PDA

View Full Version : Executive Orders for Gun Control: From Bidens Mouth; Biden Committee


chiselchst
01-09-2013, 7:03 AM
In my reading of the 2A forum, and after searching I haven't seen "executive action" discussed much, if at all.

I'm not the type to speculate too much or panic, and I've avoided - and do not subscribe to the many extreme fears many folks have regarding *possible* future situations. And I don't mean to stir the fear pot here..

But I am trying to understand exactly what can be done by executive power?

"Obama has vowed to move swiftly on the recommendations, a package expected to include both legislative proposals and executive action." (http://news.yahoo.com/biden-meet-gun-safety-victims-groups-080451748--politics.html)

I know speculation and hypothetical situations are not worth getting too excited about, but what might realistically be attempted, or done, using executive action (https://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=what+is+executive+action+by+the+president%3F&oq=what+is+executive+action+by+the+president%3F&gs_l=hp.3...2503.10374.0.10564.27.23.0.3.3.0.550.4 673.0j16j4j0j1j2.23.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.ULUfoHNaA iA&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.b2U&fp=e8d1c4af4054bbc0&biw=1344&bih=695)?

Dropping in to provide an anchor for the discussion - I'll post a ref to an updated first post.

We need a basic understanding of 'executive orders', and I'm going to steal most of this page: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/a/Presidential-Executive-Orders.htm



A presidential executive order (EO) is a directive issued to federal agencies, department heads, or other federal employees by the President of the United States under his statutory or constitutional powers.

In many ways, presidential executive orders are similar to written orders, or instructions issued by the president of a corporation to its department heads or directors.

Thirty days after being published in the Federal Register, executive orders become law. While they do bypass the U.S. Congress and the standard legislative law making process, no part of an executive order may direct the agencies to conduct illegal or unconstitutional activities.

...

Reasons for Issuing Executive Orders

Presidents typically issue executive orders for one of these purposes:

1. Operational management of the executive branch
2. Operational management of federal agencies or officials
3. To carry out statutory or constitutional presidential responsibilities

...

Can Executive Orders be Overridden or Withdrawn?

The president can amend or retract an executive at any time. The president may also issue an executive order superseding an existing one. New incoming presidents may choose to retain the executive orders issued by their predecessors, replace them with new ones of their own, or revoke the old ones completely. In extreme cases, Congress may pass a law that alters an executive order, and they can be declared unconstitutional and vacated by the Supreme Court.

...

Constitutional Authority for Executive Orders

Article II, section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads, in part, "The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America." And, Article II, section 3 asserts that, "The President shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed..." Since the Constitution does not specifically define executive power, critics of executive orders argue that these two passages do not imply constitutional authority. But, Presidents of the United States since George Washington have argued that they do and have used them accordingly.
// Librarian

Kopis
01-09-2013, 7:18 AM
Congress can prevent an EO, they just did it when Obama signed an EO to unfreeze government salaries.

OleCuss
01-09-2013, 7:24 AM
Obama has apparently been considering telling the BATFE to re-classify semi-automatics as automatic weapons under the NFA - effectively banning them. And yes, I'm playing a little loose with the terminology and I'm no legal expert so maybe it's not the NFA - but I think it is.

I think you will see Obama push very hard in the UN for sweeping gun bans and then (if he thinks he can get away with it) try to impose those bans here in the US even without ratification.

You'll see more of the nonsense he has imposed on the so-called "border states".

You may see him interfere with the NICS to slow down background checks.

I don't think anyone has the full list, but expect it to be as extensive as he can possibly make it. And remember that Obama has effectively no accountability - he doesn't have to run for office and a successful impeachment is so improbable as to be ludicrous.

Steve1968LS2
01-09-2013, 7:30 AM
Obama has already proven that he doesn't care about the constitution or using congress the way he supposed to.

This shouldn't shock anyone..

Jason_2111
01-09-2013, 7:49 AM
It's a very democrat thing to use the executive order when it's too hard to get their way through normal channels. The amount of EO's that came out of Clinton's administration was astounding.

I actually don't worry about DiFi and her nutty ideas. To pure politicians like her, winning isn't as important as being seen "doing something" about a problem... even if what they do has no good effect at all.
What I do worry about is the President pulling an EO out of his hiney and doing something that it will take years to undo in the SCOTUS.
I also worry about a super majority in Sack-of-mentos, and how long it would take to overturn stupidity passed there.

GrizzlyGuy
01-09-2013, 7:53 AM
Just in: Joe Biden on CNN "executive action will be taken" (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=674522)

tcrpe
01-09-2013, 7:55 AM
Been saying it all along. Next up, a slew of new "regulations"

Joewy
01-09-2013, 8:03 AM
Obama has apparently been considering telling the BATFE to re-classify semi-automatics as automatic weapons under the NFA - effectively banning them. And yes, I'm playing a little loose with the terminology and I'm no legal expert so maybe it's not the NFA - but I think it is.

I think you will see Obama push very hard in the UN for sweeping gun bans and then (if he thinks he can get away with it) try to impose those bans here in the US even without ratification.

You'll see more of the nonsense he has imposed on the so-called "border states".

You may see him interfere with the NICS to slow down background checks.

I don't think anyone has the full list, but expect it to be as extensive as he can possibly make it. And remember that Obama has effectively no accountability - he doesn't have to run for office and a successful impeachment is so improbable as to be ludicrous.

They cant reclasify a law. It is very specific what is a machine gun. Congress would need to change the law.
He can interfer with the NICS thou.

winnre
01-09-2013, 8:11 AM
What about all those folks with certain misdemeanors who all of a sudden found that they could no longer own a gun? What if they change the law so even an arrest makes you ineligible?

Tincon
01-09-2013, 8:13 AM
Obama has apparently been considering telling the BATFE to re-classify semi-automatics as automatic weapons under the NFA - effectively banning them.

He would clearly be usurping the inherent constitutional powers of the legislative branch in area they have heavily legislated. This would not pass constitutional scrutiny, for this and several other reasons, and I'm not sure it would take years for SCOTUS to act. It would however be a huge mess, and bad for everyone, but ultimately I'm sure it would backfire and actually weaken efforts to ban these guns.

ENTHUSIAST
01-09-2013, 8:24 AM
Last time I checked there are more of "We the People" than gun grabbing Politicians and Federal Loyalists.

As someone said this aint 1994 anymore the world has changed a bit since then.

This will not end well.
KQQdTEnt81o&feature=player_embedded

domino
01-09-2013, 8:28 AM
It's a very democrat thing to use the executive order when it's too hard to get their way through normal channels. The amount of EO's that came out of Clinton's administration was astounding.

I actually don't worry about DiFi and her nutty ideas. To pure politicians like her, winning isn't as important as being seen "doing something" about a problem... even if what they do has no good effect at all.
What I do worry about is the President pulling an EO out of his hiney and doing something that it will take years to undo in the SCOTUS.
I also worry about a super majority in Sack-of-mentos, and how long it would take to overturn stupidity passed there.

True that it has been a democratic thing more, but Bush 43 actually signed a lot of them too. Reagan also signed just as many as Clinton did. But Barry has signed close to 150 thus far. They are unconstitutional to say the least. Roosevelt issues over 3,000

I like what Ron Paul said about them - he said they are unconstitutional and that if he were even elected then he would sign only one EO and that would be to end future EO's.

This is a presidents tool when they dont get their way. Hopefully congress will do the right thing and toss out any EO he tries with gun control policies.
I think to date only 2 EO's have ever been overturned by congress. Please correct me if I am wrong about this.

domino
01-09-2013, 8:32 AM
What about all those folks with certain misdemeanors who all of a sudden found that they could no longer own a gun? What if they change the law so even an arrest makes you ineligible?

No offense but DONT BREAK THE LAW. It amazes me that I see these kind of post on here all the time - I had a DUI - I had this when I was younger. I am in my 40's and guess what ? I have never had any run-in with the law at all - ever. I have gotten a traffic ticket before, but I have never broken the law and been arrested. How many people are there that go through their life that never get arrested? A lot of them. I just dont understand it. I am not trying to be a richard here but thats your problem for breaking the law. To me it shows a lack of judgement.

If you know it is wrong to drink and drive and you are breaking the law but you do it anyway - isnt this a lapse in judgement?

GrizzlyGuy
01-09-2013, 8:38 AM
What about all those folks with certain misdemeanors who all of a sudden found that they could no longer own a gun? What if they change the law so even an arrest makes you ineligible?

He can't do that via executive order. The federal firearm prohibiting factors (crimes, mental health issues, dishonorable discharges, etc.) are stated in federal law and can only be changed by Congress.

I'm having a hard time thinking of anything significant that Obama could do via executive order. Reprioritizing BATFE to focus more on some aspects of the law and their regulations vs. other ones is about it.

paul0660
01-09-2013, 8:40 AM
I have gotten a traffic ticket before, but I have never broken the law

And, lots of people don't get ANY tickets, (which IS breaking the law btw).

Check out the penal code sometime, it is chockablock with laws to break, some of which you have...........not been caught at.

winnre
01-09-2013, 8:44 AM
A traffic ticket is a form of arrest. And people are arrested and not convicted because they are not guilty.

winnre
01-09-2013, 8:44 AM
A traffic ticket is a form of arrest. And people are arrested and not convicted because they are not guilty.

hawk1
01-09-2013, 8:46 AM
I look at this as we're winning.

My guess is Biden told him they don't have the votes to pass anything.

Executive Orders can be killed by a vote in the house. If he goes that way, then the pressure needs to be put on the house to kill it or face being voted out in the upcoming election...

furyous68
01-09-2013, 8:47 AM
WELL... according to Biden (@ 3:55 of this video: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nbc-news/50410235#50410235 ) Executive Orders are on the way. Can't stand to see Holder sitting there next to him. That bastard should be in jail.

Hold on boys, we're in for a ride... and the track may run out before the end.

domino
01-09-2013, 8:52 AM
And, lots of people don't get ANY tickets, (which IS breaking the law btw).

Check out the penal code sometime, it is chockablock with laws to break, some of which you have...........not been caught at.

That was my bad - i did break the law and received an infraction for it. But getting yourself in trouble for a misdemeanor - if you are convicted of one in book book that is a lot more than an infraction. And the infraction I received was for using someones truck to haul something and their registration was expired, once I received citation and showed the owner he then registered his truck, I went to court and showed them proof and paid a small fine. Did I break the law - technically I did - I guess I should have looked at the registration on my relatives truck before driving it.

ddestruel
01-09-2013, 8:52 AM
All we can do is wait to see what he does in the form of a EO if any and then react

Anticipating and speculating about what this administration will do and wont is a fools game as they never cease to amaze us on how far they reach beyond previously used levels of assumed authority and how far they push the envelope of circum-navigating constitutionally defined checks and balances with their authority grabbing "new rules".

domino
01-09-2013, 8:56 AM
A traffic ticket is a form of arrest. And people are arrested and not convicted because they are not guilty.

There must have been some reason for the arrest? Sorry but I guess I was only reading into the part where you said What about all those folks with certain misdemeanors who all of a sudden found that they could no longer own a gun? To me that means they went to court and have a misdemeanor on their record. If they were arrested and never charged for one that is a different story I guess. I guess I have just been lucky enough to have never put myself in a position to be arrested other than the technical traffic citation I received in the past.

furyous68
01-09-2013, 8:56 AM
See this video: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nbc-news/50410235#50410235

@ 3:55 he mentions the president is ready to issue EO's if needed.

frankm
01-09-2013, 8:58 AM
WELL... according to Biden (@ 3:55 of this video: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nbc-news/50410235#50410235 ) Executive Orders are on the way. Can't stand to see Holder sitting there next to him. That bastard should be in jail.

Hold on boys, we're in for a ride... and the track may run out before the end.

If they are unConstitutional, then why should people listen to anything they say or obey them anymore? :facepalm:

tcrpe
01-09-2013, 9:01 AM
:dupe:

furyous68
01-09-2013, 9:04 AM
Sry... I looked but didn't see a thread on this video. Mod's delete it if it is a dupe.

