Executive orders: 'Some of them quite frankly, are humorous'

Just wanted to say it seriously hurts my head to read some of these comments, in particular those by Michelle Shelton. The lack of basic reasoning skills is astounding. And calling people "genocidalist"? You seriously need to get a grasp on reality.

Whoa!  I think I need to go back and look again.  I was under the impression that the job of a law enforcement officer was to enforce laws - I was not aware that a sheriff in Oregon was able to pick and choose the laws he/she would enforce.  Frankly, that bothers me a lot more than waiting to see what our impotent Congress may finally do, or not do.

 

Wow!

I just want you to know, I love you Michelle Shelton! Please don't give up the fight the world needs people with brains!

Of all the mass shootings, how many people that committed the crime were sane, legal, law abiding gun owners?

good argument Michelle Shelton!! its obvious you are arguing with a brick wall.......but that is even giving him too much credit.

One idea I came up with long ago was that of the Good Citizenship endorsement. It would work like the CCW in most states. The person wanting to purchase firearms, ammo, anything gun related would apply for the Good Citizenship endorsement on their license. A background check would be completed and they would have their endorsement.When the legitimate hunter wants to buy anything gun related, they could then show their driver's license, submit to a fingerprint check, the driver's license could be a PIV card with this information imbedded into the card, submit their credit card, and walk out with their purchase. No need for a background check. That was completed when they applied for their endorsement.COSTCO has a machine that asks for their card, then your credit card when purchasing gasoline. A similar setup could be in place for the driver's license and then credit card. For a person with this endorsement, identify theft could become a thing of the past. This of course means most people wanting the endorsement might not have any desire to own guns. Also, some employers might be allowed to require the endorsement. The endorsement in effect states the holder is a step short of being bondable.At the same time, a person who steals a gun would not be able to purchase ammunition for that gun, if they failed or would fail a background check. The gun control people get what they want, making it a little more difficult for criminals to get guns, with minimal inconvenience to legitimate gun owners. Would this have stopped Sandy Hook, or many of the other recent mass shootings? Probably not. Would it curb gun violence? Probably. Is it the end to problem of the violence in our cities? No, only addressing the issues of the gross income inequality in America, and restoring a sense of responsibility, that we are in this together, to our society can do that. The latter probably cannot be legislated. Still, how many lives does any idea have to save before it becomes worth while?

If some quack wants to get a gun to shoot up a bunch of people,then they will get one regardless of whatever new laws come out.All these restrictions, etc. our government comes up with only make it harder and more costly for the rest of us to protect ourselves. I consider these new regulations to simply be a knee-jerk reaction to appease those who are outraged by this latest shooting spree,as well as a perfect opportunity to grab more taxes out of current and future legit gun owners. I highly doubt it will prevent future shooting sprees,and honestly Washington really needs to focus more on curtailing thier spending/taxing sprees and get our country back on it's feet before it becomes a Third World bananna republic...Everyone will wish they DID own a gun and had ammo if it comes to that.

Sandy, you are obviously a genocidalist fascist and want to throw down the constitution of this land. You have no respect for life at all. How I know this? Your very words. 1. You have ABSOLUTELY no respect for private property. You want to take away my ability to sell my own private property that I own to anyone else. You don't want me to be able to transact any firearms related business, and don't want anyone else to do the same. I object to your driving, since there are more auto related deaths in the US than firearm related homicides. Because I disagree, that should be the policy of the land. Please go have your car sent to a landfill to be crushed and hand over your license. 2. The mentally ill are already not allowed to have firearms. The Sandy Hook shooter was unable to obtain a firearm legally, so he stole the gun he used. Because you can't wish away the millions of guns that already exist, I assume you are for mandatory gun confiscation, o fascist. Taking away the ability of people to defend themselves is genocide, and I can see already you want us all dead. None of us will willingly give up our arms. I guess the only way to deal with people like us is to round us up and ship us off to camps, for "re-education", or death. That means you are pro-genocide, anti-Constitution and rule of law. Nice. 3. There is no such thing as an "assault weapon". That is a term made up by the media to scare stupid people who know nothing about firearms. People who are pro gun: take a look at these two. This is what the other side thinks about anyone that owns a firearm. They think that WE are the problem, not the murderous scum that are already ineligible to get a gun anyway. They want you dead, and don't seem to have any bones about it.

