Current weather

  • Overcast, light rain
  • 55°
    Overcast, light rain
  • Comment

Executive orders appear to be in conflict with Constitution

Posted: February 1, 2013 - 9:55am

The Second Amendment has been whirling around the news very often these days, because of the frequent atrocities involving weapons. The Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy was truly alarming; my heart goes out to the students and their families. I wonder, if the affected families are thankful that the incident sparked government action, or if they view it as politicians taking advantage of the emotions created through the tragedy.

Specifically, President Obama made 23 executive orders concerning gun control. The media portrayed the actions as not anything truly radical. After some research, I found these changes made are alarming because they defy the Constitution. I am currently taking U.S. government in high school, and it is my understanding that any degree of disregarding the Constitution is a serious offense. Didn’t our president swear to uphold it? The 23 executive orders are not only destroying the second amendment, but also the first, fourth, and fifth amendments. The actions allow federal agencies to access “relevant data” as well as clarifying that doctors may ask about firearms in our households. On top of many other things, Obama ordered a letter be written to the AFT to specify how to run background checks. This is taking steps to pave the way for background checks to take place in any transfer of firearms. The executive actions are no small violations of our liberty invested in us by the Constitution.

I wonder, if president Obama is allowed to make these actions without congressional approval, what is going to stop him, or any other president in the future for taking further action? The political actions that are taking place are contradicting what our Constitution is telling me, and the problem isn’t with the Constitution.

  • Comment

Comments (4) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Allen 02/01/13 - 03:46 pm
Constitutional Rights Are Not Absolute

Ms. Daniels - thank you for your letter and your interest in politics. However, you should be aware that the rights enumerated in the U.S. Constitution are not absolute, and that the government has the right to pass reasonable regulations restricting those rights.

Sam Von Pufendorf
Sam Von Pufendorf 02/01/13 - 05:54 pm
Allen you are correct ... sort of.

Ms Daniels makes some valid points in her article. And you make some valid points in your post as well.
You are right when you said: "the government has the right to pass reasonable regulations restricting those rights." However, the government didn't "pass" any regulations. Not all of the 23 orders bear the need for congressional approval or a USSC seal of approval. Some may. Such as executive order #11 to nominate a Director of the ATF. There is a director currently in place who reports to the Attorney General. Would this be a different post? Would it require a congressional vetting process? #16 Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes. This may or may not be challengeable in regards to doctor / patient privilege. Also, what will those questions consist of? How many guns? What type? Numbers of rounds in the home?

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 magazines will be proposed for Congressional action. Nearly all of the orders have little value on the surface except to "promote" or "clarify" and "improve." The true action will come when congress begins deliberating any future gun laws, restrictions, regualtions and/or bans.

Joanna, keep your head in politics and question everything. Check the facts you hear on FOX, CNN, ABC, NBC etc. Form an opinion based on facts. Just beware, the above news media will provide the facts they want you to know. It's known as "cherry picking." Be independent, open minded and objective. You will find firm and supportable opinion of your own. If you truly are interested in finding facts, I can suggest a short book for you: "Un-Spun: finding facts in a world of disinformation" by Brooks Jackson, Kathleen Hall Jamieson. Thank you for inspiring thought amongst us elder posters.

"No one more sincerely wishes the spread of information among mankind than I do, and none has greater confidence in it's effect towards supporting free & good government."

-Thomas Jefferson-
May 6, 1810

normolson 02/02/13 - 12:07 am
Allen is mistaken

First, I'd like to commend Ms. Daniels for her interest in the battle we now engage in. That battle is waged by those who say the Bill of Rights are not absolute and those who believe they are natural, God-given, and inalienable.
The primary fact is that the Constitution grants no rights. The Bill of Rights proceeds NOT from government but from God. The Declaration of Independence is clear that we are endowed BY OUR CREATOR with certain inalienable rights, that AMONG THESE are life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness. "Among these" means that there are others that proceed from the Creator.
Allen should know that the Constitution is a binding document ON THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT only, providing limited and enumerated powers and responsibilities that would best insure the natural rights of the people. In other words, the central government's primary job is to protect the liberty of the people.
Please read my opening statement to the U.S. Senate sub-committee.

I thought these truths concerning the US Constitution were known by every school child, but alas, the central government wants "we the people" to believe that it can rob us of our God-given rights without consequences.

leewaytooo 02/02/13 - 05:28 am
the first amendment is

the first amendment is incomplete....