Moonshine
01-09-2013, 9:06 AM
I have to be honest, at first the tin foil hat paranoia about Obama the boogeyman and martial law scenarios was amusing. But seriously can we just focus on what's realistically going to happen?

Obama has an "F" rating with the Brady bunch. He is infamous for taking the middle-of-the-road path of least resistance. What's going to happen is a ban on greater than 10 round magazines and changes in background checks so they are required for PPT in all states along with checks to the mental health database. There is NO SUPPORT in either body of the legislature to do more than this.

OK, now that I have said what will realistically happen the tin foil hats can go back on and you may discuss your conspiracy theories about executive orders and Blackhawk helicopters comming in the dead of the night searching for M&P-15s panic bought for $2,500 and overpriced Romanian WASR-10s.

Moonshine
01-09-2013, 9:09 AM
REPEAT AFTER ME: there will be no executive action. There will be a weak middle of the road approach that includes a greater than 10 round mag ban, background checks for PPTs, and expansion of the use of the national mental health database. There is simple NOT congressional support out there for more than that.

paul0660
01-09-2013, 9:17 AM
Obama has an "F" rating with the Brady bunch.

That is not a good standard, most politicians don't meet the Brady's idea of what should be.

Is everyone ignoring the way tax codes can be used to affect ownership of any little thing?

furyous68
01-09-2013, 9:18 AM
Moonshine, though I don't subscribe to all the conspiracy theories, I don't trust ANY politician.. Republican or Democrat. I do not trust the POTUS, or the VPOTUS... especially when they have that lying dirt bag, Eric Holder, sitting right next to them. I wouldn't doubt for a second that Obama will push EO's if Congress doesn't do what he wants regarding gun control. Who gives a flying rip how the Brady's grade him.

EDIT: Good point Paul... just like Obama Care. The only way that was cleared by SCOTUS was because it is enforced as a tax, not a law. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't try something like this with gun control.

MaHoTex
01-09-2013, 9:19 AM
The latest article says "Executive action can be taken" so they have obviously already discussed it and determined that is a real possibility. Additionally, they have determined that a separate legislative action would also be required to drive the final nail home.

I do not think this is tin foil hat paranoia. This is very real, and it will be happening in the next 3 weeks.

7lug
01-09-2013, 9:24 AM
Obama has an "F" rating with the Brady bunch. He is infamous for taking the middle-of-the-road path of least resistance. What's going to happen is a ban on greater than 10 round magazines and changes in background checks so they are required for PPT in all states along with checks to the mental health database. There is NO SUPPORT in either body of the legislature to do more than this.

Thats why he's putting this on Joe Biden -

Don't you understand that Obama uses Executive Orders to get things done? Who cares what either body in legislation supports, EOs allow his people to circumvent ANY opposition by either congress or senate. Biden HIMSELF says "There will be no negotiation... We will use Executive Orders..." So what he says goes. And yeah, Biden is a straight A student in the eyes of the Brady Bunch

Oh and hey everyone... Thanks for having me :oji:

thominator
01-09-2013, 9:26 AM
I have to be honest, at first the tin foil hat paranoia about Obama the boogeyman and martial law scenarios was amusing. But seriously can we just focus on what's realistically going to happen?

Obama has an "F" rating with the Brady bunch. He is infamous for taking the middle-of-the-road path of least resistance. What's going to happen is a ban on greater than 10 round magazines and changes in background checks so they are required for PPT in all states along with checks to the mental health database. There is NO SUPPORT in either body of the legislature to do more than this.

OK, now that I have said what will realistically happen the tin foil hats can go back on and you may discuss your conspiracy theories about executive orders and Blackhawk helicopters comming in the dead of the night searching for M&P-15s panic bought for $2,500 and overpriced Romanian WASR-10s.

This isn't conspiracy, this is the VP of the USA saying that EO's may be issued for guns, you think they're just blowing hot air?

voiceofreason
01-09-2013, 9:28 AM
No offense but DONT BREAK THE LAW. It amazes me that I see these kind of post on here all the time - I had a DUI - I had this when I was younger. I am in my 40's and guess what ? I have never had any run-in with the law at all - ever. I have gotten a traffic ticket before, but I have never broken the law and been arrested. How many people are there that go through their life that never get arrested? A lot of them. I just dont understand it. I am not trying to be a richard here but thats your problem for breaking the law. To me it shows a lack of judgement.

If you know it is wrong to drink and drive and you are breaking the law but you do it anyway - isnt this a lapse in judgement?

Good for you.

Unfortunately, the men and women in LE are just people like you and me. They make mistakes, lots of them. Sometimes things are done somewhat outside of the law to justify a specific ends with good intentions

If you think that LE doesn't profile... You are a fool.

If you "look shady" you WILL be looked at closer and more often. Each detainment increases the chance of an arrest.

Not everyone is connected like David Gregory and can commit a premeditated crime on nationwide tv and get away with it.

There are so many laws on the books, there is at least a 50% chance you can be found to have done something wrong.

Do you always follow posted speed limits?

---

Casual_Shooter
01-09-2013, 9:28 AM
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=674522

the86d
01-09-2013, 9:28 AM
My property theoretically will be grandfathered in, however my son and daughter will not be able to have the same freedoms that I enjoy...

Sounds like a dictatorship to me (via XO and all)!

Cnynrat
01-09-2013, 9:31 AM
But, EOs for what?

Could they issue an EO requiring all Fed agencies to report certain info to DOJ for inclusion in NICs database? Sure.

Do I think they will issue an EO banning so-called "assault weapons?". Not very likely IMO.

paul0660
01-09-2013, 9:36 AM
This isn't conspiracy, this is the VP of the USA saying that EO's may be issued for guns, you think they're just blowing hot air?


It's the only air Joe blows, and I give this administration enough credit to use him as a stalking horse.

There are limitations on EO's, and refreshing to me that gun owners are concerned about this.

Moonshine
01-09-2013, 9:38 AM
I would be willing to bet a box of .223 there is no EO. Oh wait there are no boxes of .223 to bet because with Joe and other politicians blowing hit air everything is being bought for 1000% higher prices.

Hmmm... Ahhhh... I get it, guns are effectively banned because there are no guns or ammo to buy because everyone is sold out LOL!

7lug
01-09-2013, 9:39 AM
But, EOs for what?

Could they issue an EO requiring all Fed agencies to report certain info to DOJ for inclusion in NICs database? Sure.

Do I think they will issue an EO banning so-called "assault weapons?". Not very likely IMO.

Well that's your opinion and I respect all opinions. Mine is that they revert to a CA style ban but nationwide. 10rd magazines, bullet buttons or fixed mags etc - mental health checklists and extended waits/restrictions on both new and used weapon sales. With Smokin Joe vomiting something about "No reasonable need for 30rd magazines other than to wreak death and havoc on humans" or something of the sort...lol

thominator
01-09-2013, 9:41 AM
It's the only air Joe blows, and I give this administration enough credit to use him as a stalking horse.

There are limitations on EO's, and refreshing to me that gun owners are concerned about this.

I hear ya.

Problem with some people is they are so far removed from conspiracy talk that they don't want to hear or believe it even when it start to becomes reality.

I guess when the VP of the USA starts talking like this, it's still conspiracy talk to some folks.

Dantedamean
01-09-2013, 9:43 AM
Thats why he's putting this on Joe Biden -

Don't you understand that Obama uses Executive Orders to get things done? Who cares what either body in legislation supports, EOs allow his people to circumvent ANY opposition by either congress or senate. Biden HIMSELF says "There will be no negotiation... We will use Executive Orders..." So what he says goes. And yeah, Biden is a straight A student in the eyes of the Brady Bunch

Oh and hey everyone... Thanks for having me :oji:

Well ya, if he didn't do executive orders and only relied on cooperation then he would never get his way. He's a 12 year old running our county, the morons who voted for him the second time are just as bad.

sakosf
01-09-2013, 9:49 AM
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

ChrisC
01-09-2013, 9:50 AM
It's a very democrat thing to use the executive order when it's too hard to get their way through normal channels. The amount of EO's that came out of Clinton's administration was astounding.

Reagan signed more than Clinton. EO's have been abused by both sides, it is not a democrat thing. Clinton only did about 70 or so more than Bush. They all use them so stop making statements like "it's a very democrat thing" when in reality it is used by both sides.

noseyparker2u
01-09-2013, 9:51 AM
Anyone who still thinks Obama in not an Marxist dictator in training has not been paying attention. Executive action is just the first step in circumventing the 2nd. amendment, it will happen, and will happen soon. His plan to "fundamentally" change America is coming to fruition. The current crop of Republicans are both unprepared and/or unwilling to do what it takes to stop him. Remember, Austria voted to have Hitler annexe their country, sort of like what we have done

gwstans
01-09-2013, 9:55 AM
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/executiveorders.asp

the86d
01-09-2013, 9:57 AM
Anyone who still thinks Obama in not an Marxist dictator in training has not been paying attention. Executive action is just the first step in circumventing the 2nd. amendment, it will happen, and will happen soon. His plan to "fundamentally" change America is coming to fruition. The current crop of Republicans are both unprepared and/or unwilling to do what it takes to stop him. Remember, Austria voted to have Hitler annexe their country, sort of like what we have done

Obama is no Hitler...

Hitler poised people's parties against one another like never before, blamed the rich, and took away their guns... Never-phrackin'-mind, he's WORSE than Hitler, as he has MORE power, and more drones (aka mindless-Zombies)!

Chip-chip-chip, until no rights are left...

Cnynrat
01-09-2013, 9:59 AM
Well that's your opinion and I respect all opinions. Mine is that they revert to a CA style ban but nationwide. 10rd magazines, bullet buttons or fixed mags etc - mental health checklists and extended waits/restrictions on both new and used weapon sales. With Smokin Joe vomiting something about "No reasonable need for 30rd magazines other than to wreak death and havoc on humans" or something of the sort...lol

They will not do all you say by EO.

They will try to do all that (and more) in Congress, and we'll see if the Republicans in the House play ball with them

7lug
01-09-2013, 10:04 AM
Well considering what Fake-Stein is already proposing... It is just crazy -

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2012/feinstein-goes-for-broke-with-new-gun-ban-bill.aspx

Dantedamean
01-09-2013, 10:08 AM
Well considering what Fake-Stein is already proposing... It is just crazy -

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2012/feinstein-goes-for-broke-with-new-gun-ban-bill.aspx

Ya I want the damn text to come out already, it will give a good insight into what they want.

LBDamned
01-09-2013, 10:09 AM
A traffic ticket is a form of arrest. And people are arrested and not convicted because they are not guilty.

a traffic ticket is an infraction. Nothing more.

3006
01-09-2013, 10:15 AM
I think Obama will hit very hard with a feinstein style bill! I think he is anti gun to the extreme .

five.five-six
01-09-2013, 10:16 AM
EO threat sounds to me like he can't get enough legislative backing to pass an AWB.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk 2

Dennisr
01-09-2013, 10:18 AM
Yeah, I'm gonna go with federal laws limiting mags to 10 rounds and a ban on "assault weapons". That should be easy for them to pass and easy for the public to swallow.

And it's one step closer to the edge...

7lug
01-09-2013, 10:20 AM
EO threat sounds to me like he can't get enough legislative backing to pass an AWB.

But who needs it? Biden and crew DO NOT CARE what legislative backing they receive. That's the point.

gun toting monkeyboy
01-09-2013, 10:33 AM
You guys need to take a deep breath. Obama can't get an AWB through congress. And an Executive Order would have injunctions filed against it in a dozen courts before the ink from him signing it was even dry. He is not a king. He is not a dictator, no matter how much he wants to be. The way our constitution is written, the President can't just overrule congress or the constitution on a whim. And do you seriously think that the NRA or any of the other 2nd Amendment groups out there would stand around and take this? Seriously? We have some very, very good legal minds on our side, and a ton of court cases supporting us. He doesn't stand a chance in hell of pulling this off. We are not the same country we were in 1994.

