Things That Make One Go "Hmm"

We should have an election between President Obama and the very best candidate that America's Republicans can come up with to challenge him.

That way we could get a sense of whether Americans prefer the way he has led the nation for the past four years, or instead prefer what the very best possible Republican candidate offers.

My "Strawman" is - if this President issues an executive order that fundamentally diminishes rights of the 2nd ammendment, it will be overturned by the Supreme Court......and in my mind is akin to Marshall Law. Is that clear now?

President Lincoln suspended habeus corpus and President Roosevelt put Japanese American citizens in prison camps.

Well, . . . that settles that. A President can deny citizens basic rights by executive order.

So, . . . the next question is: "Should a President deny basic rights recognized in the Bill of Rights, or elsewhere in the Constitution, by Executive Order?"

Crystal Clear.

In a hypothetical situation where this president issues an unconstituional executive order the checks and balances of the Supreme Court will overturn it. Well said.

And since we are speaking hypothetically..let me predict what will hypothetically happen in the case of any executive order this president may issue regarding gun violence: Every gun nut in the country will say its unconstituional regardless of the Supreme Court. AND If all we accomplish is requiring gun shows to follow the same rules as gun stores I'm positive we'll be knee-deep in urine and outrage from paranoid gun lobbiests. This is all hypothetically speaking, of course.

At gun shows, dealers follow the same rules they follow at their gun stores.
At gun shows, individual citizens follow the same rules they follow elsewhere.

In any case DonDiego is not looking forward to the upcoming inundation of peepee.

Better #1 than #2 ---- I guess.....

The poorly-named "gunshow loophole" refers to the fact that background checks are not required in private sales, many of which occur at gunshows. As a result, fully 40 percent of all gun sales in this country don't include a background check.

If a felon, a person who has been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric institution or someone under a domestic violence restraining order is on the honor system when buying a gun, the background check system can't really work. We need to tighten that up.

So if assault weapons were banned (bear in mind the definition of an assault weapon is sketchy) would that have prevented the crazies in Colorado and CT from doing what they did?

Unlikely as the cause for the shootings was their mental instability of which little is being adressed.

Most shootings involve illegal activity by illegally possessed weapons; so no matter what comes out of this latest effort will not end that

But It is being addressed in the same discussion group as assault weapons. I suspect part of that discussion will come back to the point that mentally unstable people can buy guns at gun shows without a background check. And I suspect the same people that want mental health addressed will object to any effort to stop that 800 pound gorilla.