The Dictator Versus Our Civil Rights

Print page

Obama gun controlA couple of weeks ago, I wrote that Obama was going after our rights to bear arms as outlined in the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Well, the New Year was here, and as almost his very first act of business on arriving back in Washington, Obama issued a new set of executive orders, doing just that.

Obama has stated that his goal for his last official year in office, is to do something about gun control. If that’s the case, then the actions he took on January 5th are only the opening salvo against our 2nd A rights. We must realize and constantly remember, that the left’s way of doing things is the same as eating an elephant… one bite at a time.

That explains why Obama’s new executive orders seem so benign. In fact, they look like a paper tiger. In some cases, what he’s ordering merely seems to be a repeat of what’s already in the law, while in others it seems like he’s actually doing something positive. After all, spending money on improving mental health services, in order to find and help potential mass murders, actually seems to agree with what many conservatives have been calling for.

Likewise, putting pressure on states to provide more complete information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which was originally a NRA initiative, makes sense too.

Obama’s announcement of his illegal measures was nothing more than one more opportunity for the liar in chief to lecture the American public on his exaggerated liberal talking points. Rather than make any useful statement, he spread a series of lies and half-truths, some of which were immediately caught and refuted by the liberal media.

Considering the liberal media is as anti-gun as Obama himself is, their catching his lies about gun violence is really something. Yet that is exactly what they did. Some even challenged him, which is extremely rare for the liberal media to do.

Even so, suspicions run high about anything Obama does, and this is no exception. There is very good reason why we are all suspicious of Obama, and that is that what he says and what he does are not the same thing. If there is a way to use the executive orders he just released to hurt the rights of American citizens, then we can be sure that he will do so.

While Obama’s stated goal is to make our communities safe, we have to realize that his saying so is merely like the magician’s gloved hand, intended to distract people, while he does something else. So too with these measures. If he was truly concerned about the safety of our communities, he would stop going out of his way to make them more dangerous. Just in the last year, he’s personally made things more dangerous by:

  • Releasing 6,000 convicted criminals from prison
  • Releasing known terrorists from Guatanamo Bay, so that they could return to terrorism
  • Allowed tens of thousands of Muslim immigrants into the United States, without vetting them
  • Appointed Muslims with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood to sensitive positions in the DHS
  • Supported #Black Lives Matter, including their calls to kill police
  • Refused to use the term “Islamic terrorist,” but insists on calling their attacks “workplace violence”
  • Removed known terrorist groups from the terrorist watch list
  • Allowed known terrorists to cross the Mexican border into the United States
  • Allowed thousands of juvenile gang members, ranging from 16 to 18 years of age into the country

There are more, but just this sampling shows how little Obama cares about our nation being a safe place for us to live. Were he truly concerned about public safety, he would take action to protect the American people, not to make our lives more dangerous.

Does a Great Nation Need to Follow Others’ Example?

In the midst of all these things, making our lives more dangerous, Obama talks about the need to make our country more like Australia and take honest law-abiding citizens’ guns away from them. It’s clear that public safety is not his concern, but rather his progressive liberal agenda and his stated desire to destroy the country and therefore fulfill the dreams of his father.

So, while the executive orders that Obama signed may seem benign, we have to put ourselves into the convoluted thinking of a progressive liberal mind, in order to truly understand them. I don’t claim to have that ability, but as I look at them, a few things stand out to me.

As usual, the measures that Obama is taking will do nothing to prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns, regardless of what he says. Nor will it do anything to prevent mass shootings. The perpetrators of those shootings acquire their guns legally and criminals do not buy guns at gun shows, they buy them on the streets. So, on one hand we can call everything that Obama did with this latest act of anti-gun rhetoric nothing more than a circus show, except for one thing… he truly hates guns. There has to be a more nefarious purpose.