-Mb

oh, and one other tidbit. Obamacare, piece of crap that it is, has a provision in it that FORBIDS the federal government from collecting any information on gun owners. How exactly is he going to get around that? Sounds like he is about to be hoisted on his own petard.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 10:36 AM
Obama has apparently been considering telling the BATFE to re-classify semi-automatics as automatic weapons under the NFA - effectively banning them. And yes, I'm playing a little loose with the terminology and I'm no legal expert so maybe it's not the NFA - but I think it is.

I think you will see Obama push very hard in the UN for sweeping gun bans and then (if he thinks he can get away with it) try to impose those bans here in the US even without ratification.

You'll see more of the nonsense he has imposed on the so-called "border states".

You may see him interfere with the NICS to slow down background checks.

I don't think anyone has the full list, but expect it to be as extensive as he can possibly make it. And remember that Obama has effectively no accountability - he doesn't have to run for office and a successful impeachment is so improbable as to be ludicrous.

If that is the case, there are going to be thousands of people going to jail for having "manufactured" automatic weapons illegally. Pretty much anyone involved at ANY gun manufacturer that has even a single semi-auto has been involved in illegal manufacture.

I seriously can't see even our corrupt government going for that one. The number of lawyers that would come on board would guarantee a circus like atmosphere never seen before or since.

tcrpe
01-09-2013, 10:38 AM
http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc23/tcrpe/Capture-64_zpsd3493f44.jpg

noseyparker2u
01-09-2013, 10:39 AM
Liberals are like Zombies, they just never stop!

wintersborn
01-09-2013, 10:39 AM
This is for real the video is here:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

Or you can find the link on the Drudge report etc.

Has anyone drafted a plea letter to LEO's asking then to not comply with this action for obvious reasons but most importantly for their safety ?

The LEO's I have worked with and am personal friends with know what could happen to them and are very nervous about the situation.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 10:40 AM
Good for you.

Unfortunately, the men and women in LE are just people like you and me. They make mistakes, lots of them. Sometimes things are done somewhat outside of the law to justify a specific ends with good intentions

If you think that LE doesn't profile... You are a fool.

If you "look shady" you WILL be looked at closer and more often. Each detainment increases the chance of an arrest.

Not everyone is connected like David Gregory and can commit a premeditated crime on nationwide tv and get away with it.

There are so many laws on the books, there is at least a 50% chance you can be found to have done something wrong.

Do you always follow posted speed limits?

---

If you do NOT ALWAYS obey the posted limit, are you aware that in most places there are thresholds that turn a mere traffic infraction into a criminal charge?

There are FAR too many laws on the books for ANYONE to know even a tiny fraction of them. Even worse is the fact that most of the laws are written by people with less intelligence and reading comprehension skills than my four year old son. Even if you DO know about the law, do you actually understand not only what it says, but what the local authorities THINK that it says?

thominator
01-09-2013, 10:42 AM
This is for real the video is here:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

Or you can find the link on the Drudge report etc.

Has anyone drafted a plea letter to LEO's asking then to not comply with this action for obvious reasons but most importantly for their safety ?

The LEO's I have worked with and am personal friends with know what could happen to them and are very nervous about the situation.

Here is a letter from a LEO in response to the recent Iowa bill to ban and confiscate semi-auto weapons:

Article about an Iowa legislator who will be pushing for a gun ban, buy-back/turn in, followed by confiscation.

http://www.carrollspaper.com/m...ID=1&ArticleID=14934

The article and drivel is the same old knee jerk liberal reaction and talking points. What I found refreshing was one of the sentiments expressed in the comments to the article. Refreshing to actually hear the words coming from a cop on where they stand. i am hopeful that all across the country these sentiments are the majority of those sworn to protect and serve.

"I have a very close friend in the DMPD, who asked that I post this here for him, as he fears reprisals:

"Why is ii ugly statist trolls are always so eager to get us law officers killed for their beliefs? You got another thing coming creep if you think myself or my fellow officers are going to commit suicide by carrying out any such illegal order.

You'd have us trample on essential liberties, and put everything we hold dear at risk.

My kids have to go to school with the people you want me to kick the doors in on. My wife works with the people you want me to gun-down. My house is right next to all the families you'd have me assault - yes I said ASSAULT.

No way. No d*&^ way. These are my neighbors, friends, and family. We work our collective butts off, trying to keep these people safe! You'd have us turn our weapons on them?

I, and most of my fellow officers will not be a party to this. We are PEACE KEEPERS. We are SHEEP-DOGS.

We are not "goons" or "stormtroopers" at the beckon call of some schmuck out to make his name by chasing tragedies.

If you want to disarm the people of Iowa, then you strap on a vest, and take them yourself you authoritarian coward.

In fact if it comes to that, you can have MINE, cause I will quit, and a hell of alot of my comrades will stand right alongside me. Your stupid anti-liberty agenda is not worth my blood, the blood of my fellow officers, or the blood my my family.

Take them yourself"

tba02
01-09-2013, 10:43 AM
The layman in me thinks they will toss anything they can out there and see what is left in the end. EA/EO, legislation at local, state and federal. They want "a win" anyway they can get it and will try them all, even if rhetorically.

So yeah, hearing EA/EO being considered is certainly valid for sharing to the public.

OlderThanDirt
01-09-2013, 10:49 AM
That is not a good standard, most politicians don't meet the Brady's idea of what should be.

Is everyone ignoring the way tax codes can be used to affect ownership of any little thing?

I brought this up on another thread. No JBT confiscating guns. Just the IRS ensuring compliance with whatever is in an EO. Don't want to comply? Look forward to frozen bank accounts, no health care, etc.

I recall several people have gone down for not having a little $200 tax stamp. Consider what one faces with a violation of the NFA.

Violations of the Act are punishable by up to 10 years in federal prison and forfeiture of all devices or firearms in violation, and the individual's right to own or possess firearms in the future. The Act provides for a penalty of $10,000 for certain violations. A willful attempt to evade or defeat a tax imposed by the Act is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $100,000 fine ($500,000 in the case of a corporation or trust), under the general tax evasion statute. For an individual, the felony fine of $100,000 for tax evasion could be increased to $250,000.

Or in other words, we will destroy you if you do not comply. I can see people begging to turn in their firearms under expanded NFA categories.

BigMac
01-09-2013, 10:49 AM
I would be willing to bet a box of .223 there is no EO. Oh wait there are no boxes of .223 to bet because with Joe and other politicians blowing hit air everything is being bought for 1000% higher prices.

Hmmm... Ahhhh... I get it, guns are effectively banned because there are no guns or ammo to buy because everyone is sold out LOL!

Ahmmm I sold 50 boxes yesterday at regular pre stupid prices.. There is 223 for a few minutes anyway ;)

bwiese
01-09-2013, 10:50 AM
Pretty much can't reclassify guns without Senate+Congressional action.

Broadly, "what a gun is" is a legal definition via statute.

EOs could affect NICS processing/data gathering, certainly import matters and other procedural ATF stuff.

Manolito
01-09-2013, 10:50 AM
Today is not what drives men mad it is the fear and dread of tomorrow that allows them to become crazy.

Lets do what we can today and each following day.

Executive order is what they see as possible. Biden has already said Bill Clinton learned a very valuable lesson about weapons bans. Clinton in a State of the Union address stated some are not here tonight because they signed on for the assault weapons ban. This is a lesson all elected officials learn. If you vote to take our guns your chance of re-election is in jeopardy. There are a lot of Democrats that hunt and own guns nobody wants to alienate those people.

bwiese
01-09-2013, 10:52 AM
REPEAT AFTER ME: there will be no executive action. There will be a weak middle of the road approach that includes a greater than 10 round mag ban, background checks for PPTs, and expansion of the use of the national mental health database. There is simple NOT congressional support out there for more than that.

Generally agree as long as we keep our strength up - and don't let the 'duck hunter types' screw us over in PR arena.

wintersborn
01-09-2013, 10:57 AM
Thanks for sharing Thominator.

I do not wish to instigate threatening talk against LEO's but they know what will happen. Two of my fiends are good men and will not participate but it is a very touchy subject at CHP and in local PD here.

I think if more LEO's had the courage to go on public record, many more would back them up. If there was a majority on this issue, then I think they would be safe from persecution.

It has got to start somewhere with someone.

OleCuss
01-09-2013, 11:02 AM
I'm glad you all think they cannot reclassify the weapons. I hate to tell you that the Democrats have been discussing doing that for quite some time.

And who, exactly, is going to stop Obama if he does? The BATFE? The DOJ? The military? Oh, yeah, I forgot - Kagan, Sotomayor, etc. will tell him he has to stop. . .

Maybe I'm related to kcbrown?

But seriously, I don't know how far he will go, but I guarantee it will be a whole lot further than some on this forum were saying it would go before he was re-elected. I keep remembering hearing how Obama was never going to do anything to damage our RKBA.

Well, the former Joyce Foundation member is going to do everything he thinks he can get away with to kill our RKBA.

Right now he is trying to calibrate the opposition he will get and getting his flunkies in government, in the press, and in the big corporations to prepare for a gutting of our rights.

SunTzu
01-09-2013, 11:18 AM
Internment camps for Americans of Japanese decent was done by executive order and upheld by Supreme Court. Public opinion and fear mongering is very powerful.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/09/Biden-Obama-Will-Bypass-Congress-for-Gun-Control

Cnynrat
01-09-2013, 11:21 AM
Internment camps for Americans of Japanese decent was done by executive order and upheld by Supreme Court. Public opinion and fear mongering is very powerful.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/09/Biden-Obama-Will-Bypass-Congress-for-Gun-Control

Different time, different likely response.

BlooDSMeaR
01-09-2013, 11:21 AM
LEO's don't want the public to own guns. it makes their jobs that much more dangerous. They wouldn't want to be the ones going door to door confiscating either... Tough call but the one and only LEO I know is all about getting guns from us Joe's.

Fellblade
01-09-2013, 11:23 AM
If he did issue an EO to make Semi-auto fall under NFA, wouldn't that give good ground to overturn NFA since the vast majority of firearms in common use would be restricted?

gun toting monkeyboy
01-09-2013, 11:25 AM
LEO's don't want the public to own guns. it makes their jobs that much more dangerous. They wouldn't want to be the ones going door to door confiscating either... Tough call but the one and only LEO I know is all about getting guns from us Joe's.

Yeah, ummm... your research set consists of one. That is statistically insignificant. Look at how many LEOs are on here. Don't go painting them with a broad brush just because the only one you know is an a-hole.

-Mb

epilepticninja
01-09-2013, 11:29 AM
What's going to happen is a ban on greater than 10 round magazines and changes in background checks so they are required for PPT in all states along with checks to the mental health database. There is NO SUPPORT in either body of the legislature to do more than this.



I agree with you on your assessment. A full outright ban prolly won't happen. However, it is what the libtards in this state are going to do is what scares me. And that doesn't take a tinfoil hat to figure out. They are going to go bananas on our gun rights in CA. Believe that.

ufcfan83
01-09-2013, 11:32 AM
At what point does the elitist look at the guy with the tinfoil hat and say "Hmm, He might be onto something."

ufcfan83
01-09-2013, 11:45 AM
This guy seems pretty upset about it.
(link below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aorMJoMDN-Q

Dantedamean
01-09-2013, 11:45 AM
If an executive order is put into place when does it go in on affect?

Is it similar to a bill, it won't go into affect till Jan 1st 2014 or will it be law once he signs it?

CBruce
01-09-2013, 11:47 AM
He can't do that via executive order. The federal firearm prohibiting factors (crimes, mental health issues, dishonorable discharges, etc.) are stated in federal law and can only be changed by Congress.

I'm having a hard time thinking of anything significant that Obama could do via executive order. Reprioritizing BATFE to focus more on some aspects of the law and their regulations vs. other ones is about it.

Could he stenghten background checks? Force all gun transfers do be done with them? Ensure that all mental health issues are reported and added to this database? Prioritize them so they can be done more quickly and effeciently? Require law enforcment to follow-up on failed attempts to purchase a gun?

