Posted in: Politics

Treason: Executive Order Proposed For Obama Gun Control Speech Called ‘Treasonous’

NRA ad isn't about Obama's kids

COMMENTARY | An executive order proposed for today’s Obama gun control speech has been called treasonous. Political experts suspect that President Obama will likely attempt to bypass Congress by issuing an executive order in relation to gun control laws. As previously reported by The Inquisitr, this executive order would limit access to so-called assault weapons, take away high-capacity ammo magazines, and strengthen background checks for potential gun buyers as part of 19 gun control measures espoused by Joe Biden.

According to The Washington Times, the idea that Obama might attempt to bypass Congress started with Mayor Michael Bloomberg openly extolling the idea to students from John Hopkins University:

“There are steps that President Obama can take without congressional approval at any time he chooses with just one stroke of the pen.”

The Washington Times points out that this “suggestion that the President stop obeying the will of the people as expressed in laws made by Congress borders on treason.” The Presidential executive branch of the US government is intended to enforce the law, not create or change the law, which is the job of Congress. Joe Biden was put in charge of a task force on the gun control issue, and he also claims that President Obama can move unilaterally on the issue of guns and is considering 19 different measures.

An action like this would likely spark many protests from those who believe the executive order to be treason. The conservative website Drudge Report compared executive action to dictators Hitler and Stalin. The reason they make these comparisons is because, before seizing power, dictators usually seek to disarm the public of their ability to fight back before making their move. While it’s doubtful that progressives will complain about additional gun control laws, many will likely question the method by which then came to be.

While the idea of an Obama dictatorship is a conspiracy theory, it’s not a conspiracy to suggest that the executive office should not be allowed to unilaterally assault the second amendment without the full consent of Congress. The gun control debate over the second amendment hinges on the meaning of “shall not be infringed.” This language must either mean “the right cannot be violated but may be subject to regulation” or “no restriction or limitation can be placed on the right.” Studies of the word “infringed” as used by James Madison, Samuel Adams and the Congressional Committee show that the original intent of the law was that “no restriction or limitation can be imposed.”

The Washington Times points out that arguments for regulating gun ownership would logically extend to include regulating religion:

“Consider this. The original wording of the First Amendment was “…nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.” It is absurd to claim that the freedom of religion was guaranteed but subject to “reasonable” regulation. This first draft was eventually reworded to say, “Congress shall make no laws…,” thereby clarifying the intent beyond a shadow of a doubt.”

As Gallup reports, just four percent of Americans identify guns as the nation’s top problem. As previously reported by The Inquisitr, a Gallup Poll from December seems to indicate that a whopping 87 percent of Americans may agree with the overall idea of the NRA’s plan for a Model School Shield Program. When asked about “increasing the police presence at schools” 53 percent considered this plan “very effective” and 34 percent “somewhat effective.” Only 12 percent thought this idea would be ineffective and one percent offered no opinion. The Gallup poll also compared what people thought about the effectiveness of various plans, including mental health:

“Almost as many people (34%) thought that at least one school official in every school should carry a gun as those who favored banning the sale of assault and semi-automatic guns, while 27% felt that the news media should not print or read the names of the shooter. The news blackout of the shooter drew the highest percentage of those who thought it would be ineffective, at 40%, but the gun ban was a close second in the ineffectiveness rating at 36%. What also becomes clear from the poll is the public’s perception that all of the solutions offered would be fruitless, as 53% was the highest positive rating of any of the remedies.”

Do you think that it should be considered treasonous for the executive office, and specifically President Obama, to issue an executive order on the second amendment that usurp’s Congress’s authority?

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

38 Responses to “Treason: Executive Order Proposed For Obama Gun Control Speech Called ‘Treasonous’”

  1. Sal Milanese

    Treason? How the hell is banning assault rifles and requiring stricter background checks treason? Treason is you assholes that need these military grade assault rifles to take up arms against your government. You gun nuts disgust me.

  2. Kevin Davis

    Disarmament of the american people classifies as comfort!!!! To me it is treason!!!!

  3. Luis A Cruz

    Tell washington to deal with the real problem! Stop taking from the people and give to the people. What do I mean by that? Instead of taking weapons from people, weapons paid by hard working americans who have the right to, invest in the nations real problem! Invest in better education, mental counselors in schools, and help society nation wide. Mental need is the real issue here. Is washington trying to keep it cheap and attack the tools instead of the real problem? It looks that way.

  4. Corey Cricchio Kasi Shaw

    Its only a "theory" until proven true, then it becomes fact. The FACT is, Obama continually abuses executive privilidge and is acting like a dictator. No theory here…..Did I mention that he's also an idiot…
    dic·ta·tor
    /ˈdiktātər/
    Noun

    A person who tells people what to do in an autocratic way or who determines behavior in a particular sphere.

  5. Brandy Hansen

    I'm sure at one point in the 1930's someone said Hitler was attempting to become a dictator and was told it was a "conspiracy theory", that didn't stop it from coming about. Why does the media insist on putting a negative conotation on that phrase? Everything from conspiricies to science is a theory until proven. Imagine what the world would be if Einstein's Theory of relativity, or Aristotle/Galilleo's theory of Gravity had been frequently referred to as "scientific theory' in that same condescending tone. Come to think of it – they were – and think how stupid those people wound up looking.

  6. Bert Pace

    You haters shouting "Treason" are a laugh a minute. Remember when Pres. G.H.W. Bush signed an executive order banning the import of certain Assault Rifles? Did we hear you call him treasonous? Didn't think so. He's white.

