Obama's "gun-control" will not lower crime

Executive Order Number 1:"We already have a background check system in place. Under the Brandy Handgun Violence Prevention Act. So, what "relevant data" is Obama talking about?"In the case of "Printz v United States", the Supreme Court ruled that the provision of the Brady Act that compelled state and local law enforcement officials to perform the background checks was unconstitutional on 10th amendment grounds. Basically, nationwide background checks is something that the federal government cant oversee, it all has to be kept in shape by the collaboration of all the individual US states. Some of these states though have vastly different laws on the books about what is and what isnt relevant information. This executive order would define what is or isnt relative information so that states are all on the same page when it comes to transferring information of people who want to get a gun. http://www.denverpost.com... E.O.2)"seeing to as the mentally ill person who shot up the elementary school did not legally obtain the firearm he used, show's that a law mitigating the privacy of an individuals health records won't matter too much."Not all mentally ill people can easily work their way around background checks like Lanza did. Background checks are a massive roadblock for mentally deranged people trying to get a gun, and to point to one instance and assume thats how ALL mentally ill people operate when they try to get guns is ludicrous. E.O.3) "Anyways, bribing states for background information does not seem at all necessary or effective. Due to the fact that no state would allow someone who is convicted of a felony to get a firearm."They do that all the time because of how underfunded those agencies are. There are 270 million guns in a nation of 300 million people, and the government agency meant to handle gun control only has a staff of 5,000 people. Not to mention, this same agency also has to track tobacco and alcohol along with firearms. http://www.knoxviews.com...http://www.reuters.com...If a state agrees to increase funding for background checks and existing forms of gun control, then the government will help fund the agencies within the state that would carry out these tasks according to this Executive order, which will help reduce crime. E.O.4)"What more can he do that the NICS isn't already doing during every background check?"The NICS is merely a database containing records of people and their backgrounds, the role of the ATF is to actually go out and shut down places illegally selling and manufacturing firearms, seize caches of weapons that are being stored or illegally held by people, retrieve the guns seized from cartels and drug rings within the US, etc. The ATF basically does the dirty work of actually going out and retrieving the guns already used in crimes or illegally owned while the NCIS just keeps a list of everyone who is and isnt allowed access to a gun. There is a MASSIVE difference between the two. http://en.wikipedia.org...http://en.wikipedia.org...E.O.5) "This is already being done. The Police run background checks when they pull you over"Police officers cant run a full background check before returning a firearm because what the FBI considers to be enough information is only a fraction of what other state departments use when running background checks to begin with. Most background checks only include criminal history, not any information regarding mental health or drug abuse. http://www.mercurynews.com...This gives officers more information which will help them better asses if someone should get their gun back or not. E.O.6) "If a dealer has a question about running a background check, he can easily call a government official"Go find the number then... Lets see how long it will take you and you'll see how 'easy' it is or isnt.... If you dont want to waste your time though Ill reiterate the point though that these government agencies are horribly understaffed and underfunded, and that there are hundreds of thousands of gun dealerships and gun stores throughout the US. Such a letter would be a general FAQ that could answer commonly asked questions and save everyone a whole lot of time and effort....E.O.8) "This one is ridiculous, gun locks ALREADY work!"Then how come a three year old can get past them?http://www.forbes.com...Seriously, are you researching the things you say at all or are your arguments driven by your own opinions and imagination?E.O 9 + 10)"Good luck on finding them. That's all I have to say." Ok now im SURE that your arguments are being driven by your own opinions.... Youre argument against tracking lost guns to make sure that they dont end up in the wrong hands is 'good luck finding them'? For real? I feel like im just wasting my time at this point. Its clear that locating lost guns will prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. E.O. 11)"What will he do that the ATF isn't already doing" - Push for more funding, - Hire more agents - Coordinate with state governments to better utilize the resources they have at hand - Choose what the agency should focus on fixing first and foremost - Reorganize how information is shared so that information gets where it needs to be faster and cheaperThats just off the top of my head. Imagine a classroom with no teacher though, a hell of a lot more gets done when there is someone at the helm and in control of things.E.O.12)"The Police have already been trained in active shooter situations"Oh yeah sure because the shootings at Newton, Virginia Tech, and the Aurora movie theater went so well right?..... Again this is just your own opinion on how you think everything works rather then the reality of it all. Its straightforward logic to conclude that if police officers are better trained to handle a shooter situation, it will limit how much damage is done, and could even intimidate potential shooters into not going through with their plan. Hell an officer may be able to take out a shooter before he kills a sinle person, which counts as lowering crime. E.O.13) "I'm pretty sure my taxes already pay for the ATF, FBI, and the Police. So, what are you trying to do exactly?"Maximize enforcement efforts means utilize the resources those agencies already have to better organize against gun crime without just asking for more money, which is something that we all agree is a smart move and a smart thing to do and will help lower crime. E.O.14) "This will just reiterate what everyone already knows. Yet, another ways of time."And you know this for sure because.....? Seriously dude, stop assuming you know everything that will happen and give actual arguments and sources for your claims.... Theres no reason to assume that this will turn up nothing useful. E.O.15)"Gun safes, trigger locks, safety, and only aiming at something you intend to kill should be enough"You must have a really bad definition of what gun control is if you think that safeties and trigger locks is all the gun control you need... Gun control includes conceal carry laws, handgun bans, assault weapon bans, ect. that are enacted on state levels which certainly are worth looking into to see which ones are the most effective and which ones suck. E.O.18) "More incentives That's more money"OH THANKS CAPTAIN OBVIOUS, WE KNOW THAT ALREADY.Look, 99% of the Pro's arguments are based on his own opinion of how HE would do things and how HE thinks everything works, but in reality the systems in place have a lot of problems, are underfunded, understaffed, and not up to code. These executive orders are meant to fix these issues, which in turn will lower crime. Its as simple as that. Extend all dropped arguemnts