Maybe I don't understand executive orders, but its my belief they pertain specifically to enforcing existing laws, and one cant simply make things illegal. You can seemingly prioritize or de-prioritize enforcing certain laws, but not ouright modify them.

bigdawg86
01-09-2013, 11:48 AM
This guy seems pretty upset about it.
(link below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aorMJoMDN-Q

'Merica!

mt4design
01-09-2013, 11:50 AM
Obama is a friend of known radical revolutionaries who actually used violence against this country. In fact, Bill Ayers visits the guy at the White House.

Obama grew up with Frank Marshall Davis, a card carrying member of the communist party, as his mentor.

Obama's grandparents were extreme leftists.

Obama's mother and father held extreme views against the United States and it's "imperialism".

Obama sat in a pew listening to the words of a radical cleric named Jeremiah Wright for over a decade. When pressed, he said he never really listened to what the man said.

Leftists breed dictators.

Obama, through his actions along with the despots who have aligned themselves with him, is consolidating power and looking more and more like a dictator every day.

If those facts are said to be tinfoil, then take off the rose colored glasses.

ETA: One thing to consider is that revolution is part of their agenda. You can only go so far within the confines of the Constitution to fundamentally transform this country. You can only go so far by usurping the Constitution all together and declaring power never granted to the office of the president. What they need is an Arab Spring on the streets of Hometown, U.S.A., a catalyst event to bring that about and an issue that will cause too far a rift between "Constitutionalists" and them. And, they've actually been training to fight "Constitutionalists".

the86d
01-09-2013, 12:01 PM
This guy seems pretty upset about it.
(link below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aorMJoMDN-Q

WOW! This might be a diving board...

reznunt
01-09-2013, 12:17 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=aorMJoMDN-Q

*sorry, repost

gobler
01-09-2013, 12:19 PM
WOW! This might be a diving board...

More and more I have heard this talk. We are close to a breaking point now and I don't know, maybe 0bammy wants to have some thing like this happen to justify a real clampdown...

winnre
01-09-2013, 12:20 PM
Anybody want to buy a used boat? It's old and may sink at any time....

CHIEFone
01-09-2013, 12:24 PM
WOW! This might be a diving board...

vid was good except for the END, he has a decent youtube channel too.

the86d
01-09-2013, 12:27 PM
More and more I have heard this talk. We are close to a breaking point now and I don't know, maybe 0bammy wants to have some thing like this happen to justify a real clampdown...

I am with you, it is a REAL scary thought that it could get ugly real quick...

I believe that more never-enlisted own forearms than ever, and some people are crazy...

I believe he wants people to start, so he can put up even more restrictions, and NDAA clamps, and ... more.

the86d
01-09-2013, 12:28 PM
vid was good except for the END, he has a decent youtube channel too.

Had? :)

CHIEFone
01-09-2013, 12:33 PM
^^^ true, Had a decent channel

PatrickRyan
01-09-2013, 12:38 PM
Obama has already proven that he doesn't care about the constitution or using congress the way he supposed to.

This shouldn't shock anyone..

Isn't that the truth.

reznunt
01-09-2013, 12:40 PM
Yeah, ummm... your research set consists of one. That is statistically insignificant. Look at how many LEOs are on here. Don't go painting them with a broad brush just because the only one you know is an a-hole.

-Mb

:cheers2:

badicedog
01-09-2013, 12:40 PM
Scary times ahead. I think everyone should really take time to digest all the events that are unfolding before our eyes. Someone once wrote "when it's time to think about burying your arms, it's time to think about digging them up". Hope things don't lead down that path...

major burnout
01-09-2013, 12:44 PM
Don't you talk about bill errors like that. Bill made some mistakes when he was young and built a few bombs and talked about blowing up government buildings. Yes his soon to be ex-girlfriend died when a bomb 'accidentally' exploded. That was a long time ago. He has made a wonderful recovery and now works with children. That's right children. He uses his time to help the underprivileged youth of Chicago. So that's proof he is a good guy. I'm sure lots of presidents had friends who advocated destroying America. I don't see bill as a threat now that his friends run the US.

Obama is a friend of known radical revolutionaries who actually used violence against this country. In fact, Bill Ayers visits the guy at the White House.

Obama grew up with Frank Marshall Davis, a card carrying member of the communist party, as his mentor.

Obama's grandparents were extreme leftists.

Obama's mother and father held extreme views against the United States and it's "imperialism".

Obama sat in a pew listening to the words of a radical cleric named Jeremiah Wright for over a decade. When pressed, he said he never really listened to what the man said.

Leftists breed dictators.

Obama, through his actions along with the despots who have aligned themselves with him, is consolidating power and looking more and more like a dictator every day.

If those facts are said to be tinfoil, then take off the rose colored glasses.

ETA: One thing to consider is that revolution is part of their agenda. You can only go so far within the confines of the Constitution to fundamentally transform this country. You can only go so far by usurping the Constitution all together and declaring power never granted to the office of the president. What they need is an Arab Spring on the streets of Hometown, U.S.A., a catalyst event to bring that about and an issue that will cause too far a rift between "Constitutionalists" and them. And, they've actually been training to fight "Constitutionalists".

reznunt
01-09-2013, 12:45 PM
...

major burnout
01-09-2013, 12:50 PM
More and more I have heard this talk. We are close to a breaking point now and I don't know, maybe 0bammy wants to have some thing like this happen to justify a real clampdown...

Bingo

goodlookin1
01-09-2013, 12:55 PM
There will not be confiscation.....not in the sense of door to door breakdowns. That would trigger HUGE backlash, all the way up to massive civil unrest or even physical war against LEO/Feds/whoever comes to get their guns.

The confiscation will come in the silent form of "no transfer/no new purchases", AKA "Death by 1000 cuts". You would be forced to register them NFA style, then confiscate the property at their death. This, along with other small cuts, is how they plan to fundamentally change America's gun culture. It takes time. People dont fight as much if they arent having their stuff physically taken away. But let them keep what they have until they die, and your fight will be won in time.

We CANT let this happen.

frankm
01-09-2013, 12:55 PM
Scary times ahead. I think everyone should really take time to digest all the events that are unfolding before our eyes. Someone once wrote "when it's time to think about burying your arms, it's time to think about digging them up". Hope things don't lead down that path...

All actions of government seem to parallel the tinfoil hat crowd's predictions of the demise of the Republic.

major burnout
01-09-2013, 12:58 PM
I hear ya.

Problem with some people is they are so far removed from conspiracy talk that they don't want to hear or believe it even when it start to becomes reality.

I guess when the VP of the USA starts talking like this, it's still conspiracy talk to some folks.

It's just ol' crazy Joe. He's not a real Vice President of the United States of America. He likes to joke around, keep it light.

9mmdude
01-09-2013, 1:02 PM
LEO's don't want the public to own guns. it makes their jobs that much more dangerous. They wouldn't want to be the ones going door to door confiscating either... Tough call but the one and only LEO I know is all about getting guns from us Joe's.

Broad inaccurate statement without foundation or merit.

louie
01-09-2013, 1:03 PM
The easiest he could do would be like Clinton did last time. Ban military style ammo from Russia. When Clinton did this w/ China, the Russian x39 was 300.00 a thousand till the factories started really churning it out. That would make it much more expensive to shoot the "evil" type guns" and hurt their popularity. Also, could say would help Americans with more jobs here. Instead or Wolf for 223/x39 buy Remchester for $15.00 a box in good times. Also, no more imports of hi cap mags from overseas could be done. Clinton did this w/ the barrels of full auto weapons. Kits used to come w/ barrels, now they probably won't come at all. There is only so much he can do, but what he does do will hurt, no two ways about it.

philobeddoe
01-09-2013, 1:11 PM
he can screw up the ammo supply via EO ... govt surplus, imported ammo, etc.

BHPFan
01-09-2013, 1:18 PM
The easiest he could do would be like Clinton did last time. Ban military style ammo from Russia. When Clinton did this w/ China, the Russian x39 was 300.00 a thousand till the factories started really churning it out. That would make it much more expensive to shoot the "evil" type guns" and hurt their popularity. Also, could say would help Americans with more jobs here. Instead or Wolf for 223/x39 buy Remchester for $15.00 a box in good times. Also, no more imports of hi cap mags from overseas could be done. Clinton did this w/ the barrels of full auto weapons. Kits used to come w/ barrels, now they probably won't come at all. There is only so much he can do, but what he does do will hurt, no two ways about it.

While on this subject, how about a ban of surplus ammo importation?
This means no more NATO 7.62x51 surplus ammo, no more Pakistani .308, no more Prvi Partizan ammo, etc...

Clinton banned all the Chinese ammo and gun imports (remember the Norinco 1911's and Poly M14s).
GW Bush banned all the receiver and parts kit imports (hence more expensive Imbel receivers and more expensive FAL and G3 kits)

ENTHUSIAST
01-09-2013, 1:21 PM
All actions of government seem to parallel the tinfoil hat crowd's predictions of the demise of the Republic.

Bush took a crap on our 4A with the Patriot Act,TSA, Internal Border Patrol Checkpoints.

Obama is now hovering over the 2A with his pants around his ankles and a new roll of US Constitution toilet paper.

Look at the National Debt right now and 0bama wants to use an EO on guns wake up people the New World Order is very real.

History shows what happens to us after they come for the guns.

louie
01-09-2013, 1:29 PM
The nineties and early 2000's were the golden age of cheap ammo The Chinese AK ammo was 7-9c a round for surplus, a little more for commercial. Turner's used to put the Norinco .223 on sale for 1.99 a box! Usual price was 2.99, and it was boxer/brass cased! The 8mm got almost as cheap as .22. 54R usually .8 to.10 a round for surplus. Ammo was cheaper in inflation dollars than it was in the fifties. Lot of cheap shooting for those 15 years. I guess this will all be a good memory now.

dixieD
01-09-2013, 1:29 PM
The good thing about EO is that a future President can wipe it away with their own EO.

louie
01-09-2013, 1:32 PM
Bush never touched the Clinton Chinese gun or ammo ban. He could of, but he didn't.

the86d
01-09-2013, 1:37 PM
The good thing about EO is that a future President can wipe it away with their own EO.

You don't know THEY are talking about doing away with pres. term limits...?

mosinnagantm9130
01-09-2013, 1:43 PM
I get the impression that there are many in this thread that don't understand the limitations of EOs.

Baconator
01-09-2013, 1:45 PM
I get the impression that there are many in this thread that don't understand the limitations of EOs.

Why do you think the legal limitations of EO matter? The EO is as strong as those willing to enforce the EO.

Was it legal to sell a bunch of guns that were knowingly being smuggled into Mexico, with little to no oversight?

zfields
01-09-2013, 1:45 PM
Tagged

Sent from my Incredible 2

OleCuss
01-09-2013, 1:48 PM
I get the impression that there are many in this thread that don't understand the limitations of EOs.

I don't think that is the real issue.

There are many of us in this thread who do not trust the White House or the courts, or most of the other elements of our government to "understand the limitations of EOs" - or the restrictions on governmental power written so plainly into the Constitution.

Bruce
01-09-2013, 1:49 PM
There's nothing to worry about. If B Hussein signs gun control EO's, CGF will file a lawsuit and all will be well. :D

Baconator
01-09-2013, 1:50 PM
There's nothing to worry about. If B Hussein signs gun control EO's, CGF will file a lawsuit and all will be well. :D

in :twoweeks:

damoni
01-09-2013, 1:52 PM
Well ya, if he didn't do executive orders and only relied on cooperation then he would never get his way. He's a 12 year old running our country, the morons who voted for him the second time are just as bad.

You mean "idiots" who voted for him.

Biden is a puppet. That whole administration should be impeached, (at the very least). Government is supposed to support and defend the constitution, not use it as toilet paper, the fact that this trash is coming from the POTUS and VPOTUS makes me want to puke!:mad:

Executive order is the smoke and mirrors way to pass illegal legislature.