First of all, Obama has talked about closing the “gun show loophole.” I’ve been to a number of gun shows and even purchased guns at them. This loophole that he refers to is purely a thing of liberal fantasy. Anyone who has ever tried to buy a gun at a gun show knows that you have to jump through the same hoops at gun shows, that you do when buying a gun in a gun store. Perhaps that’s because the majority of the sellers at gun shows are gun store owners.

The only way you can buy a gun at a gun show, without a background check, is to buy it privately. While most gun shows are frowning on it now, you can rent a table at a gun show as a private citizen and sell some of your personal gun collection. The law allows it, just as it allows you to sell a gun to a friend or family member.

According to Obama’s new executive orders, anyone who sells guns “regularly” is going to be required to have a federal firearms license (FFL) and perform background checks. But that’s already the law. So what’s new? When asked by a reporter what the threshold was for requiring the FFL, Obama said there is no minimum. Is he planning on making people get a FFL to sell one gun from their private collection in a private sale?

That possibility has been a concern of gun-rights activists for some time. The reason is that the only way such a law could be upheld is to institute a nationwide gun registry database. Historically, that’s the necessary step before confiscation, so there’s a real danger in allowing the creation of that database.

Obama also railed against the ability to buy guns online, without a background check. This part was probably nothing more than grandstanding, as that’s illegal. Currently, firearms purchased online require the same level of scrutiny as firearms bought in a brick and mortar store. The buyer has to fill out the applicable paperwork and the seller has to call the NICS for a background check. If the firearm is to be shipped across state lines, it must be delivered to a FFL holder (gun store) for the completion of the paperwork and NICS background check.

There were two places where Obama added money to government department budgets, in order to improve gun-related services. While that is illegal for him to do, without congressional approval, everything else he did was illegal too, so we’ll set that aside for the moment. The two areas are to increase the NICS and to hire 50,000 more mental health workers.

Improving the NICS is a worthwhile endeavor. The current system has holes in it, specifically holes that allow people with mental illness to slip through. Not all states properly inform the NICS about those who have been adjured to be able to handle firearms safely. That might help catch people like Adam Lanza, before they go on a killing spree. But, once again, I have to wonder if that’s all it’s about.

I especially wonder when I couple that with the hiring of 50,000 additional mental health workers. What is the true reason for that? The obvious answer is to help find people who are not mentally capable of handling the responsibility of owning firearms. But how are they defining that?

As it stands right now, the Veteran’s Administration has been paying doctors to certify that individual veterans aren’t emotionally stable enough to own firearms. There is no hearing about this and the vet isn’t given the opportunity to defend themselves. All it takes is a doctor’s signature on a form. This atrocity is about to be extended, doing the same to the elderly who are receiving Social Security. Except in their case, the criteria isn’t PTSD, but rather the inability to handle their own finances.

The way the executive order is written, these people are unable to own firearms because they have been deemed to be mentally incompetent or unstable. Since when does the inability to write a check make someone mentally incompetent or emotionally unstable? If there’s anyone in the country who needs a firearm, it’s the elderly. All too often, criminals prey upon them, because of their inability to defend themselves. Firearms at least give them a fighting chance.

This is some of that “one bite at a time” creep that I was talking about before. First they went after the veterans and now they’re going after the elderly; who is next? What fringe group is Obama going to pick out next, in order to marginalize them and take away their Second Amendment rights?

If we add together the actions against senior citizens, the increase in mental health workers and the increase in NICS workers, we can arrive at a troubling conclusion. Perhaps Obama’s next step is to require mental health screening of gun owners. They do that in Australia and he’s been holding their gun laws up as an example. Perhaps these 50,000 health care workers aren’t going to look for the Adam Lanzas in our midst, but iThe Distead look for a means to certify gun owners as unfit to own firearms.

The fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (say that five times fast) is so extensive, that it’s all but guaranteed that every person in the world has some sort of mental disorder. Psychiatrists and psychologists have been working overtime to define conditions that can be called mental disorder. Part of this is for their moment of fame and part is that they truly believe that we all have something wrong with us (except them, of course).

