At least three congressmen, a former attorney general and the head of a national gun owners’ group have said that impeachment may be in order for President Obama because he dared to sign some executive orders designed to curb gun violence.
One of the congressman, Steve Stockman of Texas, called Obama’s anti-gun violence efforts “an existential threat to this nation.”
In other rightwing hysteria:
The Jackson Clarion-Ledger reported:
[Mississippi] Gov. Phil Bryant and House Speaker Philip Gunn said they would block any federal measures limiting the right to bear and possess arms from being enforced in Mississippi.
At a press conference hosted by Gunn and the Republican Caucus immediately following Obama’s address, State Rep. Chris Brown, R-Aberdeen, said he is drafting legislation to say that firearms manufactured in Mississippi would fall under state law and wouldn’t be subjected to federal regulations.
Tennessee state representative Joe Carr “is sponsoring legislation that would charge federal agents with a Class A misdemeanor for enforcing or attempting to enforce a federal law or executive order that bans, restricts or requires registration of any semiautomatic gun, accessory or ammunition.”
Expect more of the same in the days to come.
So what exactly did Obama do to become the object of such wrath?
Unlike Hitler and Stalin, to whom some have compared him, Obama recognizes there are certain actions that he can’t simply decree, and which require congressional action. So he sent Congress proposed legislation which would ban sale of assault weapons, limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds and require background checks for all gun purchases (including those at gun shows, which are currently exempt).
If you’re curious about the executive actions that some consider impeachable offenses worthy of comparison to the behavior of evil dictators, you can read about them here.