Maybe I'm just venting, but when governments are up to no good, no good will come of it!:oji:

LBDamned
01-09-2013, 1:54 PM
vid was good except for the END, he has a decent youtube channel too.

yep...

unfortunately I think the reactions (this vid, Alex Jones, etc) are exactly what the antis want... don't get me wrong, I'm pissed about what is going on too - but I think it's important not to show sides that they can use against us.

newbee1111
01-09-2013, 2:02 PM
Look, guys, take a deep breath. The executive order statement wasn't meant for you. It's a bunch of hot air that the Obama is having Biden say so that it can be played off later. Its BS meant to re-assure the anti-gun people that something is being done when really nothing is being done at all. This is just another edition of Washington puppet theater. Anti-gun legislators need to introduce bills they know are probably going to die in committee or in a best case scenario get defeated straight up in the house. Obama needs to look like he is doing something so he had Biden form a committee. Running a committee is the perfect way to look like you are doing something, lots of photo ops, serious looking discussions, etc. They are going to try to run out the clock until people have gone back to caring about American Idol.

Assuming the NRA is going to have a backbone this time I don't even think that magazine capacity will be touched at the federal level. At best they are going to get background checks for private transfers similar to what we already have in CA now. Obama already knows that gun control measures are DOA in the house and probably won't make it past a filibuster in the senate.

It's the stupid stuff being written up in Sacramento we need to worry about. Really at this point the best we can hope for is that the governor veto's some of the worst measures and the CGF gets to file more lawsuits. I'm personally expecting magazine limits on airsoft guns, paintball markers and cap guns.

dfletcher
01-09-2013, 2:08 PM
I take the VP's statement to mean the WH is concerned their efforts through Congress may fail and the longer the discussion the less likely their success - in short, it's a threat designed influence an increasingly reluctant Congress.

I don't put anything as off limits to what this President would like to do to restrict guns. He has a long anti-gun history. That he has thus far lacked the votes to do as he please doesn't change that fact. I think he'd be happy to ban anything that goes "bang".

I understand the admonition "don't give them any ideas" when it comes to CA laws and our mediocre legislature. Separately, I'm of the opinion I'm not smart enough to give the federal folks any ideas when it comes to the "how to" of gun control. I ask this question by way of supposition and whether it would fly under Heller.

It seems to me AR 15s (for example) are protected under Heller and the President would have a difficult time if he tried to place them under NFA. Whether that would be seen as a "reasonable regulation" I don't know - a $200.00 tax and treating the AR 15 as an M16 doesn't seem reasonable to me.

But greater capacity magazines may not be as well protected under Heller. Could greater capacity magazines be somehow limited and constructive possession applied to them with respect to AR 15s? This sidesteps any restriction on AR 15s directly, possession of an AR 15 and smaller capacity magazines would be unaffected. But the combination of possessing an AR 15 and greater capacity magazines would be prohibited - by constructive possession, the combination would be probibited.

How would we attack such a restriction?

Again, I don't think this is great creative thinking on my part. I don't think anyone on the VP's staff might read this and have an "Aha!!!" moment. If anything I think they've probably already considered it. Or, such an apporach can not be accomplished by an EO - I'll admit knowing very little as to what can and can not be done. How was the "Streetsweeper" afforded DD status?

damoni
01-09-2013, 2:13 PM
Look, guys, take a deep breath. The executive order statement wasn't meant for you. It's a bunch of hot air that the Obama is having Biden say so that it can be played off later. Its BS meant to re-assure the anti-gun people that something is being done when really nothing is being done at all. This is just another edition of Washington puppet theater. Anti-gun legislators need to introduce bills they know are probably going to die in committee or in a best case scenario get defeated straight up in the house. Obama needs to look like he is doing something so he had Biden form a committee. Running a committee is the perfect way to look like you are doing something, lots of photo ops, serious looking discussions, etc. They are going to try to run out the clock until people have gone back to caring about American Idol.

Assuming the NRA is going to have a backbone this time I don't even think that magazine capacity will be touched at the federal level. At best they are going to get background checks for private transfers similar to what we already have in CA now. Obama already knows that gun control measures are DOA in the house and probably won't make it past a filibuster in the senate.

It's the stupid stuff being written up in Sacramento we need to worry about. Really at this point the best we can hope for is that the governor veto's some of the worst measures and the CGF gets to file more lawsuits. I'm personally expecting magazine limits on airsoft guns, paintball markers and cap guns.

I would love to agree with that, and it is sound, don't get me wrong, but I see this whole thing going down like this;

The rest of the nation is going to be brought up to California's Nazi gun law system, which in turn will leave the morons running this state to push our gun laws to the next illegal level. Remember the ol' saying.................... "As California goes, so goes the nation." :facepalm:

JoshuaS
01-09-2013, 2:35 PM
There must have been some reason for the arrest? Sorry but I guess I was only reading into the part where you said What about all those folks with certain misdemeanors who all of a sudden found that they could no longer own a gun? To me that means they went to court and have a misdemeanor on their record. If they were arrested and never charged for one that is a different story I guess. I guess I have just been lucky enough to have never put myself in a position to be arrested other than the technical traffic citation I received in the past.

I never did anything to get myself arrested, but I was. I was charged with two felonies as a minor. Called out of class, and then arrested even though I had done nothing wrong. My accusers had actually made death threats against me, I called their bluff and threatened to report them to the police. I was constantly bullied and isolated, and the school would sweep it under the rug. They decided (this was right after Columbine) to make accusations against me (and my only friend) as a way of preventing me from reporting them. We were led out in handcuffs, based on accusation from hoodlums who were constantly lying and bullying people.

The police refused to let me speak to my parents, they refused a lawyer. Such abuses do happen. It took 2 years before it ended. My lawyer wanted me to plead no contest, my parents urged the same. Thankfully I refused, plead innocent, and most of my accusers recanted on the stand, admitting they didn't think it would go this far. The two who continued lying, contradicted each other and their earlier testimony. And the rest of the evidence was hearsay based on hysterics in the public. When the judge ruled that the case was to be dismissed with prejudice, the ADA tried a motion to charge us with disturbing the peace, as our arrest had disturbed the police. The judge lambasted her, she she actually broke down crying. He even advised us to sue the school district, the police and the DA's office. We didn't because I had this abhorrence about taking taxpayers' money.

But say my accusers had kept their stories straight and stuck to them, say I had a judge with less common sense...I would have felonies on my record. Even though I did nothing but avoid trouble as much as possible. Most lunches/breaks I hung out with my favorite teacher, in his room, to avoid the bullies. The one day he was absent was the day I was arrested.

I learned right then and there that being arrested doesn't mean you did anything wrong. It doesn't even mean that you were stupid. You cannot always avoid it no matter how good you are. I have no doubt that many of the cases I hear where someone got arrested for this or that, but wasn't actually breaking the law, could have been avoided by playing it safe (such as locking up a long gun in the trunk). But not always.

You are blessed never to be the target of irrational suspicion of hate. Don't assume that those who have been did anything wrong necessarily.

wintersborn
01-09-2013, 2:38 PM
This guy seems pretty upset about it.
(link below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aorMJoMDN-Q

Well he is right and he is not alone.

History has proven many times over that the use of force is what makes change. If a very large group of patriots use deadly force to eliminate the threat to our country then you will see change.

It works both ways like 9/11 etc. for that change to work against us.

Lets hope that LEO's do not risk their lives for a treasonous dictator's actions.

I just got word from my two family members still in active duty and they are passing around petitions to not enforce confiscation.

There is hope yet.

maddoggie13
01-09-2013, 2:40 PM
Better buy more lowers...

PBRStreetgang
01-09-2013, 2:47 PM
Was just reading how Biden and Walmart going to talk about it. Walmart take the gun grabbers side, I might start to panic a bit more.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/09/walmart-gun-control_n_2435232.html?1357753660&icid=maing-grid7%7Cipad%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D254877

nobody_special
01-09-2013, 2:52 PM
Obama could direct the ATF top alter the interpretation of *sporting purposes* in order to ban semi auto imports, as well as ammo.

OleCuss
01-09-2013, 2:58 PM
I never did anything to get myself arrested, but I was. I was charged with two felonies as a minor.
.
.
.

You are blessed never to be the target of irrational suspicion of hate. Don't assume that those who have been did anything wrong necessarily.

Amazing story. . . Glad you fought the charges - and that you shared the story and made a very good point.

Sportsmans_Arms_Gabe
01-09-2013, 3:35 PM
Was just reading how Biden and Walmart going to talk about it. Walmart take the gun grabbers side, I might start to panic a bit more.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/09/walmart-gun-control_n_2435232.html?1357753660&icid=maing-grid7%7Cipad%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D254877

LOL! Walmart is set to make MONEY from this, big time money. This is the biggest joke of the whole craze so far.

tba02
01-09-2013, 3:51 PM
Thinking about the guy at the Walmart counter helping with a 4473 is about to make me lose my lunch.

lavey29
01-09-2013, 3:56 PM
I have been saying all along the EO's were one method that O and his cast of clowns would use to push this agenda through. They will also tie it into the U.N. treaty they signed banning firearms.

Will they send the popo out to seize all guns? No way, they will use the IRS to apply tax liens and wage garnishments on owners until they surrender their banned guns. Assimilate or be wage garnished to death. This is how they are applying the tax with obamacare. They are using the IRS to enforce the mandatory payment for obamacare unless you have other coverage.

We are nearing a point of no return here in OUR country and talk means nothing but actions speak volumes in my opinion.

damoni
01-09-2013, 4:04 PM
I have been saying all along the EO's were one method that O and his cast of clowns would use to push this agenda through. They will also tie it into the U.N. treaty they signed banning firearms.

Will they send the popo out to seize all guns? No way, they will use the IRS to apply tax liens and wage garnishments on owners until they surrender their banned guns. Assimilate or be wage garnished to death. This is how they are applying the tax with obamacare. They are using the IRS to enforce the mandatory payment for obamacare unless you have other coverage.

We are nearing a point of no return here in OUR country and talk means nothing but actions speak volumes in my opinion.

I agree!!! What a dirty bas***d! And to think, people in this country voted for him...AGAIN!:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

August
01-09-2013, 4:05 PM
LOL! Walmart is set to make MONEY from this, big time money. This is the biggest joke of the whole craze so far.

Unfortunately, gun sales (nation wide) at Walmart is NOT their bread and butter.

CharlesV
01-09-2013, 4:24 PM
Obama says at this moment he can use EO
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-determined-act-against-gun-violence-biden-164128551.html

Ive said it all along, they can use the Patriot Act to go around Congress. Obama simply doesnt care about the rule of law or procedures and is going for broke right now.

Cnynrat
01-09-2013, 4:34 PM
I have been saying all along the EO's were one method that O and his cast of clowns would use to push this agenda through. They will also tie it into the U.N. treaty they signed banning firearms.

Will they send the popo out to seize all guns? No way, they will use the IRS to apply tax liens and wage garnishments on owners until they surrender their banned guns. Assimilate or be wage garnished to death. This is how they are applying the tax with obamacare. They are using the IRS to enforce the mandatory payment for obamacare unless you have other coverage.

We are nearing a point of no return here in OUR country and talk means nothing but actions speak volumes in my opinion.

NEWS FLASH: No U.N. treaty regarding firearms has been finalized, let alone signed. :facepalm:

Librarian
01-09-2013, 4:59 PM
Obama says at this moment he can use EO
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-determined-act-against-gun-violence-biden-164128551.html

Ive said it all along, they can use the Patriot Act to go around Congress. Obama simply doesnt care about the rule of law or procedures and is going for broke right now.

No, the story you link says BIDEN says the president could use EO.

Tincon
01-09-2013, 5:00 PM
They will also tie it into the U.N. treaty they signed banning firearms.
:TFH:

The occasional read of the Constitution may help quite a bit with things like this. For example: [The President] shall have Power, by and with Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur...

Treaties unilaterally entered into by the president, or some ambassador, do not have the force of law here in the US. They need a super-majority of the senate. That won't happen anytime soon for a UN gun ban treaty. Even if the senate did consent, treaties are not automatically "self-executing", most likely a federal statute (requires house approval as well) would need to be enacted as well.