Markus, you are such a liar I am beginning to wonder if someone is paying you to spread misinformation. There are many more thousands of non-firearm homicides in this country than there are with firearms. Taking away guns does not reduce homicide. Look at Chicago, St Louis, Detroit, Philadelphia, Los Angeles. Highly restrictive gun laws, the bulk of the deaths, both with and WITHOUT guns. I noticed you side stepped the abortion issue. Typical for the genocidalist. Handwringing for only socially approved dead, I see. When the governments into the business of deciding when someone is actually a human being, you'd best look out, as they might decide you aren't anymore, or anyone in your family. I will answer your question about guns and doctors. What are doctors for? Well, they are responsible for many more deaths just from medical malpractice alone, the #2 killer of socially accepted people. Some are also directly responsible for genocide, as it takes a doctor in tandem with the mother to murder a baby, and there are lots more of those deaths each year than any other thing combined. What are guns for? I can guarantee virtually every gun owner in this country, and every manufacturer will tell you the same thing: they are meant to defend the life of the owner and that of their loved ones, NOT to "murder". As evidenced by my concealed weapon permit, I have never committed a violent crime, and the proof is in my card. Yet I carry a gun, not to murder, but to protect. The more arms there are, the LESS violence there will be. A well armed society is a polite society, but you keep setting up bizarre strawmen and tilting at them, to make absolutely no point.

I don't want the mentally ill in our county or any county to have access to guns. I don't want gun dealers or private sellers to sell guns to anyone. And most of all, I don't want any deaths ever to happen around here with assault weapons. Is there anything wrong with that??

I have been on the law enforcement side of this of this community and a veteran that served my (our) country. I shuddered when I listen to the anti gunners and their baseless positions on taking or rescricting guns and the knee jerk position of solution is not the answer. I do hope their are of people out there can think without party affiiatIon or mental that make this work

Michelle, bravo, you proved it! You proved that guns aren't the only way to kill people. I think that's what you were trying to get at, anyways. Sadly, that's not what I was disputing. It's impossible to completely get rid of murder. As much as I'd love to, it's just not feasible. However, as I've stated earlier, most people are murdered from guns, countries with higher restriction on guns have less homicides, countries with little to no restriction on guns have more homicides. It's your decision on what's for important. Having what you believe should be your God-given right to hold a gun, or assuring the rate of homicide goes down. What's more important to you? I'll presume for the former, but, for me, I value human life above all else, and I certainly don't want to see you dead, contradictory to what you told me.

OOps, thought I put this on there. Largest school massacre is us history, not guns involved. Phew, g'nite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

I think I've made my point, while Markus has been proved a loon with his magic notebook. G'nite folks, I am going to bed.

There are lots more where that came from, but I think you get the gist. Once more with the lies: there are more non-firearm related homicide BY FAR in the US than gun related. Lies, lies lies. You don't deserve my respect, being a liar and a genocidal jackass. And yes, you are.

I'm the jackass? You're the one resorting to insults and degrading. Yes, guns aren't the only method of killing people and sadly, we cannot completely get rid of murder in the world. However, the easiest way to kill and the method that gives the greatest egregious effects is a gun. We can't get rid of them all, but we can try to prevent the deaths. That's all I want. Apparently, for believing that, I'm all the hateful insults that you've thrown at me. You want me to believe I'm just this, pathetic excuse for a human being. Facts are: Most deaths in this country come from guns. Countries that have more restriction have less of them while those that are more flippant with enforcing control face more tragedies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_massacre 90 people burned to death in a few minutes at the hands of the US Govt over a $200 tax stamp.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre

Same damned day as Sandy Hook. I am pointing this out to others that are looking at this thread, thinking that that genocidalist shill might have some kind of argument. http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/15/china-stabbing-school.html

Tell that o the 21 people stabbed the same week in DISARMED JAPAN at that school. Nearly the same result. Tell that to the millions of DISARMED Jews that were gassed to death in the death camps. Tell that to the millions of DISARMED Armenian Christians that were death marched to death in the cold winter. Tell that to the 20 million DISARMED Ukranian Kulaks that were starved to death by Stalin.Your arguments are devolving into madness. Magic notebooks? You sir, are a jackass and I don't waste my time with trying to discuss anything with them.

What is the purpose of doctors? What is the purpose of a gun?

I'll bet you are pro choice as well. 4000 babies genocided a day but you want to disarm all the rest of us over 20 schoolchildren that died at the hands of a crazy person. Where is your compassion for the 60,000,000 that died in the US since RvW?

You're right, it is possible to kill someone with a bat, a knife, or something else. That is true. But nothing makes killing easier than a gun. One is not going to stab a group of children and then stab themselves, or, at least, if they are to do that, it is FAR less likely. Imagine if there was an easier method of killing than a gun. What if there was a magical notebook that could kill someone simply by writing their name in it? If something like that was released to the general pubic, would there be more deaths? Of course! It's much more facile and fast to kill a group of people with gun than anything you mentioned.

I can give you thousands of links to thousands of authorities that refute every thing you say but you would never ever accept them. You'd come up with bizarre and irrational disqualifications as to why that could never be true. There is no arguing with anti-life, which you are.

No body gets out of life alive, Markus. That is the damned stupidest thing I've ever seen someone writing on FB. And that is saying something. The number 1 cause of death here? Tobacco. #2? Medical errors. Gonna ban doctors and hospitals? Many many more people die from unintentional falls than firearms. Gonna force everyone to carry a pillow?

