Carney: Obama Implementing Executive Actions Following Navy Yard Shooting

[big_dog]

Source: CBS Washington DC

In the wake of the shooting at the Navy Yard, Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president is implementing executive actions and reiterated his commitment to strengthening gun laws, including expanding background checks to sales online and at gun shows. “The president supports, as do an overwhelming majority of Americans, common-sense measures to reduce gun violence,” Carney said. Obama didn’t mention gun control as he addressed the Navy Yard shooting from the White House, promising to pursue “whoever carried out this cowardly act.”

“We are confronting yet another mass shooting, and today it happened on a military installation in our nation’s capital,” Obama said. “It’s a shooting that targeted our military and civilian personnel. These are men and women who were going to work, doing their job protecting all of us. They’re patriots, and they know the dangers of serving abroad, but today they faced the unimaginable violence that they wouldn’t have expected here at home.”

Read more: http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/09/17/carney-obama-implementing-executive-actions-following-navy-yard-shooting/

[global1]

1. What Are The Executive Actions Is PBO Implementing?......nt

[AnotherMcIntosh]

29. Good question. He could ban loaded firearms at military bases. Or ban firearms altogether.

/facetiousness off

[jmowreader]

38. Loaded firearms at military bases are already banned

[AnotherMcIntosh]

40. Then, according to the reasoning of some, the guns should be banned.

Ban them all, some say.

[AllyCat]

2. Because the background checks worked SO WELL this time, lets expand them

so more criminals can have top security clearances and more guns!!

[MynameisBlarney]

3. So, what would you suggest?

eom

[sulphurdunn]

4. I would suggest to immediately

begin the process of reducing private contracting to only areas of expertise for which the government cannot train and hire public servants.

[Marrah_G]

17. Something needs to change

I can totally agree with taking the private company out of it though. My son would still want to do his job even if it was working directly for the government.

Also alot of these are desk jobs that are being done by people who want to do the job but maybe also don't want to be a full time soldier/sailor/airman/marine.

Background checks for gun is a must. Criminal and mental health checks are a must.

[murielm99]

30. Good idea. n/t

[kardonb]

6. guns

I would also prohibit gun sales at garage- and estate sales . There is absolutely NO control over who buys them at these events . Put serious penalties on those that disobey this rule . Pull licenses from estate sale firms that do not comply . I had one agent laugh in my face when I asked if he does a background check on the purchasers of the guns he had on sale .

[NickB79]

9. That was part of the last gun control package that failed to pass

It would have required background checks on all firearms sold, even used ones between private individuals.

President Obama doesn't have the power to order this on his own, though, and I don't see the GOP-controlled House giving it to him anytime soon.

[fathom5]

10. That's not subject to Executive Action/Order.

That would fall under the Legislative branch of government.

[hack89]

11. The president has no authority over such sales

they are a state issue unless they cross state boundaries.

[AtheistCrusader]

34. Except that a single pot plant growing in your basement has been ruled a matter of interstate commer

ce for KICKING IN YOUR DOOR AND DRAGGING YOU OFF purposes.

[hack89]

35. Unless you think that is a good thing (I don't)

lets not distort the Constitution again.

[AtheistCrusader]

36. Oh, I think it's a horrible precedent, but it exists.

[AllyCat]

28. A Constitutional amendment expanding the rights of citizens to live

and not get shot.

[hack89]

37. Why don't we just make it a crime to shot someone else?

doesn't that serve the same purpose?

[AllyCat]

42. Yeah, that hasn't worked either. So we take additional steps

to amend the Constitution to grant rights to life. If that means a few hundred large smelting furnaces, so be it.

[hack89]

43. So what would that amendment apply to?

any object or behavior that could possibly endanger someone else's life? Or just guns?

[AllyCat]

44. Getting rid of the FRICKIN' guns!

Hunt all you want, but people should not have access to assault weapons, assault-style weapons, handguns, semi-auto, auto...whatever terminology you want to float. Amend the Constitution to get rid of the friggin' guns that have one purpose...killing people.

Well-regulate the militia as it states. What we have now is a flippin' free-for-all. I know you disagree. You want to have what you want to have. Words and diplomacy can work wonders. But like the old saying goes "you get more with a gun and a kind word, than you do with just a kind word". So you people will continue to advocate EVERY FREAKIN' BODY having guns so it doesn't infringe on YOUR right to have whatever YOU want at the expense of everyone else's LIVES.