Also, this statement: There are executive orders, executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet. is about as meaningless as political drivel gets. I'd say wait until he actually figures out what he thinks he can accomplish with an EO before panicking.

pitbull30
01-09-2013, 5:05 PM
Turn on Fox News Hannity right now. He's going off on this topic. It comes on again at 8 pm if you miss it. Or maybe someone will post it here.

majtom94
01-09-2013, 5:10 PM
Seems to be closed now - guess there was too much attention.

chiselchst
01-09-2013, 5:13 PM
Turn on Fox News Hannity right now. He's going off on this topic. It comes on again at 8 pm if you miss it. Or maybe someone will post it here.

Thanks PitBull!

Yes, the lead story... :D

Repeated again (on West Coast) at 8 PM again per PitBull...

lavey29
01-09-2013, 5:42 PM
NEWS FLASH: No U.N. treaty regarding firearms has been finalized, let alone signed. :facepalm:


NATO allies have already signed on and we will be right behind them using the tragedy in CT as part of the reasoning.

mjam
01-09-2013, 5:49 PM
:TFH:

The occasional read of the Constitution may help quite a bit with things like this. For example:

Treaties unilaterally entered into by the president, or some ambassador, do not have the force of law here in the US. They need a super-majority of the senate. That won't happen anytime soon for a UN gun ban treaty. Even if the senate did consent, treaties are not automatically "self-executing", most likely a federal statute (requires house approval as well) would need to be enacted as well.


This is how we (Americans and believers of the constitution) should be thinking. Most politicians "rule" on fear and that's what is happening now. Most of the laws they want pass for "new gun control" wouldn't have stopped any of the tragic events that have happened in the past few months if they were law prior. We as Americans need to educate other Americans that are ignorant of what these elected officials are doing. This New World Order that the these officials are trying to push can and will be vanquished with proper education and cool heads.

lavey29
01-09-2013, 5:49 PM
:TFH:

The occasional read of the Constitution may help quite a bit with things like this. For example:

Treaties unilaterally entered into by the president, or some ambassador, do not have the force of law here in the US. They need a super-majority of the senate. That won't happen anytime soon for a UN gun ban treaty. Even if the senate did consent, treaties are not automatically "self-executing", most likely a federal statute (requires house approval as well) would need to be enacted as well.

Also, this statement: is about as meaningless as political drivel gets. I'd say wait until he actually figures out what he thinks he can accomplish with an EO before panicking.


Do you not think this current admin will not circumvent the rules in some way shape or form? Did a bunch of illegals just become citizens just in time to vote before the election thanks to a EO? Did congress have any recourse or try and stop it?

I have been saying weeks and weeks back that EO would be used because he knows the legislation will be tied up in congress and will not fly most likely especially in the house. Everyone mostly laughed and said no way. Some things will get passed like the gun show loop holes and improved mental health screening, mandatory wait periods etc...maybe even the 10 round mags may fly but to get the complete ban he wants he will tighten the screws with EO and bring all sorts of angles into play such as the treaty that I guarrantee will be signed by the U.S. as soon as Kerry is sworn in and crosses the T's on it for O.

Mark my words and see what the socialist agenda has in store for you next.

lavey29
01-09-2013, 5:56 PM
This is how we (Americans and believers of the constitution) should be thinking. Most politicians "rule" on fear and that's what is happening now. Most of the laws they want pass for "new gun control" wouldn't have stopped any of the tragic events that have happened in the past few months if they were law prior. We as Americans need to educate other Americans that are ignorant of what these elected officials are doing. This New World Order that the these officials are trying to push can and will be vanquished with proper education and cool heads.


Now thats funny. Reading and cool heads will prevail? BS, everyone that believes in the 2nd should be angry as hell that the socialist admin is working to take it away or restrict it to about nothing. This is no time for reflection and thinking it is time to voice your opinion loud and often and tell your Reps WTF you think so they know. Conservatives by nature do not typically get loud and march on issues. The left controls the media so that outlet is not a viable option with a few exceptions here and there on some talk shows. Wheres the million man open carry march on Washington? Where are all our strong tea party and hard core conservatives voicing their opposition to further gun legislation? The left is all over the airwaves pushing it. Dem governors and mayors pushing it. Where is OUR voice and action? We sat idly by in 1994 as well.

mt4design
01-09-2013, 5:57 PM
I can't believe that people don't think unilateral and illegal action by this president is impossible.

He destroyed car dealerships by forcing them closed and they had been family owned and run for generations because they were run by republican or conservative donors. That's a fact that has been completely forgotten.

He is using drone strikes to kill U.S. citizens abroad without due process. Innocent until proven guilty no longer applies. Look at the NDAA.

He pushed through Obamacare even though the majority of the country did not want it.

It wasn't just him?

Okay.

Despotic rule is precisely what 1939s Germany lived with.

All dictators need their cronies.

Obama has no true regard for the U.S. Constitution. He has stated as much.

Google, "obama, the U.S. Constitution is dead".

How about Scalia spelling it out?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTRe5xDLfXw

We live in interesting, dangerous times.

Librarian
01-09-2013, 5:59 PM
First post updated, with essentially the content from this page: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/a/Presidential-Executive-Orders.htm

Do you suppose various Congressional staffers and Presidential aids might have been reading the internet for the last couple weeks? And do you further suppose they NEVER saw the emoting wrapped around 'oh, dear, he'll bypass the Congress and use an Executive Order!' ?

There's a difference between sober consideration of an impending problem, and panic.

Please learn some coping mechanisms.

Gringo Bandito
01-09-2013, 6:01 PM
Check out the little nugget below via the link. I still have not been able to read the amendment in Obama Care that they are referring to but it is promising.



http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/09/Backfire-Obamacare-Forbids-Gun-and-Ammo-Registration

Gringo Bandito
01-09-2013, 6:01 PM
Check out the little nugget below via the link. I still have not been able to read the amendment in Obama Care that they are referring to but it is promising.



http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/09/Backfire-Obamacare-Forbids-Gun-and-Ammo-Registration

Helmut Shmacher Space Chimp
01-09-2013, 6:08 PM
I hope it is all hot air....but it could mean big trouble...And we really don't need it

Breadfan
01-09-2013, 6:12 PM
Tag

cHaOs ReX
01-09-2013, 6:21 PM
Not sure if it's been said yet but Biden has been known to say some pretty stupid things.

scarville
01-09-2013, 6:25 PM
Not sure if it's been said yet but Biden has been known to say some pretty stupid things.

I suspect his blather is mainly posturing for the base. From Biden's mouth to my dog's nuts.

lavey29
01-09-2013, 6:34 PM
Check out the little nugget below via the link. I still have not been able to read the amendment in Obama Care that they are referring to but it is promising.



http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/09/Backfire-Obamacare-Forbids-Gun-and-Ammo-Registration



Do you think they would use obamacare as a tool to track and ID gun owners? Cmon, that info is readily available if you ever bought a handgun or rifle. DROS, background check, CCW permits, FFL business and individual, etc...the fricken government know s everything or has access to acquiring the info.

Now let's just say that "hypothetically" O uses EO to ban all sorts of rifles, handguns and any mags over 10 rounds. He signs it and it becomes law. May take years to argue it at the supreme level and by that time 2 conservative justices will have retired so we all know 2 more lefty females will be put in my O. So now you get the letter in the mail which shows you are a gun owner and asks you to declare and surrender your firearms which fall under the ban. You say F it, come and try and take them from me. You are screwed, you cant go shoot them anywhere for fear of being arrested, cant use the 30 mags anymore for same reasons or even hi cap handgun mags. If you fail to voluntarily surrender your stuff then the IRS will step in and enforce civil penalties such as liens or wage garnishments. I guarantee they will use a civil remedy to force you to surrender your stuff and what would be the reason not to since you can't go to the range with it any longer? It may take sometime because there are a lot of gun owners before you get our letter from the government but it will come. I have RAWS at home. The state knows I have these because I was required to register them years back. I know my letter is coming sooner then later.

The most corrupt administration in history will once again bypass our laws and constitution. Wait and see...

cfm117
01-09-2013, 6:34 PM
"My relevancy will be recognized!"

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c292/cfm117/joe-biden-gun-2_zps5e5a526c.jpg

lavey29
01-09-2013, 6:38 PM
Not sure if it's been said yet but Biden has been known to say some pretty stupid things.



O said it weeks ago after the shooting when he said he would use every power his office holds to take action (summary from memory). He knows congress will be slow and he will start the train rolling himself and follow up with some campaigning around the country and drum up support.

Capt.Dunsel
01-09-2013, 7:15 PM
For those of you that do not believe google Executive Order #13603 signed by Obama on March 16, 2012.

Get ready.

Baconator
01-09-2013, 8:02 PM
For those of you that do not believe google Executive Order #13603 signed by Obama on March 16, 2012.

Get ready.

Yup

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimpowell/2012/04/29/obamas-plan-to-seize-control-of-our-economy-and-our-lives/2/

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Tincon
01-09-2013, 8:54 PM
Do you not think this current admin will not circumvent the rules in some way shape or form? Did a bunch of illegals just become citizens just in time to vote before the election thanks to a EO? Did congress have any recourse or try and stop it?

I have been saying weeks and weeks back that EO would be used because he knows the legislation will be tied up in congress and will not fly most likely especially in the house. Everyone mostly laughed and said no way. Some things will get passed like the gun show loop holes and improved mental health screening, mandatory wait periods etc...maybe even the 10 round mags may fly but to get the complete ban he wants he will tighten the screws with EO and bring all sorts of angles into play such as the treaty that I guarrantee will be signed by the U.S. as soon as Kerry is sworn in and crosses the T's on it for O.


Well there is a major problem with your scenario that becomes pretty obvious if you think it through. If Obama decides to unilaterally create some "legislation" either through an EO or treaty, which criminalizes conduct, what happens next? I suppose he might get the ATF to come arrest you, and then lets assume you get taken to jail. Well at that point you are going to end up before a federal judge. I know quite a few of those guys, and guess what, they don't allow trials for laws that don't actually exist. If you think they do, you are living in a distopian fantasy world. So you are gonna get kicked loose, and almost certainly with a court order from a federal judge for the return of your lawfully possessed property.

Now I suppose they could just start holding everyone without trial in FEMA camps or whatever, but at that point whatever EO or treaty might exist is hardly relevant. So maybe take off the :TFH:, take a deep breath, have a beer, and try to relax.

Capt.Dunsel
01-09-2013, 9:00 PM
Tincon "Now I suppose they could just start holding everyone without trial in FEMA camps or whatever, but at that point whatever EO or treaty might exist is hardly relevant. So maybe take off the , take a deep breath, have a beer, and try to relax."

Take a look at EO # 13603 I mention before , no tinfoil hat needed .

bubbapug1
01-09-2013, 9:11 PM
I think its very telling that the white house today saw fit to defend Piers Morgan's rant about gun control as his 1st amendment right, and didn't even note that his rants affected our 2A rights.

Right there one can see a massive blindspot in Obama's world view.

This facist in liberals clothing wants nothing less than total submission of the independently minded folk who used to comprise the better aspects of America. Its now the sheeple and career challenged who will inherit the earth, or at least our bank accounts and firearms.

Its Russia all over again, only with a less violent tinge...for now, but in time things will get ugly I am sure.

Tincon
01-09-2013, 9:24 PM
Take a look at EO # 13603 I mention before , no tinfoil hat needed .

Please explain how that EO creates a new category of criminal conduct. Seems to me that it is much closer to a clarification of his position as commander in chief and what role he will play in a national emergency. Alarming perhaps, but not legislation. There are some bright lines in the constitution, this isn't one of them, although there certainly could be several constitutional challenges if he actually followed through on that order. That's a world apart from creating an entirely new criminal law.

gazzavc
01-09-2013, 9:47 PM
Obama has apparently been considering telling the BATFE to re-classify semi-automatics as automatic weapons under the NFA - effectively banning them. And yes, I'm playing a little loose with the terminology and I'm no legal expert so maybe it's not the NFA - but I think it is.




I think that may lead to some very unintended consequences.

Think for a moment, how many parts kits, conversion kits, tubes, 80% recievers are out there in circulation, and have been for years and years

Now....

