List of executive actions Obama plans to take as part of anti-gun violence plan

This is a discussion on List of executive actions Obama plans to take as part of anti-gun violence plan within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by DocT65 As a physician, I'll be quick to tell you 2 things: 1. I have never asked any patient this question, as ...

Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 188
Like Tree179Likes

Thread: List of executive actions Obama plans to take as part of anti-gun violence plan

  1. #106
    Senior Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,131
    Quote Originally Posted by DocT65 View Post
    As a physician, I'll be quick to tell you 2 things:

    1. I have never asked any patient this question, as it's none of my business.
    2. If anyone is asked this question by a healthcare provider, feel perfectly comfortable in replying, "That question is not pertenant to my healthcare and quite frankly, is none of your business.". This is not information that any healthcare provider is entitled or required to know unless you want them to know.
    That's comforting. ...But what if it becomes a requirement for you to ask and document?
    DRM likes this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #107
    Member Array vanbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by tdw63 View Post
    Don't like the one about Doctors asking patients about guns in the home. This is a blatant invasion of privacy.
    Agreed, and I'll tell my doc to go **** himself if/when he asks. And instruct my children to give a more polite, but same, answer.

  4. #108
    Sponsor
    Array DRM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Near Historic Williamsburg, Virginia
    Posts
    636

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder71 View Post
    I don't see it that way at all. No offense, but your tinfoil is wrapped a bit tight today.
    No offense taken...

    But when you start putting a picture puzzle together on your kitchen table, you don't have to have all the pieces to figure out what it is.

    Mark my words, he's going for it. I hope I'm wrong. We'll find out soon enough.
    BigStick and Pistology like this.
    "...with liberty and justice for all..."
    (Must be 18. Void where prohibited. Some restrictions may apply. Not available in all states). - D. Stanhope

    D.R. Middlebrooks - Pro Shooting Coach & Custom Gunsmith
    Tactical Shooting Academy & Custom Shop
    www.TacticalShooting.com

  5. #109
    OD*
    OD* is offline
    Moderator
    Array OD*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Coopersville
    Posts
    10,659
    Quote Originally Posted by DRM View Post
    No offense taken...

    But when you start putting a picture puzzle together on your kitchen table, you don't have to have all the pieces to figure out what it is.

    Mark my words, he's going for it. I hope I'm wrong. We'll find out soon enough.
    You're correct, if you have to have a back ground check for a private sale, that means going through an FFL, that ain't private no mo.
    TX expat and 1MoreGoodGuy like this.
    "The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper

    "Diligentia Vis Celeritas"

    "There is very little new, and the forgotten is constantly being rediscovered."
    ~ Tiger McKee

  6. #110
    VIP Member Array Thunder71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    2,505
    Unless they devise a means to do so through a Smartphone for example, that simply comes back with a 'Yay' or 'Nay', I see no other means by which it could happen.

    I really have no problem doing the sale at an FFL, and I'm sure some would welcome the flood of $10/$20 transactions that would inevitably happen.

  7. #111
    Member Array DandLfam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Mid-Michigan
    Posts
    244
    Co-Worker:
    "Why do you need more than 10 rounds? What are you going to do with and assualt rifle anyways?"

    My response:
    "Why do you need a multiple purse's?"

    Co-Worker:
    "Well not all purses are comfortable in all occasions. Some fit the situation better than others"

    Me:
    "Exactly. You have your reasons for "needing" multiple purse's, I have my reasons for "needing" 10 plus rounds and an AR. Regardless if you think I need an AR or I think you need a Louis Voutton(sp?) purse's, the gov't shouldn't be telling us what we do and don't need."

    Co-Worker:
    "Ohh..... yeah guess not"
    EDC: M&P 9*2
    PHIL.4:13

    NRA

  8. #112
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder71 View Post
    Unless they device a means to do so through a Smartphone for example, that simply comes back with a 'Yay' or 'Nay', I see no other means by which it could happen.
    What could happen, private party sales through an FFL only? Of course they can happen, it'll be the cornerstone for his argument for a full database of weapons that everyone owns. Once they know you own it, you'll have to sell it legally because much like the FFLs themselves, you'll be subject to a short notice (or no notice) inquiry to make sure you still own the firearms you have on record...
    OD* and phreddy like this.
    NRA Life Member

    "I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady

  9. #113
    New Member Array Scott2187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    6

    List of executive actions Obama plans to take as part of anti-gun violence plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard58 View Post
    We have those officers in NC schools now and they r the county sheriff deputy's. They do work out good. My wife is a teacher and she likes them being there.
    Are they armed? Weren't we told armed officers in schools was the absolute worst thing that could ever be done in the history of man?

  10. #114
    Member Array Bikemobile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    69
    How wil this affect law enforcement officers? We carry 46 rounds of .40 cal at a time. 90 rounds of .223. On duty.

    If my rifle is personally owned but department inspected and maintained then what? 10 round mags for personal practice and 20-30 rounders for duty?
    PROTECT THE FLOCK, CONFRONT THE WOLF.....

  11. #115
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,768
    Quote Originally Posted by tdw63 View Post
    Don't like the one about Doctors asking patients about guns in the home. This is a blatant invasion of privacy.
    There is nothing that says you can't ask the doctor if they are having any trouble in the bedroom department with their spouse as a response to their question about your guns.

    My and my wife's doctors both know we carry guns, and teach classes. We have been to their home and carried while doing so. For most people I think my above response would be appropriate, but since my doc. will never ask, I guess I won't ask him either.
    accessbob likes this.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  12. #116
    Senior Member Array Jemsaal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    az
    Posts
    748
    A few thoughts here.

