The Constitution is an imperfect document that has required revision from time to time. Our Founding Fathers, in their infinite wisdom, understood that our world was likely to change and would require amendments to the document that serves as the codified law that emphasized the need for a restraint of government.
Though the document has changed over time and will likely change some more before this author moves to the other side of the grass, it remains remarkably clear on some key areas of liberty.
The First Articles of the Constitution are outlines for the three branches of government and their respective powers. The Legislative Branch creates laws, the Judicial Branch interprets them and ensures constitutional compatibility and the Executive, as the name suggests, executes the will of the law-making body and the Judicial Branch (in addition to serving as the Head of State on the international stage.)
This magnificent setup was not an accident; the Founders intended a system of checks and balances.
However, this system has been thoroughly disregarded by a dictatorial regime that remains engaged in an adversarial relationship with the people of the United States- the true rulers of this government.
President Obama is readying his executive actions to curtail the Second Amendment and these edicts are expected any day now. PolitiStick has previously reported that the unconstitutional edicts will likely center on expanding background checks to include private sales (thereby making them not private sales).
Obama has met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch to discuss how he will implement his orders and as Second Amendment groups warn the president to not go through with the tyrannical move, Obama pledged that his executive orders will be “entirely consistent” with the Constitution.
However, any such orders designed to serve as laws that emanate from the Oval Office is, by its very nature, unconstitutional.
Obama claimed, “I’m also confident that the recommendations that are being made by my team here are ones that are entirely consistent with the Second Amendment and people’s lawful right to bear arms.”
The senator-turned-president-turned-emperor also pounced-upon national grief concerning gun violence and claimed that his orders could “potentially save lives in this country” and “spare families the pain and the extraordinary loss that they’ve suffered.”
Of course, the catalysts for these new orders have been the recent slate of mass shootings that have occurred with legally-owned firearms. These shootings cannot and would not have been stopped by any expansion of background checks as recent tragedies like that seen in Roseburg, Oregon, were perpetrated by maniacs who obtained their weapons via a background check.
Other tragedies, like the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre, were conducted with weapons that were obtained illegally. Adam Lanza, the Sandy Hook shooter, attempted to purchase a firearm, but was denied by a background check. Instead, he killed his mother and stole her firearm, a series of events that could not have been stopped by expanded background checks.
White House Minister of Propaganda Josh Earnest conceded that the unlawful orders will likely be challenged in court, but claimed that the Obama regime would emerge triumphant.
“The kind of arguments that we’ll be able to mobilize in the court of law are ones that I’m confident will be powerful and persuasive,” he said. “Ultimately, a judge will have to decide. But we should not be distracted however, from the fact that the reason the president is taking these actions is because Congress has utterly failed in their responsibility to do so.”
While Mr. Earnest and Mr. Obama are certainly welcome to feel disappointed that Congress has failed to bend to their agenda, such is the beauty of our system of government. Checks and balances serve as barriers to executive, legislative and judicial tyranny. Even if one were to believe that these upcoming executive orders were good ideas, their very existence are contrary to our Second Amendment liberties and the manner in which they will be implemented are in violation of our Constitution’s separation of powers.
Even the notoriously-liberal Republican Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, has pledged to fight the unconstitutional edicts.
“While we don’t yet know the details of the plan, the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will,” Ryan said in a statement. “This is a dangerous level of executive overreach, and the country will not stand for it.”
2016 Republican frontrunner Donald Trump promised to undo Obama’s damage if elected, saying, “We’re not changing the Second Amendment. I will veto that. I will un-sign that so fast.”
In all conceivable manners, gun control laws that emanate from the White House are unconstitutional so long as martial law has not been officially declared.
Had Mr. Obama or any of his legal lackeys taken a moment to read a CliffsNotes on our Constitution, such orders would reveal themselves to be flagrantly unconstitutional and incompatible with our system of government.