[hack89]

46. The process is very straightforward

1. Two thirds vote on proposed amendment in both the House and Senate or a Constitutional Convention.

2. Ratification by 38 states.

Good luck.

[AllyCat]

48. Yup. Because the Gun-Humper lobby wants money and the death it brings...

they have bought our horrible Congress and much of the American people. Might as well change the country's slogan to "shoot first!"

[hack89]

49. ok nt

[wordpix]

41. gun sale background checks were in VA, vying for worst gun control laws in nation

not saying HP did a great job, either

[former9thward]

5. Journalism is really lousy nowadays.

There is not one word in the story about what the "Executive actions" are. Given that phase is in the headline one would think someone would have thought to ask that simple question.

[Lasher]

13. I agree with you. (Edited to identify the executive actions)

Looks like the "executive actions" part was thrown into the title as an afterthought. Nothing sells newspapers better than a more controversial headline. This no doubt alludes to Obama's speech last month at a White House meeting with 18 big-city Mayors:

Obama promises mayors he'll use executive actions to combat gun violence

08/27/13 06:12 PM ET

President Obama told a collection of big-city mayors Tuesday at the White House that he would continue to use executive actions to combat gun violence plaguing major cities.

In the meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder and the mayors of 18 cities from across the nation, Obama discussed commonly applicable strategies to reduce youth violence.

"He also vowed to continue doing everything in his power to combat gun violence through executive action and to press Congress to pass common-sense reforms like expanding the background check system and cracking down on gun trafficking," the White House said in a statement.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/319061-obama-promises-mayors-hell-use-executive-actions-to-combat-gun-violence-

This article, like the one in the OP, fails to even speculate what these executive actions might look like.

Edit: I found something, see below:

Obama Offers New Executive Actions On Gun Control

08/29/13 05:44 PM ET EDT

WASHINGTON — Months after gun control efforts crumbled in Congress, Vice President Joe Biden stood shoulder to shoulder Thursday with the attorney general and the top U.S. firearms official and declared the Obama administration would take two new steps to curb American gun violence.

<snip>

One new policy will bar military-grade weapons that the U.S. sells or donates to allies from being imported back into the U.S. by private entities. In the last eight years, the U.S. has approved 250,000 of those guns to come back to the U.S., the White House said, arguing that some end up on the streets. From now on, only museums and a few other entities like the government will be eligible to reimport military-grade firearms.

<snip>

The Obama administration is also proposing to close a loophole that it says allows felons and other ineligible gun purchasers to skirt the law by registering certain guns to a corporation or trust. The new rule would require people associated with those entities, like beneficiaries and trustees, to undergo the same type of fingerprint-based background checks before the corporation can register those guns.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/obama-executive-actions-guns_n_3836183.html

[BlancheSplanchnik]

19. thank you. n/t

[Lasher]

21. It's nice to get a pat on the head every now and then.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

33. given gladly!!

And with appreciation.

[woo me with science]

39. +100000

[JustanAngel]

7. I wondered myself about the specific action to be taken.

I think the more these issues are addressed, whether it be curtailing private contract workers and gun law revisions, etc. the more successful the outcome will be. We owe it to each other to at least try to address this problem. And most people do not require assault weapons to hunt or even protect themselves...unless from someone with an assault weapon. My prayers go to all those hurt and those who have lost a loved one. God bless each and everyone one of you who suffered through this ordeal. I also wish to praise police/navy military for their bravery. God bless our first responders, also.

[AllyCat]

45. You are much more eloquent than I. I'm so ticked off I can't even type.

[Paladin]

47. Not surprising, considering who you've been dealing with on this thread. (nt)

[BainsBane]

8. Wow, awesome

I didn't know he could do that via EO, but if it stands legal scrutiny, awesome.

[hack89]

12. Do what via EO?

the op gave no details.

The simple fact is he is very limited to what he can do - I suspect he as already done everything he can.

[BainsBane]

22. Expanded background checks

Is how I read it.

[hack89]

24. I read it as reaffirming that he would still push for legislation

expanding background checks. I suspect that if he had that power, he would have done it after Newtown instead of going to Congress.

[fathom5]

26. Presidents don't have the power to mandate expanded background checks

via executive action/order, that falls within the scope of the legislative branch.