    1. 17 does NOT violate Dr. patient confidentiality. There are already laws on the books in every state that make all healthcare workers mandated reporters. In most states, clergy are mandated reporters as well. What that means (though it's a little different in each state), is that if someone is suicidal, or if they are going to commit a crime, the mandated reporter MUST inform the proper authorities. This is a reaffirmation of a law already on the books.

    2. CDC research is offbase because guns and gun violence is NOT a disease and as such, there is no mandate for the Center for Disease Control to research it.

    3. No where in these statements does it mention "gun registration." If we start yelling and screaming about gun registration out of this set of proposals, all it will do is make us look like we're reactionary, and that will turn the average person against us because they will not want to side with reactionaries. Sure, we can argue that his proposal is reactionary, but it's a lost argument on the average person.

    4. If a doc. asks me if I have a gun in my house, my answer to him is that I make it a point not to tell anyone anything I have in my home.

    5. This could have been a whole lot worse. I think the NRA and us gunowners should focus on the issue of doctors trying to teach gun control and asking about it. Also push on what is meant by doing checks on weapons seized before they are returned. Make the president spend his political capital on these issues and he won't have enough for pushing gun control through the house and senate.

    On a side note: Check your state laws before getting all up in arms about a traffic stop equaling losing your weapon for a year. That's fallacious at best and could very well be illegal for that to happen. For instance, in my state, it is mandated by law that the weapon cannot be taken from a person except during a stop, and must be returned at the end of the stop.

    Let's be LOGICAL and engage reason here before we react, or we will end up looking just as silly as those who are reactionary and want to ban all guns.

  13. #117
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,981
    All in one spot:

    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  14. #118
    New Member Array commendatori's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by DandLfam View Post
    Co-Worker:
    "Why do you need more than 10 rounds? What are you going to do with and assualt rifle anyways?"

    My response:
    "Why do you need a multiple purse's?"

    Co-Worker:
    "Well not all purses are comfortable in all occasions. Some fit the situation better than others"

    Me:
    "Exactly. You have your reasons for "needing" multiple purse's, I have my reasons for "needing" 10 plus rounds and an AR. Regardless if you think I need an AR or I think you need a Louis Voutton(sp?) purse's, the gov't shouldn't be telling us what we do and don't need."

    Co-Worker:
    "Ohh..... yeah guess not"
    We absolutely have to fight this 'what you need and don't need' premise to the 2nd Amendment. It is the Bill of RIGHTS, not the Bill of Needs. The Founding Fathers intended for individuals to be able to arm and organize themselves in order to defend themselves against tyranny, by force, if necessary. I immediately dismiss the notion that we need high-capacity magazines or 'assault weapons'. It is a flawed and fundamentally incorrect premise.

    The minute we let others, especially politicians, decide that we do not need things that we have a right to, we lose.
    Pistology and DRM like this.

  15. #119
    Distinguished Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by John Luttrel View Post
    The neat thing about Executive orders, is they can be tossed in the trash as soon as the next president swears in; just as congress had noting to do with implementing it, congress needs not be involved in killing it.
    The problem is getting that candidate who knows what freedom means elected to be the next president.

    These EO's attack freedom and overshadow the Second Amendment.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    ...
    10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
    OK. I guessing we still won't have any information on the "fast and furious" guns that they lost....
    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.
    What exactly does that mean? What qualifications does the Attorney General have that makes him an authority on the most effective use of new gun safety technologies?
    ...
    This DOJ that is responsible for hundreds of murders by ordering LGS's to sell "assault weapons" to bloody drug gangs while calling for tougher gun control is now charged AGAIN with interfering with the private sector. I smell the reek of hubris.
    There are other expansive government actions under the category of, "Know-what's-best-for-you" down to the state level where the feds already encroach.
    Several orders involve what a free society calls, "doctors", but what are increasingly slaves by the socialist name of, "health care provider" with attempts to define ACA with a view toward the current agenda. I want to see doctors stand up for freedom and not be accolytes of gun control. We need more Ron Pauls.
    Lastly, there seems to be some consideration of criminalizing the owner of record of a lost or stolen gun.
    A lot of these are creepy and possible only with the relatively new mass storage technology. Does every market revolution precipitate socialist and expansive government as did the Industrial Revolution? I say, "Hell no!".
    Last edited by Pistology; January 16th, 2013 at 08:19 PM. Reason: DOJ didn't _allow_ sales of guns - they ordered them.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  16. #120
    Member Array Martial Archer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    455
    I apologize in advance for not reading every post in this thread before replying so if I'm beating a dead horse, forgive me. But...

    I read several comments stating something to the effect of, "Well, that's not too bad". To that I say yea, it's much worse than that.

    If this....

    "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."

    doesn't scare the crap out of you, I don't know what will. Exactly who is the esteemed AG going to deem "dangerous" and thereby prohibit from having guns?
    mulle46, DRM, Pistology and 1 others like this.
    NRA Endowment Member
    GOA Life Member

Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

executive actions obama plans to take as part of anti-gun violence plan
,
firearm background check violates hippa
,

list of the 19 new gun regulations

,
obama - #18 sro
,
obama anti gun proposal pdf
,

official executive actions obama plans anti-gun violence plan pdf

,
on prozac not allowed to buy gun
,
private rifle sales across state lines
,

review of recent anti-gun actions by government

,
turbo tax antigun
,
we don't know what's in it until we pass it obamacare
,
what is the aca as mentioned in obama's anti-gun violence plan?
Click on a term to search for related topics.