Oh, yes, a source would probably be nice, too. :) http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/the-japan-lesson-can-americans-learn-from-the-country-that-has-almost-zero-gun-deaths/

Let's loop back around to your disingenuous opening statement. What change are you specifying? I can 100% guarantee it means disarming the population, which equals genocide. Period.

Well, you're entitled to that opinion. Just acknowledge that it comes with death, too.

I do not believe in anyone infringing in the right to bear arms, period. I will not ever support any type of ban. Ever.

As I was saying, you are so far from reality I don;t think we exist in the same place.

What kind of question is that? It does not even make sense?! Ok, so there were thousands more non firearm related homicides in the us. Shall we regulate bats, hammers, and hands?

Gun Related Homicides In 2007: United States: 10,086 Japan: 22 Hmmm....

Please, just answer my question.

Oh, and if you look at percentages, 11,000 gun related deaths for 300 million people versus 300 gun related deaths per 62 million GB pop it is statistically indistinguishable on a per population basis. So make some more "facts" up and get back at us, ok Piers.. uh, Markus?

Oh, my. Just to clarify, if guns equaled more death, would you be in support of restricting them?

Lies lies lies. I intend to be rude as I find your kind, the kind that want me dead, morally repugnant and I will not parse words to spare the feelings of genocidal fellow travelers. GO LOOK AT DISARMED GREAT BRITAIN AND AUSTRALIA. Overall violent crime in those countries is WAAAY up even if they don't have as many gun related deaths overall. You are also attempting to use statistics in a misleading way. You can't compare apples and oranges: over 300 million people with millions of guns versus 60 million and hardly any guns. I will always point out the hypocrisy of the morally bankrupt liars that shill for genocide. Always. The gloves are coming off from people who have figured out the score, and we will confront you, as you shill.

Whoa there, Michelle. No need to resort to insults simply because someone disagrees with you. Challenge the idea, not the person; doing otherwise comes across as rude. Facts are, countries with higher restriction on guns have less gun related homicides. Allowing more weapons will not amount to anything good.

He's still using weasel words and suggesting he is ok with infringing on the right to bear arms, so this one is a fail. Oh, and Markus, you are damned right, I want to keep my guns ESPECIALLY because of those shootings. It saddens me to see you are so foolish. YOU are begging for history to repeat itself. Populations that get disarmed get genocided. Talk to the 9 or so groups in the 20th century that were disarmed. Oh, you CAN'T. THEY ARE ALL DEAD.

Sheriff Zanni, the fact that you have a copy of the 23 Executive Orders but find #11 (Nominate an ATF Director) humorous makes me doubt that you actually read and understand the directives. President Obama indicated on Wednesday that along with asking members of Congress to pass measures like an assault weapons ban, he would be ratcheting up pressure on lawmakers to do something they have refused to do for the past six years: confirm a permanent director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Until 2006, the president had the power to install the bureau’s director without Congressional approval. But under pressure from gun lobbyists, Congress changed the law that year to require Senate confirmation. Since then, the Senate has failed to confirm any nominee by either President George W. Bush or President Obama as senators who support gun rights have used their power under Senate rules to delay votes on nominations. The president said Wednesday that he would nominate the agency’s acting director, B. Todd Jones, to be its permanent leader. Mr. Jones, 55, a former Marine who is also the United States attorney in Minnesota, has led the agency since August 2011, when he was appointed by the administration to take over in the wake of the scandal surrounding the bungled gun trafficking investigation known as Operation Fast and Furious. I don't find anything humorous about Executive Order #11.

Sheriff Zanni, the fact that you have a copy of the 23 Executive Orders but find #11 (Nominate an ATF Director) humorous makes me doubt that you actually read and understand the directives. President Obama indicated on Wednesday that along with asking members of Congress to pass measures like an assault weapons ban, he would be ratcheting up pressure on lawmakers to do something they have refused to do for the past six years: confirm a permanent director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Until 2006, the president had the power to install the bureau’s director without Congressional approval. But under pressure from gun lobbyists, Congress changed the law that year to require Senate confirmation. Since then, the Senate has failed to confirm any nominee by either President George W. Bush or President Obama as senators who support gun rights have used their power under Senate rules to delay votes on nominations. The president said Wednesday that he would nominate the agency’s acting director, B. Todd Jones, to be its permanent leader.

Mr. Jones, 55, a former Marine who is also the United States attorney in Minnesota, has led the agency since August 2011, when he was appointed by the administration to take over in the wake of the scandal surrounding the bungled gun trafficking investigation known as Operation Fast and Furious. I don't find anything humorous about Executive Order #11.

What... like Hitler?!

It really saddens me that when these shootings happen, instead of demanding change, all people want is to keep their guns. It's almost begging for history to repeat itself.