[fathom5]

14. Do what?

There is nothing in the news article about what he plans to do.

[NickB79]

15. Here are the executive orders he was already working on

Prior to the Navy Yard shooting: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/01/16/here-are-the-23-executive-orders-on-gun-safety-signed-today-by-the-president/

It does not appear that any of the executive orders would have any impact on the guns people currently own-or would like to purchase- and that all proposals regarding limiting the availability of assault weapons or large ammunition magazines will be proposed for Congressional action. As such, any potential effort to create a constitutional crisis—or the leveling of charges that the White House has overstepped its executive authority—would hold no validity.

[BainsBane]

23. Thanks

[Ash_F]

16. Probably just changes to protocols in federally controlled environments. /nt

[Kingofalldems]

18. There is no gun loophole!!!-----NRA response.

[Cha]

20. Keep it out there front and center, Pres Obama. :(

[seabeckind]

25. We have had at least 3 incidents in recent memory

in which leaks/problems happened because a person had a security clearance who was not properly vetted. In 2 of those cases leaks of classified information occurred and not even the people who were supposed to supervise those people knew what or how the information was gathered.

In each of these cases the agency involved was part of the executive branch and in 2 of the cases a non-gov't emplyee was the perpetrator.

I would suggest very strongly that an first order of business in issuing executive orders is who and what is responsible for these lapses. Who is responsible for oversight? Who let the contracts? Who said the security clearance contractor did an effective job.

Why the hell isn't somebody being fired? And don't give me that bullshit about about not being able to.

Maybe one of the first people being looked at is our soon to be economic advisor...the very idea...a beancounter whose job it is to efficientize the operation? Are you joking? How about somebody who's in industrial engineering?

Next...evaluate the standards used for determining the applicability of contracting for services. Do a full economic analysis that includes subsidiary costs -- all subsidiary costs.

Well past time for all this bullshit to end.

Was it Gabby's shooter whose permit wasn't vetted because they had a data entry backlog? What good is a background check if the request is sitting in a "too be keyed" bucket?

</rant>

[dickthegrouch]

27. "they faced the unimaginable violence that they wouldn’t have expected here at home.”

Why not?
We hear about how many thousands have been killed in the US by guns since Sandy Hook.
We hear regularly about people from all walks of life cut down by people who choose not to control themselves.

When I was in school if the teacher couldn't identify the culprit and no-one wanted to snitch, the whole class lost their privileges. It is time for the WHOLE CLASS to LOSE THEIR PRIVILEGES. Take the fucking guns and have done with it.

[Puzzledtraveller]

31. lip service

[seabeckind]

32. After my little rant above

I was watching Rachel last evening and she had a segment about the vetting for security clearances. She had a piece of an article as her background and said that PBO had directed that the procedures be examined after the Snowden thing.

Great! I thought. He's ahead of the game.

Then, upon study I found he had assigned his budget people the job. Cute. In my rant above I said:

"Maybe one of the first people being looked at is our soon to be economic advisor...the very idea...a beancounter whose job it is to efficientize the operation? Are you joking? How about somebody who's in industrial engineering?"

He's the budget guy in the WH.

I am amazed...for a smart guy Mr Obama who is supposedly a good chess player he once again shows me that he is really bad at playing the butwadif game.

BTW, I couldn't find the article she had showed but I did find this one:

"Military’s background check system failed to block gunman with a history of arrests"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/contractor-would-not-have-hired-aaron-alexis-if-past-brushes-with-law-had-been-known/2013/09/17/e5bc83da-1faa-11e3-8459-657e0c72fec8_story.html

and this one:

"Senate Homeland Security chair: Contractor vetting process needs review"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/17/senate-homeland-security-chair-contractor-vetting-process-needs-review/

[toby jo]

50. There are advocacy groups out there working to stop govt use of people in their

space-based weaponry programs.

My, but it appears that the technology exists to do exactly what our hunter says was happening to him. I've worked on this issue. Kucinich had a bill to get it stopped, but had to drop the specific language that dealt with the targeting of people. Kennedy had a bill to stop it back in the 80s' but it, too, was stopped. Anybody with an inside track knows our guy is a vic.

Shhh. It's classified.

Obama wants to do something, stop shooting at people and they don't go off.

[gopiscrap]

51. Good for Obama