If semi-auto's are re-classified as NFA weapons, and the penalties for having or possessing an un-registered NFA semi-auto weapon are the same as having an un-registered full-auto weapon I think there will be a huge amount of un-registered machine guns out there, as people are going to think if the penalties are the same, I might as well have the full auto hidden away as opposed to the semi.

Just an opinion, YMMV

Gaz

chip3757
01-09-2013, 10:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ufcfan83
This guy seems pretty upset about it.
(link below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aorMJoMDN-Q


Link not working, do you have a title I can search to pull up on youtube

dawgcasa
01-10-2013, 4:11 AM
Obama says at this moment he can use EO
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-determined-act-against-gun-violence-biden-164128551.html

Ive said it all along, they can use the Patriot Act to go around Congress. Obama simply doesnt care about the rule of law or procedures and is going for broke right now.

As Obama told the Russians prior to the election, he'll "have more flexibility" to implement his agenda after being elected to a 2nd term when he no longer needs to appeal to left leaning moderates and independents. He's going to swing hard left now and do anything he can to cause the Republican Party to degenerate into internal strife, dysfunction, fighting, and public displays of extremism in an attempt to regain the House in 2014. His goal in these cliff/deficit negotiations is NOT to resolve the budget dilemma, it's to bruise the image of the Republican Party so badly that in 2014 he gets Pelosi back into the Speakership, then have two years to REALLY execute his agenda completely unfettered, and set the groundwork for the next Democratic presidential nominee in 2016. It's all about power and the long view of 'change'. EOs? You haven't seen nothing yet if Obama gets that to play out.

jacques
01-10-2013, 7:38 AM
If anything like the trend in 94, after sneaking the AWB through, the dems lost a lot of seats when people woke up and realized what had just happened. They should not take the vote of gun owners lightly. They will loose in the long run because we are right and they are wrong.

It will be an interesting month to see what actually happens and the resulting backlash of the people. People are awake this time around.

donw
01-10-2013, 7:50 AM
IMO, appointing joe biden to anything is a big mistake...being the mental midget he really is, will finally come out...

movie zombie
01-10-2013, 8:00 AM
precedent re executive order geared at gun control has already been set:

"The president probably needs new legislation to reinstate a ban on the sale of military-style assault weapons, stop the sale of high-capacity ammunition clips, and require background checks on all gun buyers.

But he has wide authority to use gun laws already on the books as the basis for regulations or executive orders strengthening gun enforcement.

There's ample precedent. After a mass school shooting in Stockton, California, in 1989, George H.W. Bush issued an executive order, pursuant to the 1968 Gun Control Act, that banned imports of certain assault weapons unless used for sporting purposes. Years later, Bill Clinton by executive order banned imports of almost five dozen different assault weapons that had been modified to get through that "sporting purposes" exemption. President Obama could go even further.

To take another example, the National Firearms Act of 1934 gives a president broad powers to oversee gun dealers. By executive order, the President could tighten that oversight.

Under his law-enforcement authority the president could also issue executive orders improving information sharing among state and local law enforcement authorities about illegal gun purchases, tracking gun buyers' history of mental illness, and maintaining data on gun sales for longer periods.

The administration has already issued a regulation designed to prevent sales of semi-automatic rifles to Mexican drug cartels. It requires stores in states bordering Mexico to notify federal law enforcement officials when someone buys two or more of a particular type of high-caliber, semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. That regulation, too, could be expanded upon." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/obama-executive-power-debt-ceiling_b_2447359.html?utm_hp_ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=011013&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief

contact our elected officials.
make it clear we're holding them accountable for not only their own vote and legislation but for upholding the US Constitution and making sure this president and/or any future president does not overstep via executive orders.

lavey29
01-10-2013, 8:06 AM
Well there is a major problem with your scenario that becomes pretty obvious if you think it through. If Obama decides to unilaterally create some "legislation" either through an EO or treaty, which criminalizes conduct, what happens next? I suppose he might get the ATF to come arrest you, and then lets assume you get taken to jail. Well at that point you are going to end up before a federal judge. I know quite a few of those guys, and guess what, they don't allow trials for laws that don't actually exist. If you think they do, you are living in a distopian fantasy world. So you are gonna get kicked loose, and almost certainly with a court order from a federal judge for the return of your lawfully possessed property.

Now I suppose they could just start holding everyone without trial in FEMA camps or whatever, but at that point whatever EO or treaty might exist is hardly relevant. So maybe take off the :TFH:, take a deep breath, have a beer, and try to relax.


Dude, seriously, do you think the government doesn't have data files showing you are a gun owner? Maybe some of the 80% builds are not on file but everything else is that was store bought or PPT in some form or another. If they create a large scope ban on stuff what are your options? Hide it? You can't go to the range anymore with it. If they send you a letter ordering you to surrender your stuff what do you do? Hold it and be subject to arrest? They don't have the manpower to go out and arrest everyone who doesn't voluntarily surrender their guns. They will use civil remedies and attack your wallet until you assimilate and become part of the collective. They are eveh trying to tighten up their records by making mandatory "current" registration for every firearm you possess. They will chip away at other things like parts and ban imports. They will limit or create huge tax on ammo. There will be multiple ways the government will tighten the noose once this thing gets rolling. Then a lot of states will tighten it even further with their own added things to a state ban such as Cali is doing right now. I hope I am wrong on all counts and that we stand our ground and protect our rights.

HBrebel
01-10-2013, 8:33 AM
If our own 'president' as they call him does not have to work within the confines of our constitution why should we even consider complying? If the law of the land means nothing than A made up 'executive order' means jacksh#t to me.

navycorpsman
01-10-2013, 8:42 AM
If our own 'president' as they call him does not have to work within the confines of our constitution why should we even consider complying? If the law of the land means nothing than A made up 'executive order' means jacksh#t to me.

Amen, If he signs a EO against gun owners. The dems will be demolished again in next elections

Tincon
01-10-2013, 8:46 AM
Dude, seriously, do you think the government doesn't have data files showing you are a gun owner?.

Since I have quite a few registered guns I know they do.

If they create a large scope ban on stuff what are your options?

That would require an act of the legislature. It can't be accomplished by Executive Order or a treaty not approved by the Senate.

They will limit or create huge tax on ammo.

That also requires legislation.

ENTHUSIAST
01-10-2013, 9:45 AM
Amen, If he signs a EO against gun owners. The dems will be demolished again in next elections

And then what the RINOs are going to rush in save the day and restore the Constitution?

Patriot Act and TSA ring a bell?

dawgcasa
01-10-2013, 9:51 AM
IMO, appointing joe biden to anything is a big mistake...being the mental midget he really is, will finally come out...

Rule #1 of warfare: never underestimate your opponent. Biden may be a clown, but consider he is a career Washington DC insider that has plumbed the full depths of those halls, the clown suit may just be a distraction.

PBRStreetgang
01-10-2013, 9:59 AM
Thinking about the guy at the Walmart counter helping with a 4473 is about to make me lose my lunch.

You too? Glad I am not the only one. Lucky for me I've done so many I could walk the guy through mine. Lol. :facepalm:

reznunt
01-10-2013, 10:24 AM
...

dfletcher
01-10-2013, 10:37 AM
With respect to an EO, people ought to consider this approach by the President may be attractive to a Congress reluctant to act and whose members on the fence. The Tonkin Gulf Resolution provided Congress political cover, whatever happened in VietNam could be placed squarely at the doorstep of the President. Recall that as bad as things got for LBJ, as unpopular as the war became and the many protests while he was President, Congress did not until about 1970 stand up and push for repeal.

An EO allows Congress to avoid blame, something these folks cherish and at which they are quite accomplished. And once in place I don't think we could rely on them to pass legislation mitigating the effect. It's one thing to oppose, it's another to repeal.

GunOwner
01-10-2013, 11:19 AM
I find this very troubling:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/politics/gun-control-battle/index.html

Krak
01-10-2013, 11:21 AM
:willy_nilly:

stix213
01-10-2013, 11:23 AM
Here's the main thread

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=674570

vincewarde
01-10-2013, 11:24 AM
I'm having a hard time thinking of anything significant that Obama could do via executive order. Reprioritizing BATFE to focus more on some aspects of the law and their regulations vs. other ones is about it.

There actually are some very effective things that any president could do, without passing any more laws than we have now. Most of them would be supported by majorities on both sides.

I wrote about these things here: Common Ground? 5 Gun Control Measures Both Sides Agree Upon (http://reasonedpolitics.blogspot.com/2013/01/common-ground-5-gun-control-measures.html)

If Pres. Obama's orders are to implement something like these five steps - none of which require new laws - than I think it will be a sign that he has figured out that it's going to be very hard to pass any new laws. If he does none of the above, than it is an indication that they are going to "go for broke" in an effort to ban more guns.

Bhobbs
01-10-2013, 11:24 AM
He can. It's not like he will suddenly burst into flames if he signs an EO banning firearms.

submaniac
01-10-2013, 11:27 AM
It's not like he will suddenly burst into flames if he signs an EO banning firearms.

Well, one can still hope...

http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/56/5685/Q2XUG00Z/posters/barack-obama-hope.jpg

ElvenSoul
01-10-2013, 11:31 AM
They tipped their hand to soon. White House is getting a whole lot of flack over the statement. Pissed off a lot of Congressional Members. Now O is sending Biden to talk to NRA to make peace.

SilverTauron
01-10-2013, 12:01 PM
Amen, If he signs a EO against gun owners. The dems will be demolished again in next elections

Will you quit hogging the weed and pass it around?

Its no secret that millions of guns have been sold since Obama took office in 2008. If people voted with their firearms in mind we'd be getting ready for a Romney Presidency. Yet Obama stands in office.

It's logical to conclude that for most of the 90 million gun owners in America, their weapons are just a casual hobby with no political relevance to their voting choices. As such there won't be a backlash like there was in 1994, because there aren't as many gun owners who give a damn today.As long as the Legislature doesn't pass laws which ban Dad's break action 12 gauge, no ones going to lift a finger in opposition.

No, the attraction for using EO is the time factor. Even if Feinsteins proposal flies through the Legislature it will be months before a bill will land on his desk, by which point our myopic electorate will have moved on to other issues like Fiscal Cliff 2.0 and who Kim Kardashians banging this week. Unless he acts while the Newtown tragedy is fresh in the public image, they risk losing their chance to advance the agenda. If Obama waits on the national Legislaure to pass a new law, public support will time out like a bad internet connection.

stix213
01-10-2013, 12:06 PM
They tipped their hand to soon. White House is getting a whole lot of flack over the statement. Pissed off a lot of Congressional Members. Now O is sending Biden to talk to NRA to make peace.

Interesting angle.... I wonder if it was another mistake on Biden's part to mention it at all. He always opens his mouth too early. People on the fence in congress (moderates in both parties) probably at least don't like the idea of Obummer going around Congress. That might give them some backbone to stand up to him.

dieselpower
01-10-2013, 12:06 PM
They tipped their hand to soon. White House is getting a whole lot of flack over the statement. Pissed off a lot of Congressional Members. Now O is sending Biden to talk to NRA to make peace.


LOL... no he is NOT. :facepalm: Biden is meeting with the NRA to start negotiations into what will be law. This isnt a peace offering olive branch.

1) semi-auto ban, handgun, rifle and shotgun
2) importation ban
3) magazine capacity limits
4) ammo stockpile limits
5) background checks for ammo
6) mandatory firearm safes
7) mandatory waiting periods
8) FFLs for all purchases, new and old, even family
9) ammo sales limits, no more then X per month
10) NATIONAL FIREARMS ID
11) firearm transport restrictions
12) firearm tax, ammo tax
13) AW defined into GCA, tax stamp needed for defined semi-auto AW
14) national firearm sales reporting
15) national ammo sales reporting
16) multiple firearm purchases ban / limits
17) age limits for possession, use and access
18) manufacturing regulations (more inspections audits)
19) retail sales regulation (more inspections / audits)
20) wider defended prohibited class to include family at same residence.

This is what Biden wants, pick 10 and they will agree...laws / EOs to be passed and effective by 2/28/2013.

