Barack Obama is once again circumventing the legislative process in order to push his administration’s unpopular leftist agenda. First, it was illegal immigration, then transgender bathrooms. This time, it’s guns.
Earlier this year, the White House announced new policies for those receiving social security benefits in conjunction with the president’s January 5th executive order on gun ownership. When it was released, few seemed to notice that the order allowed the administration to withhold Second Amendment rights from those who collect social security.
The move makes little logical sense. Social Security beneficiaries have never proven themselves as particularly violent or incapable of gun ownership. Instead, it seems as if this is part of Obama’s larger plan to slowly and surreptitiously restrict gun ownership whenever and wherever possible.
The administration was likely hoping that this slow creep of new regulations would go unnoticed until it was too late to be repealed. Fortunately, the watchful eyes of conservative media caught them in the act.
See Obama’s secret gun ban on the next page:
He can wipe his$#%&!@*with his executive orders . In a few months he will be gone and so will his executive orders .
Does anybody actually read what these things say or just the inflammatory, untrue headline. This has to do with people who have either been judged incompetent or are collecting disability because of mental incompetence. Do you really want mentally incompetent people owning guns?
I want the EO number on this. It’s pretty easy to look it up and verify one way or the other.
That boy’s been busy the last few days. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/search?conditions%5Bpublication_date%5D%5Bgte%5D=10%2F28%2F2015&conditions%5Bterm%5D=Executive+Orders&order=newest&page=1#
Nonsense.
Moron Labe you big eared$#%&!@*
The restriction limits SSI beneficiaries diagnosed with mental illness from buying firearms…..that’s crazy!
He needs booted out of office now!!!!!
Let’s just take a chill pill here and understand the entire context. I am absolutely pro gun ownership, however there are people out there that lack capacity to be responsible gun owners. The rule in the article only excluded Social Security receipients who are disabled to the degree that they are incapable of even handling their own finances. Think about that. If someone is so mentally ill or disabled by stroke, Alzheimers, ALS, or other diseases that they cannot even manage a checking account or responsibly handle money, do you think it’s rational and safe to allow them to purchase guns? We cannot put on pro 2nd Amendment blinders and fool ourselves into believing that everyone is a safe gun owner because they’re still breathing. There has to be rational, logical discussion of the issues and recognition of situations in which people are unfortunately too impaired for responsible gun ownership. This rule does NOT take gun rights away from all senior or disabled people – only those whose disability is so severe that they are incapable of handling their own finances.
Truth and Action again distorting the truth. Wow doesn’t suprise me though. C’mon get real and quit spreading BS. How can you call yourselves journalists? Maybe read the intent of the bill to your audience and let them find the TRUTH in the bill that you so blatantly ignore.