Most, not all, of the 23 seem harmless to ineffective but none of the actions taken or proposals would have prevented the mass shooting that prompted this knee jerk reaction except perhaps # 18 depending upon actual intent/ implementation. As usual these actions and proposed legislation will only be respected by the law abiding. A reasonable solution to minimize future events of this nature could be to revamp our mental health care facilities. In my area two large mental institutions were closed in the last decade or so and the patients were let loose on the streets. Parents of the mentally ill should take extra security precautions. It should be mandatory for doctors and family members to have mentally ill people evaluated and institutionalized if they are found to pose a public threat.
I do not like the background checks the way they are being done and the information that is no doubt being collected to a data base. The only data base should be a list of those who have committed violent crimes or have mental issues that pose a threat. If there is to be background checks then a gun buyer should have to show picture ID. And a search should be done by the gun seller to make sure the buyers name is not on the list before any sale is concluded. Once a buyer is cleared they should be free to purchase what they wish and no record should be kept of what if anything they purchased. Law abiding gun owners should not have their property listed and potentially used later by a tyrant to confiscate, or available to newspapers to publish. Law abiders should report stolen firearms to authorities, but not the guns they still possess. Only those people who pose a threat to law abiding citizens should be on a list. Not the law abiders.
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson

Respectfully,
O.A.

Wow. Just like Ayn predicted: they are depending on your willingness and virtue to always be TRUTHFUL when answering questions to your doctor. When questions are about my PHYSICAL HEATH yes. When they are about ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MY PHYSICAL health, HELL NO. I WILL LIE.

It's like asking questions to a prospective employee about their experience fixing automobiles and you as the employer suddenly ask them if they have any bowling balls in their home: What does this have to do with fixing cars? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The government lies to us all the damn time, who says we're compelled to tell them the truth?

I also think it's in the works to raise our ins. rates if there is a gun in the home. (All ways to find out what we have.) Which is NO body's business. Attacking privacy. On top of everything else that's being attacked and all the other huge problems facing this country that aren't getting resolved. We're spinning around in a cesspool of bad ideas...

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 clips 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.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/20...

Perhaps the most repulsive part of this to me is federal interference in medicine. Physicians are licensed by the States. Of course, this hasn't stopped the Feds before, with Ovomitcare being the most intrusive example.

it could have been way worse. or is this just the appetizer?

Btw, I don't know if you heard about the NRA ad? In it they ask why our children aren't as important as pres BO's are. They have armed security, so why can't our children. Bo's press secretary said it was reprehensible to use the pres's kids for political purposes. Does any one else see the irony of that?