Jump to content
Mrs. Peel

White House Seeking EOs on Gun Control...

Recommended Posts

This won't come as a surprise to anyone who's been paying attention... as some of this has been out there already. Nonetheless, I was sorry to see this Reuters article indicating that gun control activists are huddling with White House staff to try to pass some more or less ironclad executive orders re: gun control.

I guess the fact that Dems like Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema seem unwilling to do away with the filibuster means that POTUS is unlikely to get any gun control through via the legislative path... hence, he wants to do a workaround. 

https://news.trust.org/item/20210402095518-5iyhi 

I'm posting this in a public-facing thread for maximum visibility, so please be mindful of your comments. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a positive there have been a few recent cases where the ATF was cut down for "reinterpreting" existing law.  It will require a fight but the more they overreach the better the end result could be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mrs. Peel said:

This won't come as a surprise to anyone who's been paying attention... as some of this has been out there already. Nonetheless, I was sorry to see this Reuters article indicating that gun control activists are huddling with White House staff to try to pass some more or less ironclad executive orders re: gun control.

I guess the fact that Dems like Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema seem unwilling to do away with the filibuster means that POTUS is unlikely to get any gun control through via the legislative path... hence, he wants to do a workaround. 

https://news.trust.org/item/20210402095518-5iyhi 

I'm posting this in a public-facing thread for maximum visibility, so please be mindful of your comments. 

what i find telling(and most of us already expected these things) is that the guy that whined about the last president ruling by eo and people in general comparing the last president to a dictator for using eo's.......are now going nutty using eo's, and those who support him are ok with him using eo's.

 this seems to me to be highly illegal to try to restrict/remove a right through executive order.

40 minutes ago, EdF said:

On a positive there have been a few recent cases where the ATF was cut down for "reinterpreting" existing law.  It will require a fight but the more they overreach the better the end result could be.

i fully understand that the atf has a job to do. but when they are allowed to change interpretations there is a problem. the proper way would be for them to say "hey! we need to change this." then craft their new definitions, then send that to congress. the fact that we're allowing any alphabet agency to make/change rules, policy, definitions etc is really not acceptable. i also have the epa in mind with these statements too. any rule or law that we are being required to follow needs to go through congress first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EdF said:

On a positive there have been a few recent cases where the ATF was cut down for "reinterpreting" existing law.  It will require a fight but the more they overreach the better the end result could be.

One nice thing about EOs is they go straight to SCOTUS. No spending years winding through the courts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, raz-0 said:

One nice thing about EOs is they go straight to SCOTUS. No spending years winding through the courts. 

True.  But then we're back to hanging our fate in the hands of justices who haven't raised a finger to protect the constitution in a long time, save for one religious case in NY.  Not sure I'm confident enough to feel at ease they would protect the 2A.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any forthcoming bad 2A executive orders will likely mirror what the law in NJ, NY, Conn, Mass and Calif is already

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Shepherd9 said:

True.  But then we're back to hanging our fate in the hands of justices who haven't raised a finger to protect the constitution in a long time, save for one religious case in NY.  Not sure I'm confident enough to feel at ease they would protect the 2A.

Agreed. I for one was very disappointed- almost heartbroken-in the supremes spineless interest in the coup that was disguised as an election. Especially  in the so called saviors of conservatism, Trumps appointees. They need to redeem themselves if they get a chance to reel in the EOs of all types.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SJG said:

Any forthcoming bad 2A executive orders will likely mirror what the law in NJ, NY, Conn, Mass and Calif is already

I agree with you on this statement 100 percent.  This what ive been saying since 46 started running.  I cant use the word campaigning.  Because that never happened.  Good call. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, SJG said:

Any forthcoming bad 2A executive orders will likely mirror what the law in NJ, NY, Conn, Mass and Calif is already

How? 

Federal laws dont mirror anything in these states. 

 

The bump stock ban EO is already planced under injection because there are no laws that support it. 

While I don't have much hope for the controversial gun stuff in courts right now. I dont see the current courts having the numbers to support EO that aren't supported by lawful language. 

It looks even worse if he tries to do something that is trying to be passed in the legislator. 

At that point it's a separation of powers argument, not even gun related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

How? 