One of the many mental disorders listed there is “Oppositional Defiant Disorder.” In other words, if you disagree with massive government taking control of your life, you have a mental disorder. Another is “climate change denial disorder.” Between those two alone, pretty much any true conservative could easily be adjudged to have a mental disorder. If they do that, bye-bye guns.

Is that going to happen? Once again, I don’t know. But the precedence is being built, even as we speak. We must always remember that Obama’s goal, as well as the entire progressive liberal left, is to take our guns away, so that they can have total control. They will use every means they can, and create those means if they don’t exist.

One final point; this is just January. At the end of last year, Obama clearly stated that his goal for 2015 was gun control. It is quite possible that he started early, so that he could do several rounds of executive orders, each one encroaching more and more on our rights.

If that’s the case, we have much more coming our way. Keep your eyes open.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.


3,831 total views, 1 views today

Bill White

About Bill White

Bill White is the author of Conquering the Coming Collapse, and a former Army officer, manufacturing engineer and business manager. More recently, he left the business world to work as a cross-cultural missionary on the Mexico border. Bill has been a survivalist since the 1970s, when the nation was in the latter days of the Cold War. He had determined to head into the Colorado Rockies, should Washington ever decide to push the button. While those days have passed, the knowledge Bill gained during that time hasn’t. He now works to educate others on the risks that exist in our society and how to prepare to meet them. You can send Bill a message at editor [at]
Rate this article!
[Total: 8    Average: 3.6/5]


  1. Rod Griffiths says:

    I like your arguments but I have this feeling that you are discussing the trees (gun ownership) rather than focussing on the forest. Obama is blatantly violating his oath of office in failing to protect the constitution. Is this not lying under oath and therefore a crime that could be prosecuted without any further discussion of which amendment he is violating.
    The constitution includes all the amendments, he clearly, and by his actions, has demonstrated he is cherry picking which parts of his sworn oath he believes he can ignore with impunity. Congress is not willing to defend the constitution and are complicit, by inaction,

    • I can't figure out what part of the Constitution or the Bill Of Rights oummer agrees with. He is the most anti Constitution president in our nations history. And, an important fact Bill left out of this article was the No Fly List. A citizen can be placed on this list without any due process! People have been added to this list just because their names were similar to a suspected terrorist. And, unless you have connections in high places or lots of money to hire a competent attorney (mostly a misnomer), your name ain't coming off that list and you will forever be on the no firearm list. And to think, a lot of folks in this Country are planning to vote for his evil twin, killery, to replace him. God help us!

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude says:

        Marty, you missed a few of my previous articles on the no fly lists and other despotic dictatorial ways they are disarming us.

  2. Robert Ross says:

    What makes Obastard think that WE THE PEOPLE are going to obey an tyrant and give up without a fight. That nggar has a screw loose. I believe that our military will not obey anticonstitutional orders nor the police. These people are oath keepers and I hope they remember that fact. I will not give anything to this Gov.'t and I will give my dying breath to keep the STARS and STRIPES ever waving in the air. While in the service of my country we were reminded of our oath to protect America and the Constitution. Never to stand down or or stop fighting against all odds. I was a UNITED STATES NAVY, SEABEE, NEVER TO GIVE UP !!! So when Obama's brown shirts come to get me a lot of them will die first, before I do. MOLON LABE

    • You all always talk about the left, but what about the right. You all are really showing your true colors. Just because you took out the i in the word you want to say, doesn't make you any less of a threat than any terrorist. You call yourself a service man and disrespect the Commander in Cheif. Hypocrites.

      • Robert Ross says:

        OK MR.C you give all your guns, ammo, and food up to the big MAN ? in the WH. He must be your idol/ hero. Have you been in black combat? do you know what it is ? The BIG "O" in the WH may be your Commander in Chief, HE IS NOT MINE !!!!!

    • It happens one person/household at a time, just like in Nazi Germany, or Russia, or any other controlled government in history. No one notices what is really going on until it's too late. By the time enough people realize, it's probably too late. And what is going on is ignored by mainstream media or presented in a horribly one-sided slant (usually incorrectly), that the implication or truth is lost there as well. God help us all in the coming years.