"...freedom of religion..." for if there is to be freedom of

religion then surely it needs to read "freedom of religion and

freedom from religion."

religious freedom is important, until that freedom is used

to incite the oppression and destruction of others that may

choose to exercise their "inalienable' right to live.

live and let live... of course this doesn't work if you are

a psychotic......for then it is only one way and that is

destruction as a means to the only end.

violence is the first resort of the incompetent psychotic.

Raoulduke 02/08/13 - 07:28 am

Is not the Constitution a LIVING document.Which can be Amended.everyone is on the panic about their 2nd amendment rights. Do not free speech zones infringe on our right to free speech? Does not the patriot act infringe on our 1st,4th,5th,6th,8th,and 9th amendments.The citizenry idly sat as those rights were taken away after 9/11,and didn't even blink.We have given up so many of our Constitutional rights,and Civil Liberties since 9/11. What's the fuss? I sarcastically ask.

radiokenai 02/16/13 - 04:49 pm
The smell of liberals...
Unpublished disgusting in here! Look at those nazi-jackboots trying to bend the words of the Constitution to meet their immoral agenda! (leeway bends, raoulduke wants to ammend)

Absolutely disgusting, kind of smells like dung beetles in here!

I say, if they want to give up their rights, go for it! They can start by giving up their freedom of speech and stop posting their socialistic ideals in here! Move to Russia you 2 knotheads! I am sure they would hardline you right out!

radiokenai 02/16/13 - 04:49 pm
Title Should have said "Obama in Conflict with Constitution!"

I wonder how many more rights he can trample on in front of us dumb Americans?

radiokenai 02/21/13 - 08:25 am
What a a Riot!!!

Once again, another cranial challenged liberal attempts to re-write the Constitution to fit his discription! Sorry leeway, what you describe as the First Amendment is YOUR socialist liberal view and NOT what the First Amendment says!

The 60's have of peace, love and LSD have now came and gone dude!

What the first amendment says is that YOU and ME have the right to choose (or not choose) which religion we want and the Federal Government shall not establish a Religion. Here it is siple as this:

The First Amendment

Printer-friendly page for your Convenience Leeway!

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
— The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution


The First Amendment prohibits government from establishing a religion and protects each person's right to practice (or not practice) any faith without government interference.

Free speech

The First Amendment says that people have the right to speak freely without government interference.

Free press

The First Amendment gives the press the right to publish news, information and opinions without government interference. This also means people have the right to publish their own newspapers, newsletters, magazines, etc.


The First Amendment says that people have the right to gather in public to march, protest, demonstrate, carry signs and otherwise express their views in a nonviolent way. It also means people can join and associate with groups and organizations without interference.


The First Amendment says that people have the right to appeal to government in favor of or against policies that affect them or that they feel strongly about. This freedom includes the right to gather signatures in support of a cause and to lobby legislative bodies for or against legislation.

So leeway, once again, your liberal views (and that of our socialist idiot president) has no business in the United States of America! Stop trying to rewrite our Nations Constitution and get off the couch and GET A JOB!

radiokenai 02/21/13 - 08:44 am
Raoulduke....I am somewhat astonished! Way to Go! I agree!

NO, we did not idly set by and watch those rights disappear! It is both Liberal and Conservatives who we voted into office that allowed this happen!

So, are we (both Republicans and Democrats) going to sit back and watch a socialist president and Senate further trample on the Constitution in the name of Homeland Security?

Are WE (yes you and me) going to elect idiots into office who allow socialist programs, such as obamacare, to say nothing of the piles of executive order that baboon is carving away at?

1.6 billion rounds of ammunition slated to be purchased by Homeland Security? Really? To protect me from what? Illegal Aliens crossing the border? (no wait, he is giving them citizenship to buy their votes).

1 Trillion of year in debt? No Cuts? Are you kidding me?

Increased mega-taxes, with no borrowing ceiling? No Spending Cuts? How can obama call himself a leader? WOW!

Raoulduke! I must admit, this the FIRST time I seen you OPEN YOUR EYES to the direction our Government is headed...mass spending, socialist programs, cover-ups and violations of the many of our Constitutional Rights. I must say, keep an open mind and watch what YOUR president is doing! There may be hope for you after all!

Back to Top


Please Note: You may have disabled JavaScript and/or CSS. Although this news content will be accessible, certain functionality is unavailable.

Skip to News

« back

next »

  • title
  • title
  • title
My Gallery


  • 150 Trading Bay Rd, Kenai, AK 99611
  • Switchboard: 907-283-7551
  • Circulation and Delivery: 907-283-3584
  • Newsroom Fax: 907-283-3299
  • Business Fax: 907-283-3299
  • Accounts Receivable: 907-335-1257
  • View the Staff Directory
  • or Send feedback