  7. John Nash

    Mr. Pace, Dont attemt to bring racism into the 2nd ammendment issue. Geez, just like an Obama-bot

  8. Shawn Dickson

    Treason all day everyday think its time to end his reign….cannot let them do this….it is so twisted in theses times think they have forgotten they work for the people..we dont work for them

  9. Pat Buckley

    It's treason, and he knows it!
    This has been planned for a long time, millions of plastic coffins have already been produced and sitting in storage. Google it!

  10. Tim Moles

    This makes a mockery of veterans and what they defended, the Constitution.

  11. Sam Sirianni

    He's not banning ALL guns… He's creating stricter rules, that aim to protect the American people. It is not treason to make it illegal for us to have SAW M249 LMGs. Lines have to be drawn somewhere. Who is to say that the lines we have now are perfect? Perhaps it would be safer to have them be more strict. These rules are not to take away adults' rights to own a pistol to defend themselves, their families, and their homes. Nor is it trying to take away people's rights to own basic hunting weapons. Everybody calm down, and get grip. Tell me why you need a gun that has more than 10 bullets in a clip. Reload it, if you must.

  12. Bert Pace

    You seem blinded by a lack of light. Where was the outrage when Bush 41 banned the import of assault rifles by Executive Order? Get my point? No one said squat, until a black man makes some proposals. Just like a teatard

  13. Anonymous

    Signing 23 Executive Orders to further his agenda appears abusive and he has overstepped his Executive role. If Congress does not act now ~ than who can stop him later.

  14. Sam Sirianni

    Are you people all as uneducated and ignorant as you seem? President George W. Bush issued 291 Executive Orders in 8 years. Which is a pace of over 145 per year. -Higher than Obama. George Bush Senior issued 166 in 4 years of office -Considerably more than President Obama's 144 in his first 4 years. Furthermore Obama is on pace for far less Executive Orders than Clinton, Reagen, Carter, Ford, and Nixon… AND GUESS WHAT? NOT ONE SINGLE PRESIDENT in the Archives HAS ORDERED LESS THAN 145 Executive Orders in 4 years besides President Obama. You might disagree with the content, but signing executive orders does not make a president a dictator or treasonous. Or else every single one of our presidents has been a treasonous dictator.
    -Assuming you know how to read adequately, you may read everything here:
    http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

  15. Rob Otto

    he absolutely should be based on his repeated deceit and use of news media to misinform the public to gain political influence.

  16. Tammy Grant- Saad

    People really believe President Obama is attempting to be a dictator? Do you have any capacity for logic at all? In the next four years we are going to elect a new President of the United States. How is Obama going to stop that? Does the entire American population really need to be armed to the teeth to prevent President Obama from becoming a dictator? Not even the bluest of Progressive, Liberal Democrat would stand behind a Dictator Obama, or Dictator anyone else for that matter. Does anyone really believe the US military would support President Obama in a quest to become a dictator? I am more afraid of a super paranoid, gun toting fool with an itchy finger and supresized magazine fulfilling this senseless, foolish prophecy of Civil War or Revolution too many people are screaming about and preparing for.

  17. Tammy Grant- Saad

    Just to be clear, I fully support the average American's right to own guns, but I also think full background checks would be a smart move. Most gun owners are responsible, and sane. Even some of those who have been swayed by propaganda and conspiracy theories are rational people and would not take a human life just because. I just think we need to be more responsible as a society with who we allow to own guns, and how we enforce gun laws.

  18. Donald Fry

    Sam Sirianni
    Let's focus the conversation. George Bush eroded the constitution. This does not make a direct attack on the Bill of Rights by this president right. Our balance of powers is starting to fray, I think at least in part due to party politics that is out of control in congress. The next logical step – and the one I most fear – is the executive branch stepping in to save us from ourselves. Executive orders is one thing, overruling the Bill of Rights is a whole new level of usurping power. With the base that Bush built for forming a dictatorship, it is reasonable to challenge any further moves in this direction by the executive branch – no matter who holds the office.

  19. Scott Ball

    It is not the place of the President, to "Executive Order" legislation. That is why we have a Congress, and a Senate. Their JOB is to propose legislation. This is the same type of treasonous crap, as if a Conservative President decided to "Executive Order" a change in Roe v. Wade. It is not their job, they have no right to interfere with the legal process, and it is a step not only far beyond their bounds, but down a slippery slope into dictatorship. If a President, ANY President, can change the law to suit them by writing whatever "Executive Order" he wants, then they are not a President, but a DICTATOR.

  20. Scott Ball

    Sam, I don't question your view, but the METHOD is important here. I disagree with you, but we have that RIGHT. If any one person, can just write and order and bam, that is the new law….that is DICTATORSHIP.

  21. Scott Ball

    You don't seem to get it Sam. The President's 23 executive orders are LEGISLATING and that is not his job, it is illegal, and it is the FIRST STEP into DICTATORSHIP. Wait until he takes away something you want. It wasn't a problem before WWII, when Hitler was "taking care of" the Gypsy problem. Then the "Jewish" problem….until his Nazis came for someone you loved. Then, it was your problem. Unfortunately, they had already murdered anyone that could have helped you.

  22. Scott Ball

    Why is it, that anyone that disagrees with Obama is considered a "racist" by the liberal media, and idiots like you, Bert? It is a systematic attack on the United States Constitution, that I cannot stand. Enjoy the rights, that Veterans like myself defended for you. If this continues, you will not have to worry about enjoying them long.

  23. R.j. James

    If sombody was to break into your home and has a ak 47 with a drum with 100 rounds have fun with protecting your family with a limited capasity mag. just saying

  24. Alan Mulroy

    Americans are nuts…………no guns, no school shootings….no dead kids that we see on TV.
    What is the problem with more strenuous backround checks, to filter out people that may have a tendancy to mass shoot innocent people? The rest of the world is confused!!!!