TED Conversations

Poch Peralta

Freelance Writer / Blogger,

TEDCRED 10+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Do you agree with these new Executive Orders that Will Change Who Can Buy Guns? Or should the Executive Order itself be amended?

'The White House issued two executive actions on Friday that aim to beef up background checks for would-be gun buyers and keep the weapons away from those at risk of harming themselves or others.

'The first order, proposed by the Department of Justice, more clearly defines who cannot possess a handgun under federal law due to mental health issues.

'The second executive action concerns privacy laws associated with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act...'
see details of the EOs here
http://mashable.com/2014/01/03/executive-order-buy-gun/

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jan 9 2014: Round Two: Ding. I thought about this again and the term HIPPA popped into my mind.

    HIPAA Laws and Regulations are divided into five Rules:
    • Privacy Rule
    • Security Rule
    • Transactions Rule
    • Identifiers Rule
    • Enforcement Rule
    • HITECH Act

    Since HIPPA law cannot be violated how will this EO be enforced with out a violation of rights. Again a congressional passed law against a political agenda .... interesting is it not.

    I wish you well. Bob.
    • thumb
      Jan 9 2014: 'Since HIPPA law cannot be violated how will this EO
      be enforced with out a violation of rights...'
      So the EO is no good because it's a violation of rights!?


      'Again a congressional passed law against a political agenda ....'
      Is that agenda good or bad?
      • thumb
        Jan 9 2014: agendas are like beauty they are judged in the eye of the beholder.

        Good and bad are judged by history ....

        Further ... items such as this have went before congress and were defeated ... why would anyone want to impose on the people what the peoples representatives have rejected. I consider that imposing ones will on others .... that would be contrary to the Constitution and the basics of a Republic.

        Again bringing us back to limits of the Executive Orders. If Congress says no then is a Executive Order in defiance of Congress to achieve a personal goal. If that is possible then why have three branches of government?

        It is no secret that the Democrats have for years sought to remove guns from the public and were campaign promises from both Obama and Hillary.

        The rights violated were guaranteed by law in the HIPPA Act by Congress.

        Mid term elections are coming and time to review campaign promises ....

        If you cannot get it through congress then make a big show of an EO to align the vote.

        See ya. Bob.
        • thumb
          Jan 9 2014: As I see it now, most loopholes in various laws are less obvious
          than this EO circus!

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.