      And get out and VOTE!! The only good thing about executive orders is they can be reversed by the next president!

  3. Oboz and his urge to seek total power of the country in any way he can..... Taking the Law abiding Citizens weapons away is a violation of the 2 Amendment.. Then he wants to attack the Veterans, believing we are the nut-cases causing all the shootings..... As long as there are sick and crazy people willing to kill others, we as a citizen has the rights to defend ourselves be it domestic or any form of terrorism government.... Obozo could care less about this country, he's building his private army so he can take over........ It is not the law abiding citizen causing the problems, but the criminal who goes around breaking into homes and stealing weapons to use in his next robbery or shooting....... As an American, we need to make sure that the Wicked Witch of East Dilly Hillary does not get elected to be President..... She is more wicked then obozo.....

  4. John Siemens says:

    Yup, absolutely correct. You do not boil a frog by tossing him into boiling water but by turning the heat up 1 degree at a time. This is exactly what Obama and the left is doing. Keep you powder dry! Lock and load! Armageddon is coming.

  5. Stephen Rohaty says:

    Cops hate going to domestic disputes because they know they won't be dealing with a logical issue, but an emotional one. Will police even TRY to confiscate guns, or will they just ignore such orders? I mean, in a domestic dispute, a policeman may well find himself attacked with a 3" knife wielded by a 100 pound 5 foot tall woman, or by a drunken man. But what is likely to happen when he tries to confiscate, from a quietly desperate male, his sole claim to manhood?

    • You're absolutely correct. The rank and file police officers are for the most part very pro gun and 2nd Amendment. It's the appointed police chiefs who only do the bidding of the politicians who appoint them. Not all, but a lot. The officers took an oath to protect the laws of this Nation and the Constitution. Most will not violate that oath. However, I don't know whether the same is true about obumers HSS. Do they even take the same oath?

  6. While not being a Republican I am quite Conservative. That being said I was raised a Lib. Dem. by my parents who are from the depression/Roosevelt era. After growing into an adult I began to read a whole lot on history, presidents, political issues as well as social issues. The conclusion that I have come to is that, while I was raised with a gun in my hand, ( we hunted all the time ), the desire/need/Constitutional law I have is not only a civil right but a Godly right to protect my family, church, friends, neighbors, and whoever else might need me too. To strip my right to actively protect my family is NOT something I will obey. If needed I will die protecting my right to defend said people and be buried knowing that I did my best as a husband, father, friend and patriot. But mostly as a Christian man who will die as my Savior for my FRIENDS!

  7. bill ferrell says:

    I agree that Obama would love nothing more than confiscating guns from as many people as possible. Unfortunately you undermine your own credibility here with the strawmen of "Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD)" and "climate change denial disorder." A quick Google of both revealed that ODD is identified as a childhood-only disorder (Mayo Clinic) and "climate change denial disorder" originated from a satirical "funny or die" video. Please spend a few more minutes of your time verifying your claims. Otherwise, you come across as a bit of a nut.

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude says:

      Bill Ferrel , it always used to amaze me how people with obsessive compulsive grammar or spelling troll issues are now 'graduating' to 'fact checking' obsessions, which seems to be where you're heading???

      While Bill White's specific terminology might be in specific accuracy error, likely due to his haste in compiling reference data, but the actual totalitarian methodology for using certain behavior patterns to diagnose particular anti-social psychological issues are alive and well no matter what age group you want to examine.

      In other words do you really imagine that a behavior pattern/disorder automatically disappears as one gets older. LOL? That should have been the first clue especially if you only did "a quick google search".

