Like you said, far more lives are cut short by auto accidents and things like that, but we already have traffic laws and safety standards that help with that. Which brings me to my personal take on the matter - maybe lots of this stuff is a waste of time. Maybe the faggots in DC should be fixing the debt ceiling and gosh, I dunno, spending more time enabling the private sector to do their jobs?! If anything's been proven time and time again, it's that nothing the public sector does is ever successful, so they should stick to facilitating the private side, where the smart kids hang out.

    And the "assault weapons" thing is hysterical. Love how people will just go after whatever was the cause of the most recent problem. Again, my shotgun with a box magazine conversion would do wayyyyyy more damage than a similarly equipped assault rifle in a public area. Might as well get rid of all guns if you wanna put a Band-Aid on us and claim the problem's solved.

    This really makes a lot of sense. As tragic as Sandy Hook was, it is really not statistically significant. Nor are mass shootings on the rise - violence in schools has trended downwards for years now. I think reasonable background checks and waiting periods are fine. Unfortunately, the guy who goes on a rampage is probably not the guy who fills out the paperwork, takes a firearms safety course, etc.

    However, probing medical records is concerning...psychological illnesses are over-diagnosed already. Seems like it could become a CYA type thing for doctors. Do you want to be the doctor who didn't prevent [shooter] from going on a rampage? No? Better diagnose them with something then.

    If we really think gun violence (and violent crime in general) is a social problem, we need to end the drug war. I am a pro-personal responsibility guy, but even I can see the social effects of the drug war.

    I favor few, but strictly enforced, laws. If it can't be reliably enforced, then it shouldn't be a law. This is why I think concealed carry bans are ridiculous. You will not find out unless (a) you search everybody, or (b) that person draws their gun. And if they draw their gun, they are either going to be a hero, or will be going to jail for something much worse than illegally carrying a weapon.

    And assault weapon bans are ridiculous. Only somebody like Nancy Pelosi would think such a law is useful. They are not automatic weapons. They just look scary.

  • In reply to TheKing
    wolverine19x89's picture

    To unlock this content for free, please login / register below.

    Sign In with Facebook Sign In with Google

    Connecting helps us build a vibrant community. We'll never share your info without your permission. Sign up with email or if you are already a member, login here Bonus: Also get 6 free financial modeling lessons for free ($200+ value) when you register!

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

  • wolverine19x89's picture

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    kraziazi's picture

    This could be it, sweetheart.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    kraziazi's picture

    This could be it, sweetheart.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    kraziazi's picture

    This could be it, sweetheart.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    kraziazi's picture

    This could be it, sweetheart.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    kraziazi's picture

    This could be it, sweetheart.

  • In reply to BlackHat
    kraziazi's picture

    This could be it, sweetheart.

  • wolverine19x89's picture

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

Pages