Bloomberg Group Gives Obama Blueprint to Foist Gun Control Via Executive Order

It’s no secret that president Obama is angling to pass tougher gun regulations via executive order following the mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon. White House press secretary Josh Earnest admitted as much in a press briefing Monday.

“It’s a high priority and will continue to be until we start to see more progress on this issue in this town,” said Earnest, referencing the standstill in Congress on the issue of gun control. Earnest declined to say what specifically the White House was looking to enact without the consent and approval of the House and Senate, but he did say that they’re reviewing their options.

“I can tell you that they’re not stumped, they’re continuing to review the law that’s on the books and continuing to consult with legal authorities but also others who may have ideas about what steps that can be taken to keep guns out of the hands of criminals,” Earnest said.

Well, to give Obama some ideas as to what he can do, Everytown for Gun Safety released a report entitled, “Beyond Gridlock: How White House Action on Gun Violence Can Save Lives,” that puts forward five “live-saving steps” the Obama administration can advance sans Congressional action.

“The president rightfully asked what he could do to prevent gun violence tragedies – our recommendations answer that call,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety.

“The White House can take steps today to keep dangerous people with guns out of our schools, to keep convicted domestic abusers from possessing guns, to crack down on trafficking and to help federal law enforcement and states enforce the laws on the books that keep criminals from getting guns,” explained Feinblatt. “There has been significant progress at the state level and we know the president is serious about taking action – but Congress must step up too and do its part to prevent gun violence. American lives are on the line.”

In brief, here are the five recommendations:

  1. Issue guidance to ensure that dangerous people are not permitted to carry guns within 1,000 feet of a school;
  2. Issue a regulation clarifying that high-volume gun sellers are “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms and must obtain dealer licenses and comply with applicable laws, including conducting background checks on all gun sales;
  3. Instruct federal law enforcement to identify and arrest dangerous criminals who try to buy illegal guns, and to notify and work with state and local authorities when these illegal purchases are attempted;
  4. Assist states in enforcing their existing background check laws by publishing aggregate background check denial data for guns sold by unlicensed sellers; and
  5. Protect victims of domestic abuse by clarifying that convicted abusers are prohibited from having guns regardless of marital status.

To be honest, some of these don’t sound so bad (a domestic abuser is a domestic abuser, regardless of their marital status; increase efforts to crackdown on prohibited persons who attempt to buy firearms). Yet, the fact that it’s coming from Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety, one can’t help but to be skeptical because of the larger agenda in play, which is Bloomberg’s quest to Europeanize the Second Amendment.

Make no mistake about it, Bloomberg wants to gut our right to keep and bear arms. The billionaire business magnate favors bans on commonly owned and widely popular firearms as well as registration schemes and other onerous provisions that would make gun ownership a burden and turn gun owners into public pariahs. That’s clear. So, any “gun violence plan” that comes from Bloomberg has to be seen in that context.

Of course, there is the other obvious objection which is that none of these provisions would have prevented the mass shooting in Oregon. Though it’s been said 1,000 times before it bears repeating, mass shootings are a manifestation of inadequate mental health treatment, not lax gun laws. In this case, the perpetrator struggled with Asperger’s syndrome and other “psychological problems.” He also did not take his medication on a regular basis. Here is an exchange that a woman, Alexis Jefferson, had with the murderer’s mother prior to the shooting, reports the New York Times.

“She said that ‘my son is a real big problem of mine,’ ” Ms. Jefferson said in a telephone interview. “She said: ‘He has some psychological problems. Sometimes he takes his medication, sometimes he doesn’t. And that’s where the big problem is, when he doesn’t take his medication.’ ”

Once again a troubled young man kills innocent people and instead of focusing on how to help more troubled young men we are focusing on passing more laws to prevent folks from owning certain pieces of hardware. It should be apparent, but that’s putting the emphasis where it doesn’t belong. If we want to save more lives, we need to start by saving more people, that is, getting broken people the mental treatment they need. That’s the optimal way to reduce violence. When it comes to other types of violence we seem to understand this.  For example, we’ve lowered vehicular deaths by targeting drunk drivers and alcoholics — not by banning SUVs or sports cars. It’s time we start applying the same logic to mass killings.

{ 24 comments… add one }
  • Michael DIGuiseppe January 15, 2016, 1:56 pm

    I total agree with all of your comments. We must protect our God giving rights. The framers of your consution fore saw the future. They knew what was in-store for us if we don’t support and protect these God given rights. We must defeat the Dumoc raps and Odumba who want to destroy our way of life, control us,like Hitler did to the German people and those that we not of the Arian race. Obama is a radical Muslim and has pulled the wall over our eyes. He supports any people who want us to take away our freedoms. GOD PLEASE BLESS AMERICA. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.