This is what they are talking about

fred40
01-10-2013, 12:15 PM
LOL... no he is NOT. :facepalm: Biden is meeting with the NRA to start negotiations into what will be law. This isnt a peace offering olive branch.

1) semi-auto ban, handgun, rifle and shotgun
2) importation ban
3) magazine capacity limits
4) ammo stockpile limits
5) background checks for ammo
6) mandatory firearm safes
7) mandatory waiting periods
8) FFLs for all purchases, new and old, even family
9) ammo sales limits, no more then X per month
10) NATIONAL FIREARMS ID
11) firearm transport restrictions
12) firearm tax, ammo tax
13) AW defined into GCA, tax stamp needed for defined semi-auto AW
14) national firearm sales reporting
15) national ammo sales reporting
16) multiple firearm purchases ban / limits
17) age limits for possession, use and access
18) manufacturing regulations (more inspections audits)
19) retail sales regulation (more inspections / audits)
20) wider defended prohibited class to include family at same residence.

This is what Biden wants, pick 10 and they will agree...laws / EOs to be passed and effective by 2/28/2013.

This is what they are talking about

17 is the only one I see reasonable...accompanied by an adult only of course.

SKSer
01-10-2013, 12:22 PM
LOL... no he is NOT. :facepalm: Biden is meeting with the NRA to start negotiations into what will be law. This isnt a peace offering olive branch.

1) semi-auto ban, handgun, rifle and shotgun
2) importation ban
3) magazine capacity limits
4) ammo stockpile limits
5) background checks for ammo
6) mandatory firearm safes
7) mandatory waiting periods
8) FFLs for all purchases, new and old, even family
9) ammo sales limits, no more then X per month
10) NATIONAL FIREARMS ID
11) firearm transport restrictions
12) firearm tax, ammo tax
13) AW defined into GCA, tax stamp needed for defined semi-auto AW
14) national firearm sales reporting
15) national ammo sales reporting
16) multiple firearm purchases ban / limits
17) age limits for possession, use and access
18) manufacturing regulations (more inspections audits)
19) retail sales regulation (more inspections / audits)
20) wider defended prohibited class to include family at same residence.

This is what Biden wants, pick 10 and they will agree...laws / EOs to be passed and effective by 2/28/2013.

This is what they are talking about

did you get this info from somewhere?? Or is this a big list of what basically all the anti's collectively proposed? Also where did you get the date if not from the same source?

ElvenSoul
01-10-2013, 12:25 PM
They are sending Holder to meet with NRA as well.

I do not think they expected the NRA to gain so many new members.

We are gaining momentum they are losing.

tcrpe
01-10-2013, 12:47 PM
You're partly right. He's meeting with the NRA as a "courtesy" to tell them what the decision was, since he already met with the "stakeholders" composed entirely of people on the anti-gun side.


Meeting is over.
http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/ne...e-meeting.aspx

Statement From the National Rifle Association of America Regarding Today's White House Task Force Meeting

Posted on January 10, 2013

Fairfax, Va. – The National Rifle Association of America is made up of over 4 million moms and dads, daughters and sons, who are involved in the national conversation about how to prevent a tragedy like Newtown from ever happening again. We attended today's White House meeting to discuss how to keep our children safe and were prepared to have a meaningful conversation about school safety, mental health issues, the marketing of violence to our kids and the collapse of federal prosecutions of violent criminals.

We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment. While claiming that no policy proposals would be “prejudged,” this Task Force spent most of its time on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners - honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans. It is unfortunate that this Administration continues to insist on pushing failed solutions to our nation's most pressing problems. We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be blamed for the acts of criminals and madmen. Instead, we will now take our commitment and meaningful contributions to members of congress of both parties who are interested in having an honest conversation about what works - and what does not

ENTHUSIAST
01-10-2013, 2:14 PM
Way to stand your ground NRA nice job!!! :clap:
Meeting is over.
http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/ne...e-meeting.aspx

Statement From the National Rifle Association of America Regarding Today's White House Task Force Meeting

Posted on January 10, 2013

Fairfax, Va. – The National Rifle Association of America is made up of over 4 million moms and dads, daughters and sons, who are involved in the national conversation about how to prevent a tragedy like Newtown from ever happening again. We attended today's White House meeting to discuss how to keep our children safe and were prepared to have a meaningful conversation about school safety, mental health issues, the marketing of violence to our kids and the collapse of federal prosecutions of violent criminals.

We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment. While claiming that no policy proposals would be “prejudged,” this Task Force spent most of its time on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners - honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans. It is unfortunate that this Administration continues to insist on pushing failed solutions to our nation's most pressing problems. We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be blamed for the acts of criminals and madmen. Instead, we will now take our commitment and meaningful contributions to members of congress of both parties who are interested in having an honest conversation about what works - and what does not

dieselpower
01-10-2013, 8:10 PM
if what the release says is true...they didnt pick 10. That could be good as long as we keep up the social network pressure. the more people that hear the real truth the better off we are.

westcoastfrog
01-11-2013, 3:42 AM
Liberals are like Zombies, they just never stop!

Head shots?

Rossi357
01-11-2013, 11:13 AM
I just saw on MSNBC that Biden's report will recommend background checks on all gun sales and assault weapon ban. Nothing about magazine capacity.
None of which would have stopped any mass shooting.
It remains to be seen how accurate the news report is.

Yes, I watch MSNBC and Fox and CNN.


:gura:

newbee1111
01-11-2013, 11:44 AM
I seriously doubt there was any negotiation going on during the meeting. The NRA has no reason to accept any restrictions at all. The administration just invited them to say that they brought everyone to the table.

The sad part is that something useful could actually be done here like make more resources available to help mentally ill people before they become a news item. Instead we are going to get an AWB bill that's going to die in committee (where it should because last time I checked pistol grips don't kill people).

Rossi357
01-11-2013, 11:46 AM
MSNBC just reported that Biden will recommend background checks on all gun sales and a ban on assault weapons. No mention of magazine capacity.
None of which would stop any mass shooting.
The accuracy of the news report remains to be seen.


:gura:

epilepticninja
01-11-2013, 11:53 AM
We knew they were going after an "assault weapons" ban. Wait, I thought they were already illegal to own without a license? :P What happens after all these bans go into effect, and there are still shootings galore? Can we say "we told you so?" What is the media and the libtards going to do then, there won't be anyone left to blame?

Rossi357
01-11-2013, 11:58 AM
We knew they were going after an "assault weapons" ban. Wait, I thought they were already illegal to own without a license? :P What happens after all these bans go into effect, and there are still shootings galore? Can we say "we told you so?" What is the media and the libtards going to do then, there won't be anyone left to blame?

The Federal ban expired.

BREACH
01-11-2013, 11:58 AM
What happens after all these bans go into effect, and there are still shootings galore? Can we say "we told you so?" What is the media and the libtards going to do then, there won't be anyone left to blame?

They will keep pushing to take away the guns completely, all along refusing to acknowledge their previous failures.

The last ban didn't do much to stop the violence, but none of them seem to care about that

SKSer
01-11-2013, 12:02 PM
The Federal ban expired.

I think he is referring to real assault weapons, NFA full auto etc.

Rossi357
01-11-2013, 12:12 PM
I think he is referring to real assault weapons, NFA full auto etc.

He said.....ey were going after an "assault weapons" ban. Wait, I thought they were

stix213
01-11-2013, 12:21 PM
We knew they were going after an "assault weapons" ban. Wait, I thought they were already illegal to own without a license? :P What happens after all these bans go into effect, and there are still shootings galore? Can we say "we told you so?" What is the media and the libtards going to do then, there won't be anyone left to blame?

After a ban goes into effect, and it does nothing to help, the anti's always assume they just haven't gone far enough. Just deprive a little more freedom and we'll be there. After all guns are banned, it will be knives, baseball bats, hammers, etc. Until we all live in rubber rooms and need a "may issue" travel visa to step outside.

navycorpsman
01-11-2013, 1:03 PM
I am not worried about Federal Ban. The House will not let it go at all. Not worried

stix213
01-11-2013, 1:06 PM
I'm surprised about a lack of magazine capacity mentioned. I had assumed that had the greatest chance of getting through congress.

RMP91
01-11-2013, 1:09 PM
I'm surprised about a lack of magazine capacity mentioned. I had assumed that had the greatest chance of getting through congress.

As did I, maybe they finally realized that this was a fight they would never win! :43:

There's simply too many of us (gun owners) and too few of them (gun grabbers).

majtom94
01-11-2013, 1:09 PM
That's actually the only thing I thought was for certain; we'll be waiting to learn...

kaligaran
01-11-2013, 1:27 PM
OP please post the link to this report.

I am not worried about Federal Ban. The House will not let it go at all. Not worried

But keep in mind they can amend galore to 'compromise' or have some back deal stuff to get enough support (ie you support this AWB and I'll support your tax/other thing).

Don't become complacent. Now is not the time for that.

Ford8N
01-11-2013, 1:50 PM
Everything Biden is proposing, would not have stopped the monster from Sandy Hook from slaughtering those kids.

CessnaDriver
01-11-2013, 1:54 PM
I'm surprised about a lack of magazine capacity mentioned. I had assumed that had the greatest chance of getting through congress.

Yeah, I'll believe it when I see it.
Boy Blunder Biden was mentioning it like crazy.

Librarian
01-11-2013, 1:56 PM
Folks, please - keep all the 'Biden Committee' posts in just this thread.

vern748
01-11-2013, 2:36 PM
This has all been very entertaining. People getting all heated on how the prez will ban this and ban that and take away this. Its not going to happen.

What will happen will be similar to what happened in 1934;
The National Firearms Act of 1934 gives a president broad powers to oversee gun dealers.

This increased the oversight of gun manufactures. The Walmarts, Bass Sport and all the other big suppliers of weapons will have increased oversight. Increased background checks, etc. The penalty will fall under interstate commerce, hence the tax man.

Same will befall the Remingtons, Mossbergs, and other makers of firearms. They will be forced out by either their increased liability or in-ability to manufacture specific types of weapons.

So no one is going to take your firearms from you. Too many are too small minded that they dont see themselves as the small fish. The government doesnt really care about your stockpile of 223, it the bigger guys they are going to get through tax laws and interstate commerce laws.

All this will be done without infringing on the 2nd Amendment.

Oligarchy
01-11-2013, 2:40 PM
Very interesting, because first thing this morning, I read this:

"Vice President Joe Biden announced Thursday that he will recommend new gun control measures to President Barack Obama, which include more comprehensive background checks on gun buyers and limits on the sizes of ammunition magazines. The proposal could lead to the most significant move on guns in 20 years, but one regulation highly coveted by gun control advocates is notably missing: a ban on assault weapons."

Then just a few minutes ago, I read this:

"The White House says President Barack Obama is still committed to persuading Congress to ban some semi-automatic weapons, despite comments from the vice president that suggested he and Obama would instead embrace more politically popular gun reforms."

So apparently BO put Biden in charge of coming up with a solution, didn't like it, and is going to do his own thing anyway?

newbee1111
01-11-2013, 5:36 PM
So apparently BO put Biden in charge of coming up with a solution, didn't like it, and is going to do his own thing anyway?

Nah he's just playing to his base. He knows that any serious gun control measure isn't going to make it out of the house. So his choices are to either disappoint his riled up anti-gun constituents now and tell them nothings going to happen or he can disappoint them six months from now and blame the house republicans when he does it. The second option is a lot easier.

wintersborn
01-11-2013, 5:54 PM
They are not backing down.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/white-house-obama-not-backing-down-assault-weapons-190730430.html

epilepticninja
01-11-2013, 9:33 PM
I think he is referring to real assault weapons, NFA full auto etc.

You got what I meant.

SwissFluCase
01-11-2013, 9:36 PM
They are not backing down.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/white-house-obama-not-backing-down-assault-weapons-190730430.html

Then they will be defeated.

Regards,


SwissFluCase

diana
01-11-2013, 9:44 PM
But you said.........................

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcyLeOm6yGc

jpigeon
01-11-2013, 10:11 PM
Dictator order... Lets use the right terms