On Wednesday, President Obama and President of Vice Biden unveiled their "plan" (being charitable here) for reducing "gun violence." Much of their sought for infringement on that which shall not be infringed is beyond what even they have the audacity to try without Congressional complicity. Many believe that such complicity is a tall order, particularly in the House.
The White House undoubtedly knows this, so rather than counting on enough members of Congress to heed his call to break their oath of office, he is advancing his agenda of forcible citizen disarmament as far as he dares by executive order--by fiat, in other words (but at least we know the adolescents at Esquire approve).
Obama signed a whopping 23 executive orders related to "gun control" Wednesday. At least one of them would appear to directly defy legislation duly approved by Congress and signed into law--making the orders illegal. Let's look at order #14:
14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
This executive order would seem to run afoul of the little problem that Congress has for years specifically disallowed such "research" in its budget legislation, because it was actually no more than an effort to slap a thin veneer of academic respectability over anti-gun activism, in order to provide justification for more oppressive gun laws.
Basically, groups like the Brady Campaign, who have railed against congressional interference with their agenda of anti-gun "science" want not only to impose draconian laws on American gun-owning taxpayers, but want them to pay for the laws' supposed justification as well. So far, Congress has seen through that, and disallowed funding for the research. An executive order mandating it is thus illegal.
Readers will no doubt remember NBC's David Gregory's open defiance of Washington D.C.'s "high capacity" magazine ban, in order to make a point about . . . whatever he was trying to make a point about on his "Meet the Press" program. With D.C. being a federal enclave, it's gun laws are federal laws (which is why the Heller case could go as far as it did, even before McDonald found that the 14th Amendment incorporated the Second against violation by state and local governments).
With the decision to not charge Gregory, despite there being precisely zero doubt about his guilt, we now know that federal gun laws apply only to us--that people who meet with the government's approval can arm themselves with impunity, while we would go to prison (or die resisting) for trying the same thing.
Here's the problem, though--if laws do not apply to the government (and friends), why should we feel compelled to obey them, either? If the rule of law is no longer operative, what is our obligation to the law?
A law-breaking government is no legitimate government at all, and has no claim on the citizenry's loyalty. So be it.
Update: National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea has much more, in "Obama gun speech shows misdirection, desperation and weakness."
- Obama budget exposes depth of hostility to gun rights, American people
- NRA 'inhibiting' political agenda, not 'medical research'
- Obama, Cuomo miss target on guns
- Obama orders: Scrap doctor–patient privacy, blame guns?
- Obama makes your doctor a spy for the federal government
- The hidden danger to gun owners behind Obama's executive orders
- President Obama signs 23 executive actions for gun control
- Obama re-victimizes rape victims with gun control
- Obama gun speech shows misdirection, desperation and weakness