  • Rick P October 16, 2015, 2:18 am

    I was on a big city PD for 30yrs..20 as a Detective. I agree Domestic violence is a problem, but so is the abuse of it, when police were instructed to arrest on the complainants say so, a new problem began. Complainants became en-powered to use the law as its weapon to detain their partners, while they clean out the place. I know from experience, once the law abiding people start to compromise their rights we are on the road to losing them all. Education is a better solution, the real numbers show legit gun owners and CCW people are among the most law-abiding and I deplore any violent crimes, but the campus shootings are exampled. Tens of millions of students go to school everyday at all levels with less then 1 100th of 1% chance of being killed in a mass shooting. Many more die on their way to and from school by auto and school bus accidents.

  • law dawg October 14, 2015, 4:26 pm

    This country needs the citizens to have a major tea party like they did in Boston. These types of shootings have taken place before and will continue as long as we have a weak leader like dumbama and imbeciles like him running the government. The law abiding citizens have played the states and federal government s games long enough. The knuckle heads that have been voted/ placed into positions of power within the obamanation s last two terms are self-servicing to say the least. Instead of releasing prisoners from prisons dumbama should make sure criminal s that commit haneious crimes with fire arms get the full rapture upon them. These idiots in Washington don’t have a clue of what is or has transpired in the communities involving gun crimes. The liberals in the media create havoc with their creative writing and trumped up information to create sensationalism to get people to freak out….this is the socialistic liberals commies tactics to divert the truth in order for them to achieve their agendas to suit them and them only. Think about what Hitler did and the chaos he created to disarm the citizens in the countries Germany ultimately occupied during world war two. The polish people did put up resistance and if they would of had the support quickly they would of probably beaten Hitler…the enemy here is not guns it’s the outlaws that cause the problems for all. This is why we as a nation have to fight to keep our 2nd amendment right to fight tyranny and a criminal element that’s hell bent on destroying good people.

  • hey October 14, 2015, 12:01 am

    I couldn’t agree more Jaque, however we need a major marketing campaign. About 60 to 80 percent of Americans need to understand unbiased truth to basic economics, government history, the rise as well as fall of communist parties/leaders and history of how past civilizations rose/fell in this world to even begin to paint a picture to what is happening in America in some people’s minds. I think we need to start an organization that is all about restoring the constitution first along with providing a crash course education in the topics mentioned above. Then the revolution you talked about might be possible.
    Anything less than that, I see the communist parties obtaining order through chaos and confusion during an already engineered monetary collapse. If I only had the money and knowledge of Wayne Perry

  • hey October 14, 2015, 12:00 am

    I couldn’t agree more Jaque, however we need a major marketing campaign. About 60 to 80 percent of Americans need to understand unbiased truth to basic economics, government history, the rise as well as fall of communist parties/leaders and history of how past civilizations rose/fell in this world to even begin to paint a picture to what is happening in America in some people’s minds. I think we need to start an organization that is all about restoring the constitution first along with providing a crash course education in the topics mentioned above. Then the revolution you talked about might be possible.
    Anything less than that, I see the communist parties obtaining order through chaos and confusion during an already engineered monetary collapse. If I only had the money and knowledge of Wayne Perry

  • carolinawhiteboy October 13, 2015, 4:24 pm

    As usual, written by someone who knows nothing of the subject and the effectiveness of these proposals are nil.

  • rouge1 October 13, 2015, 12:06 pm

    Facist and facism are leftwingers. They are nationalist socalist. They allow ownership of buisness with total government control. Sounds like the demacrats.

  • Bob October 13, 2015, 8:25 am

    My answer to all this kind of crap is the same every time. Will one more law on the books stop bad guys from killing innocent people? To the left, the answer is obviously YES. But with over 20,000 laws already on the books, and not even a tenth of them being enforced, the true answer is NO it will not.

  • Mongo October 12, 2015, 6:20 pm

    I’m quite sure #1, 3, and 5 are already law!!!!! 1000 feet from schools? And how would that have stopped any innocent child killing devil from hell?!? Good Lord, their suggestion is to add a law already on the books. The Gov’t already has a registry system in place; go complete the form, call it in and get your clearance, then change your mind to buy another gun. Your cleared, no problem, right? Wrong, its all about the serial number, you have to buy the gun on the application.
    Stay safe, stay armed

  • Michael McNamara October 12, 2015, 5:33 pm

    The guidelines are close to the ant-drug strategies. So Bloomberg is applying a restriction on a Constitutionally protected right based on criminal behaviors in other areas. The problem is legally carrying a gun is not a criminal behavior. If they want to decrease gun crimes (gun violence is an oxymoron) they should telling the DOJ and DA’s across America to have a no-tolerance and prosecute in every case adding 5 years to every felony with a gun. THAT would actually slow down the misuse of firearms — with laws that exist but are ignored or plea-bargained away. But more laws buys more votes and feeds the emotional Utopian into a sense something is done. The law proposal to make guns illegal within 1000 feet of schools is very challengeable in court and unenforceable.