      But for your 'advanced' information, The government psychologists will also use 'adult' versions of 'Oppositional Defiance Disorders' mostly of the 'type' that could manifest itself in potential aggression or anti-social behavior. A recent one in my purview was last year helping a Wounded Warrior get some disability benefits and when helping him with doing the report for the psychologist's evaluation/recommendation and what appeared to be--at least to me--some social manifestations of PTSD because of his answers to his work history listing. But the VA Psychologist surprised both of us by granting parts of disability because of his inability to maintain gainful employment for any length of time, putting him in the category of being 'unemployable'. The criteria based on the diagnosis of something that sounded like 'Anti Authoritarian Syndrome with potential for violence which presents a danger to fellow workers', to paraphrase to the best of my recall. Which to me, just sounds like the 'adult' extrapolation of the so-called 'child only' diagnosis??? Of course this Vet never committed any threat of violence at any of his jobs.

      In any case, Any of these types of 'diagnosis' will surely fit or be modified into the Totalitarian agenda of creating a 'dangerous' behavioral excuse to ban firearms from legal ownership. Any Suicidal tendencies already are qualified. In nascent Totalitarian States like New York and California, merely yelling at your neighbor for letting her dog shit in your driveway qualifies as 'dangerous aggression or anger' and can be grounds for a retraining injunction order which will allow the cops to search and seize your guns... plenty of actual cases on that if you don't restrict yourself to a 'Quick' google search?

      If I get the time I'll do a serious (Fact proven) article about how this mental bad health criteria can and is, as we speak, getting way out of control. (See some of my other articles on government over reach where think i already touched on this topic)

  8. Mahatma Muhjesbude says:

    While Bill hits the main issue point here which is that there is a determined initiative to disarm the Free American citizenry by destroying or at least marginalizing the 2nd/A which puts forth an unqualified, caveat-less, and strictly clear "...Shall Not Be Infringed" Law of the Land with no if's ands or buts, he is one of the many ostensibly righteous Patriots, who are destined to inadvertently aid and abet the Totalitarian agenda by saying things like "improving the NICS is a worthwhile endeavor...because it allows the mentally ill to slip through..."

    Sorry Bill but here's the 'Breaking News'. Mental illness is NOT a felony!
    Anyone who agrees that 'mentally ill' people should lose there 2nd/A rights--Before they even doing anything less, are rolling head first down the slippery slope of Tyranny right along with the rest of the Fascist Totalitarians.

    And anybody agreeing that "...NICS is a worthwhile endeavor, still doesn't realize that background checks are also known as GUN REGISTRATION lists for future Confiscations! "Shall Not Be Infringed" Does NOT mean "...except for background checks, which have been proved to have absolutely no pragmatic preventative use for denying criminals or anyone else from getting a firearm to aid in their crime. Period! But background checks do effectively establish a tool for easily tracking down all NICS recipients to find out who bought what and where it is kept. (See my "Your papers, Please" article on the National I.D. Card)

    There cannot be any cooperation or compromise on any gun control methodology if you want to avoid eventual social slavery and remain a Free American. NONE!

    This is how they incrementally are constantly Winning and we are losing. They do the Jeti mind control trick on us with their specious notions of Public Safety and Extreme Crime Prevention which, insultingly, are nothing less than Totalitarian manipulation.

    Agreeing with these lies in conciliatory surrender is like helping the Hangman put the noose around your own neck.

  9. Robert Ross says:

    When the next Revolution starts I wonder how many times will be shot when the W.H. is taken over and there is no more free housing for this freeloading, no good, POS, half breed



  1. […] By admin - Jan 12, 2016 1 0 SHARE Facebook Twitter This post was originally published on this site […]

  2. […] Original newz story - Click here (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); […]

  3. […] Continue reading at SurvivoPedia: The Dictator Versus Our Civil Rights […]

  4. […] with Islamist terrorism as they are with what they consider to be domestic Patriot opposition to their Totalitarian control agenda. Which they will put into the “domestic terrorism” category to eventually neutralize […]


Speak Your Mind

All comments, messages, ideas, remarks, or other information that you send to us (other than information protected according to the law) become and remain our property. You are fully responsible for your comment, as depicted in Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy of the website.