You May Be "The President", but We're Still "The People"!

Senate blocks gun-control legislation in blow to Obama | Reuters:

The Senate on Wednesday rejected a bipartisan plan to expand background checks for gun buyers, dealing a crippling blow to President Barack Obama's campaign to curb gun violence after the Newtown school massacre.  

 Despite emotional pleas from families of victims of the Newtown, Connecticut, shootings and broad public support nationwide, the plan to extend background checks to online and gun-show sales failed on a 54-46 vote, six short of the 60-vote hurdle needed to clear the Senate. 

 "All in all, this was a pretty shameful day for Washington," an angry Obama said of the vote, adding the effort "is not over."

Hmm ... a great deal of furor over nothing much at all?

You may be forgiven if you have already forgotten the details of Obama's propose "Reasonable"
limitations to the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, but it's worth remembering that the key element was "UNIVERSAL REGISTRATION".

As is true with all catch-phrases, the actual definition was vague, and subject to interpretation.  Originally .. no clarification was offered.  After opponents objected to the vague generality, the Administration offered that:

1. It was intended to close the "Gun Hole Loophole;
2. It offered not objection to gun-owners transferring guns to "family members"

Pointedly, there were no provisions for any other "transfers", including: renting guns at a firing range; selling (or even loaning) guns to friends of long acquaintance and confidence (such as at a shooting match); or .. whatever other reason a private, law-abiding citizen should deep appropriate.

Most importantly, the dialogue (such as it was) did not ever address the question of registration.

In order to enforce the law, the federal government would have to know  who owned what guns (by make, model and serial number).  Without that information, they would have been unable to track firearms ownership .. and eventually to trace it back to the 'original' owner.

How else would they have been able to track transfers?

This is tantamount to registration; if you con't register your guns, the government cannot track them.  If they cannot track them, they can't tell if you are "violating the law".

If the Government can't know if you are violating their (definitively illegal) laws, then they cannot control the flow of firearms in the United States of America .. which is constitutionally obliged to PROTECT firearms ownership; not to restrict it, not to regulate it, and certainly not to "track" it.

Every now and then, I am surprised (AMAZED) and pleased that there are still some politicians who actually have read, and understand, the provisions of the Constitution.  They didn't even have to ask the Supreme Court to rule on the constitionality of the law;  they saw that it was WRONG, and they STOPPED the efforts of this wanna-be "Constitutional Lawyer" in his tracks, before he was allowed to willingly and knowingly violate the Constitution which he has sworn to protect and defend, according to his Oath of Office:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

We have three branches of Government:  The Executive (the president), the Legislative (congress) and the Judicial (the supreme court).

Isn't it nice that at least ONE of the three branches knows its duty?

And that they have the courage, the determination, and the HONOR to uphold the duty to which they were elected?

Now .. if only our Executive Branch understood and upheld that duty ....

_________________

As Don McNeil use to say on his daily morning radio show "The Breakfast Club":

"Let's all march around the Breakfast Table!"