  • Jim Alston October 12, 2015, 3:38 pm

    The ONLY way to legally add people to a “no-buy, no-ownership” list is by a court order, AFTER legal adjudication that the person is guilty of mental instability, domestic violence, mishandling a firearm or other crime of violence. I would be comfortable with a common-sense approach like that. The only other way of limiting firearm misuse is to permanently remove offenders from the gene pool.

    • Rick P October 16, 2015, 8:15 am

      We could start by executing convicted murderers and taking the loopholes out of mandatory long sentences for people convicted of gun violence. Obama is going to set the record for Presidential pardons and one is rumored to be convicted cop killer Mumia. As a retired Philly PD Detective, who was on then, and knows the facts, I am frustrated by the logic of not punishing offenders and taking the rights of law-abiding citizens as the solution.

  • Fat Hubie October 9, 2015, 2:50 pm

    Liberals whining about Citizens United money in politics want to let Bloomie buy away my civil rights. I am flabbergasted!
    Come on and get them, kiddies. ..

  • JAQUE BAUER October 7, 2015, 1:21 pm

    Wake up Americans. We are slaves to a government that was designed to be for, of and by the people. The magnitude of laws and regulations that control you would fill your living room if printed on a letter size sheet of paper. There is no longer a separation of powers in a practical sense. This and other presidents do what they want and to hell with the constitution. There are countless laws that violate the Constitution, and the governments response is “so sue us.” Obama has commited treason yet no one has demanded an investigation. The system of voting is corrupt, and this current president Obama rules as a tyrant. There is no fix for what we now call our government, not by elections, or by letters to the editor. There is only one way to restore the constitution as the basis of our government. And that is to push the master reset button and wipe out every law, regulation, and agency not defined in the constitution. Now no political party would allow this to happen, nor would those that pull the strings of our elected servants. To accomplish a master reset will take a revolution by people who believe in limited government and the constitution . This new small government can be created and modeled in software, and refined as needed until its practical and functional. Then on a chosen date and time, the new government can be implemented in real time, just as new computer networks are built in parallel to the old, and switched over at midnight. Practically it will not be that simple. But if Americans value their freedoms and wealth, they had better do something to stop this relentless drive to Communism and unlimited debt. Liberalism is a nice word for socialism, and socialism is a nice word for Communism, and Communism is where we are headed. Their are enough patriots, soldiers both active and retired, and 5 stars that could accomplish the goal of a master reset of government and restoration of the Constitution as written, and the necessary mop up operations necessary to stop subversion by underground Communist forces.

    • nelson October 12, 2015, 5:11 am

      I AGREE FULLY..

    • Nomad October 12, 2015, 9:06 am

      The socialist party wants the people to do exactly that. Resetting all but the most basic Constitutional laws gives the far left draconian powers to seize control.

      • Winston October 12, 2015, 12:56 pm

        Socialist? Finland is EU socialism which is a better version of socialism than we have in the US. US socialism is corporate elitism and entrenchment of a Police State as demonstrated by Clinton, Bloomberg, Bush II , and the GOP Supreme Court- it makes no difference as to political party.

      • Winston October 12, 2015, 1:04 pm

        You would have the Far Right seize control instead? Fascism disarms people too.

        • Mike S October 14, 2015, 1:22 am

          The “far right” label that you so glibly proffer is put upon those in this country that are fully against the fascism that abounds among “moderate” Republicans, Democrats, and other socialists. Fascists all, but not a “far right” politician in the whole bunch. But I doubt that you would understand that.

    • DC October 14, 2015, 11:09 am

      Hear hear!!

    • Rick P October 16, 2015, 8:02 am

      Jaque, I thought I could articulate, I’ve commented many times in different arenas trying to alert people of whats happening only to be frustrated by the lack of historical knowledge of many citizens. There are many similarities in whats happening today as in the regimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc. A huge complying media is manipulating the country, many think social media is factual! I just wanted to say I enjoyed (enjoy may not be appropriate) and agree with your comment. When I used enjoyed, I meant frightened by.. Thanks I’m no longer alone.

  • SuperG October 7, 2015, 1:08 pm

    I’d be willing to bet that Bloomberg’s bodyguards carry guns. That would make him an hypocrite, as well as a rich liberal.

  • Steven Jacobs October 6, 2015, 4:56 pm

    I think you really have no clue. Anyone can be accused of domestic violence! Even if there is no proof! The cops will take all of your info send it to the DA and then you have a domestic abuse charge on your record. Even if you were not found guilty of anything! I know personally! So your great idea, is not so great! We live in a day and age that just an accusation of a crime can warrant an investigation and a blemish on your record! Even if its says you where never charged with a crime. Are you going to take away someone’s rights over some fools accusation? Remember domestic abuse can be filed under a lot of different categories. An argument with a family member. An argument with a someone you live with. That’s all we need is to give some of these Nazi LE officials some more power that they can twist and contort……

    • OK October 14, 2015, 8:50 am

      I agree w/ you but I don’t think an arguement falls under domestic violence. I would like to believe that if an acusation is proven false that the “ban” of ownership wouldn’t apply.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend