That is a press release. Not the executive orders. Here is where they keep the texts of the executive orders.
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/2015.html
Executive order
- Thread starter wyomingosualum
- Start date
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/2015.html
It's a press release by the White House. Although not the specific language, it likely is a very accurate representation of what the executive "actions" are.
You keep saying "his orders." His orders have not been release yet. All we have is a speech and press release. But to the actual point, it is my understanding that this information is already reported to the social security admin. and this measure would only make that information from SSA included in NICS database. The SSA already has a process in place to obtain this information from the legal system. The government ALREADY has this information. The orders may just force the inclusion of this information in the NICS database so it can be used in the firearm background check making that background check more complete and effective. Sounds good to me.
Edit to include : Also there are already federal laws allowing doctors to report law enforcement and federal agencies if they feel a person is a danger to himself or others. So nothing actually changes with these orders, they just encourage doctors and agencies to address the issue of firearms like they would with knives, vehicles, etc. He isn't changing anything. He is just reminding people that they can do these things.
Last edited:
I realize that, but that's the closest thing to the text as posted by the most transparent administration ever on the White House website. And they have all previous executive orders listed on the White House website, just not this one!
So your contention is that press releases by the white house are NOT a watered down version that uses language easily digestible by the majority of the public and contains NO political or vague language? That the press release is probably what the text of the executive order will contain?
Practical questions:
Who gets to determine if a person is mentally incompetent?
Will everyone have to get a competency hearing to clear them for firearm purchases or will we be dependent upon the incompetent to go seek out a test for competency on their own?
Once incompetent, can the person later get 'healed' and then determined to be competent?
If they are not competent to own a gun, will they also be ruled incompetent to own and/or operate a car?
Who gets to determine if a person is mentally incompetent?
Will everyone have to get a competency hearing to clear them for firearm purchases or will we be dependent upon the incompetent to go seek out a test for competency on their own?
Once incompetent, can the person later get 'healed' and then determined to be competent?
If they are not competent to own a gun, will they also be ruled incompetent to own and/or operate a car?
I am going to assume that it will be the same process after the executive order as it is before the executive order. Like I said before there is already a process in the SSA to get this information from the legal system. The executive order seems that it will only be aimed at including that data from the SSA in the NICS for background checks.
If that were the case, why an executive order to accomplish something already being done. Also, the press release specifically refers to HIPPA which has nothing to do with being incompetent and on disability. HIPPA only covers privacy in healthcare.
What percentage of the nation's incompetent people are already diagnosed as such? How can we catch the rest of them?
Also, how do we protect ourselves from those that are currently competent and able to buy guns but later become incompetent before they are diagnosed and can have their guns (and hopefully their cars) removed from them?
Also, how do we protect ourselves from those that are currently competent and able to buy guns but later become incompetent before they are diagnosed and can have their guns (and hopefully their cars) removed from them?
The executive order is not, but the press release is, like you said. The press release says that the definition for being engaged in the business of dealing arms is vague and courts have upheld convictions for dealing w/o a license when as few as 2 firearms were sold or when only one or two transactions took place.
I searched the press release on the whitehouse.gov website and the only reference I found to HIPAA was that the Dept of Health and Human services has issued a final rule permitting certain HIPAA covered entities to release certain information to NICS only. This is not executive order. The press release was just sumarizing the DHHS ruling as it pertained to the disclosure of information to the NICS.
The same way that if a person bought a gun and then were convicted of a felony would have their guns removed.
Every time I take my kids to the dr for an annual checkup the questionnaire asks if I have guns in my house. The answer absolutely gets recorded. Also on safety reccomendations it says NOT to have guns in my house.
If you are in the business of selling guns you are a gun dealer and should be subject to regulation. This does not cover grandpa giving me his s1 carbine from WWII.
You are incorrect. The dude said that if we can track a stolen cellphone we should be able to track a stolen handgun so that it cannot be used to commit a violent crime. Context is important.
And my point is that "in the business of selling guns" is open for interpretation by the whitehouse.
Now wait a minute. The government hasn't abused information about cell phones ever before.
Hahahahaha! Just kidding. They've abused the shit out of it. What could possibly be abused regarding gun information?
Actually it is not open for interpretation by the white house. It is interpreted in the courts. The press release even says so. "For example, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors also were present."
Didn't you just imply that a press release couldn't be trusted to say what the executive order will do?
No, he made an assumption and I told him that assumption could not be made based on the press release and the press release even stated that the courts decide that. But yes in general press releases are only press releases and I will judge the E.O. based on the actual E.O. text and not the press release.
Interesting opinion piece on physician roles and gun control.
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2016/...t-doctors-in-middle-gun-control-policies.html
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2016/...t-doctors-in-middle-gun-control-policies.html
I'm still halfway between this pandering to the ignorant masses and meaning nothing and another blow to the constitution.
Need to know more.
Need to know more.
The problem I see here is that you can't have one of your rights taken away from you without proper adjudication. You get to go before a judge, with representation, before you are found incompetent, Only then can your rights be removed.
Sure seems like Obama just thought this was too much to do.
Sure seems like Obama just thought this was too much to do.
Put me in this category. Background checks are worthless and often fail anyway. A determined, mentally unstable person will kill. If they can't get a gun, they may just use their car and take out just as many people.
We know mentally unstable people (the former Texas A&M player) can use machetes to kill people.
Similar threads
