14 votes

Video Update: Obama Announces Gun Control Measures - 1/16/2013

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Spread this quote

"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." - Adolf Hitler

Where's the 50 million dead abortion victims ???

That's who he should be standing next to a pile of aborted fetuses. He doesn't give a rats a$$ about kids.


"Take hold of the future or the future will take hold of you." -- Patrick Dixon

I woke up this morning.

I woke up this morning and then I saw this speech, now can someone explain to me how I ended up back in 1930s Germany? Oh wait, now I remember, everybody was asleep all the time it was building up to this. Sadly, evil never sleeps.

I hope Obama enjoys the civil war he is about to monger.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Anybody else catch what Obama said...

... starting at ~17:25? "There will be pundits and politicians... tyrannical all out assault on liberty, NOT BECAUSE THAT'S TRUE, but because they want to..."

Now bare with me, I'm bilingual (Italian is my first language), but as I understand it, what he said there, "not because that's true" in the context that he said it, with the "but" following his statement, means that he IS in agreement with everthing that he said prior to the "but", not rebutting the statments made prior. A rebuttal would have been "not because that's NOT true"

Listen to it again if you've already listened to it and tell me what you all think...

It is one of the essential features of such incompetence that the person so afflicted is incapable of knowing that he is incompetent. To have such knowledge would already be to remedy a good portion of the offense.

expert with words

As a lawyer and politician, one learns to use words in, exactly, the way you discovered, in your, very good, analysis! You would think more US citizens would be able to see through the legalese. Maybe we should call it "doublespeak"!! You write and comprehend very well, considering english is your second language!

Thank you for confirming...

...what I thought to be correct and true to be just that. I'm totally shocked that this is not a bigger finding than it is. I mean, come on, the President just admitted that his administration IS tyrannical in nature to our liberties and noone cares to expose it. This should be headlines everywhere. No wonder we're in the mess we're in.

It is one of the essential features of such incompetence that the person so afflicted is incapable of knowing that he is incompetent. To have such knowledge would already be to remedy a good portion of the offense.

The War on Firearms

has just begun. I say we stand together more than ever and push our representatives to the BRINK to vote NO on any legislation against 2nd Amendment! ITS NOW OR NEVER FOLKS; IF WE DO NOTHING, HISTORY WILL NOT REMEMBER US!

Get up, Stand up, stand up for your rights. Get up, stand up, dont give up the fight. ~Bob Marley

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?

OK who dropped the ball. Who was supposed to

Who was supposed to get pocket Constitutions to these kids and parents so they could understand the treasonous disregard for the Constitution on display.

Oh wait... Uh, never mind.

Free includes debt-free!

Not going to happen.

How many days did it take to take action? 33 days, am I suppose to be afraid. It is time to ban weapons, weapons that kill innocent children. Take them away for fools. It is time to take them away from the federal government and return control of the military back to the States.

ConstitutionHugger's picture

If gay marriage is a civil rights issue,

then clearly keeping and bearing arms is a civil rights issue. It's clearly stated in the Bill of Rights, actually.

This country needs to stand together. The liberals are guilty of the same prejudice against others that they claim is so abhorrent.

Just because I am not gay doesn't mean I don't support gay rights, and just because you don't like guns doesn't mean you should disarm me.
Just because one person commits a hit and run through a crowded bus stop, does not mean that cars should be banned.

Not Civil Right Issue... Civil Rights v Unalienable Rights...

this is an Unalienable Right Issue....

U.S. Citizens were created by the "Civil Rights Act", of April 9, 1866, and the Fourteenth Amendment. [Jones v. Temmer, 829 F.Supp. at 1226, (August 11, 1993); K. Tashiro et al. v. Jordan Secretary of State, (S. F. 12346.) 256 P., Cal. 545; May 20, 1927, Cook v. Tait; (1924), 265 U.S. 47; 44 Sup. Ct. 444; 92 U.S. 542, 549, 829 F.Supp. at 1226; 3A Am Jur 1420; 397 U.S. at 748]

Technically we are Citizen's of the several States... not "US Citizens". I know we use the term US Citizen and we know what it means to us.... BUT it means something technically entirely different legally speaking. So if you are a 14th Amendment Citizen... no good. That all came about after the civil war to give newly freed black slaves US citizenship so they could have federal protection from the States who were not going to respect them or their natural rights.

In fact, pistol permits come from this time frame. States wanted to prevent black freed slaves from bearing arms (which i do not agree with btw.) Also, marriage licenses came from this time for the same exact reason, to prevent a black man from marrying a white women. It was all bull technically! People were so prejudiced that it lead to all this non sense.

Here's a snippet I found on the internet that may help you understand the difference between Civil Right vs. Unalienable rights:

“The absolute rights of individuals may be resolved into the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right to acquire and enjoy property. These rights are declared to be natural, inherent, and unalienable.

“By the ‘absolute rights’ of individuals is meant those which are so in their primary and strictest sense, such as would belong to their persons merely in a state of nature, and which every man is entitled to enjoy, whether out of society or in it.

“The rights of personal security, of personal liberty, and private property do not depend upon the Constitution for their existence. They existed before the Constitution was made, or the government was organized.

“These are what are termed the ‘absolute rights’ of individuals, which belong to them independently of all government, and which all governments which derive their power from the consent of the governed were instituted to protect.”

In short, unalienable rights are the rights every individual has whether in or out of society.

In other words, if you live alone in the wilderness, do you have an unalienable right to “free” health care? Obviously not.
Do you have an unalienable right to till the ground and produce food, to build a house, to pursue your own happiness? Of course.
Civil rights are rights granted by the State that are not unalienable. Civil rights include such things as the right to drive and the right to vote.

Civil rights are legitimately created (at least as long as they are aligned with Natural Law) by the society to maintain peace, order, and security.


A person who believes that man’s rights come from human sources does not differentiate between unalienable and civil rights. To him or her, all rights are civil, meaning they are granted by the State.
Without this fundamental understanding, no rights are sacred and unalienable — all rights can be revoked upon a majority vote or dictate.

This is why we hear politicians claiming such things as “health care is a right.”

A person who believes that health care is a right believes that the State can give and take away rights based on a majority vote or the whims of its leaders.

Love Liberty, be Vigilant

"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Corinthians 3:17)

Faith in God will prevail all things!

Great points that cannot be

Great points that cannot be made often enough.

Wow... Now men with guns will use force against men w guns

What an oxy moronic concept this is. The government wants to use force using of course, MEN WITH GUNS against other men with guns (the Citizens)to make us safer?

Very awkward concept indeed. Those kids behind the "President" have NO IDEA what they are even supporting. But they will learn in time possibly that they were taken advantage of to force people who are NOT apart of the government from having effective options when it comes to weapons.

Wow, what a fkn state of affairs this has become!

Use kids to promote enslavement... Way to go government...way to go...

Last i looked the declaration spelled out the mission statement of government and it says:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

What makes government agents (people) any more important or capable of bearing arms then Citizens (people)?

Government is NOT a magic organization! Anyone who gives magic to the word government is against Liberty!

Love Liberty, be Vigilant

"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Corinthians 3:17)

Faith in God will prevail all things!

Surrounded by black, brown and white children and parents.

Coincidence? There is no shame with Obama's propaganda stunts.

If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one.

I couldn't make it past the

I couldn't make it past the letters from children. Gag me with a spoon.

so what exactly did he do

so what exactly did he do

there we go with the head tilting

want to f slap the bitch in the middle the most of the 3

Full text of executive orders?

Has anyone seen the full text of the executive orders? I'm ready to start analyzing.


And none of them appear to be anything, but a new way to get more gun owners identified. Nothing was stated about guns, magazines, or assault weapons!? I am more confused now, than before!


Our economy would have still been tanking, and the rich would still be getting richer... but under Romney you really think we would be losing our 2nd amendment (and our 4th, and someday our 1st)?

For all you who vote for Gary... time to bend over and take it in the bum. Remember to smile... you got exactly what you wanted.

I bet under our new dictator... there won't even be a 2016 election for Rand to win.

ya gotta be kidding!

i'm SO glad it's obama doing this. at least we've got a lot of the neocons fighting with us on this one.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Michael Nystrom's picture

It would have been exactly the same under Romney

Who are you trying to kid?

He's the man.

sad but true...

sad but true...

Mass passed the most

Mass passed the most restrictive gun laws in the country under his watch. So yes, he would have done EXACTLY what O is doing. In fact, he might have even gone a step further being a Republican with democratic support- (think Obama on expanding war)

My thoughts exactly.

All we have to do is vote more and just the right person will slide down a rainbow and crap out bricks of solid gold he will then use as the basis for our new currency and then Thomas Jefferson will be reanimated by free market science and the aliens that have been watching us will decide to make themselves known since we will have finally evolved enough to earn their respect and then the whole universe will live in peace forever.

We just need to vote for people who are on TV a lot.

Most likely, yes...

Romney was owned by the same puppet master as Obama... so I would say there is a good chance. However, I do feel a Romney administration would have prioritized setting troops into Iran before messing with gun control. No matter which order they occur in, it's still a "pick your poison" type of scenario.


Look at the gun laws Romney passed as Governor of Massachusetts, the proof is in the pudding. Romney would have been just as much of a totalitarian dictator as Obama, without the anti-war voting block to pander to. Don't fool yourself.


It's all soft administrative crap. No *direct* action taken against gun ownership/usage.


It's all about data gathering and tracking, i.e. registration.

I'm certain it will mean NICS checks retention. Likely future expansion of 4473s.

It will merge your NICS checks with to your homeland xecurity national id file.

It will remove all barriers between your purchases and your unique identifiers going forward and likely historically.

That means WHEN not IF confiscation will occur.

It will also be indicated on your childrens id file that you were an owner.