Federal laws dont mirror anything in these states.

They always have liked playing fast and loose - throw a bunch of crap and see what sticks, let the courts figure out if it was constitutional (only 8 years later).  Meanwhile the law abiding get screwed for years, and probably forever cause even if the government gets bitchslapped, theres always a slightly different set of bullshit ready to go. And so much of what has screwed everyone in the country was based off NJ's crap at the time.

Think of it like a buffet, taking the worst bits of each state.

"Oooh, bullet button, I'll have one of those."

"10 round magazines, one of those."

"Handguns directly to and from range, big helping of that please."

"10 day waiting period, gotta have that."

"Different laws for different towns, sounds good."

"Assault weapons ban and evil features? That sounds amazing!"

"Pistol permits, FIDs, and rediculous amounts of extra background checks, I want all you can give me!"

 

free staters.jpg

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Malice4you said:

They always have liked playing fast and loose - throw a bunch of crap and see what sticks, let the courts figure out if it was constitutional (only 8 years later).  Meanwhile the law abiding get screwed for years, and probably forever cause even if the government gets bitchslapped, theres always a slightly different set of bullshit ready to go. And so much of what has screwed everyone in the country was based off NJ's crap at the time.

Think of it like a buffet, taking the worst bits of each state.

"Oooh, bullet button, I'll have one of those."

"10 round magazines, one of those."

"Handguns directly to and from range, big helping of that please."

"10 day waiting period, gotta have that."

"Different laws for different towns, sounds good."

"Assault weapons ban and evil features? That sounds amazing!"

"Pistol permits, FIDs, and rediculous amounts of extra background checks, I want all you can give me!"

 

free staters.jpg

I'm not saying they don't play fast and loose, but they have to apply the EO to an existing law regardless of if its constitutional. 

The Feds have very little to work with if the NFA is all they got, even bumpstock are moving their way back into legal territory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, siderman said:

Agreed. I for one was very disappointed- almost heartbroken-in the supremes spineless interest in the coup that was disguised as an election. Especially  in the so called saviors of conservatism, Trumps appointees. They need to redeem themselves if they get a chance to reel in the EOs of all types.

They won’t redeem themselves.  They are afraid of Biden and the Dems packing the court.  So they will go along with whatever they have to in order to demonstrate they will bend to the will of the legislative and executive branches.

Then one could ask..why follow an unconstitutional executive order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.yahoo.com/news/curbing-violence-another-mass-shooting-195200338.html

"Increased restriction on gun ownerships will absolutely not help law enforcement, and people who think they will are being extremely naive," said Chennault. "People who mean to do other harm with a gun don't care about restrictions; they don't care about gun laws. If they care about following gun laws, they would also care enough to not want to do harm to other people."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2021 at 10:53 AM, 1LtCAP said:

i fully understand that the atf has a job to do. but when they are allowed to change interpretations there is a problem.

This is the fault of congress.  Generally speaking, congress has abrogated their responsibility to the administrative state.  The laws are written without specifics and "so-and-so, head of whatever" is supposed to write the specifics.  

The same happens at the state level and BOTH are problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, EdF said:

This is the fault of congress.  Generally speaking, congress has abrogated their responsibility to the administrative state.  The laws are written without specifics and "so-and-so, head of whatever" is supposed to write the specifics.  

The same happens at the state level and BOTH are problems.

CORRECT. allowing any alphabet agency(such as CARB) to essentially make laws at any level is a recipe for disaster. the fact that congress(and state legislatures) have allowed this to happen is bordering on criminal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2021 at 5:55 PM, EdF said:

This is the fault of congress.  Generally speaking, congress has abrogated their responsibility to the administrative state.  The laws are written without specifics and "so-and-so, head of whatever" is supposed to write the specifics.  

The same happens at the state level and BOTH are problems.

Yes.  They write laws with the wording...

”The Secretary shall ......[insert unconstitutional bureaucratic action here]”

Mike Lee wrote a book about.  “our Lost Constitution”.   Senator Lee has lost his way to some extent, but he isn’t wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2021 at 2:49 PM, CMJeepster said:

After gun control, I hope they take up brick control:  Man killed with brick at Morristown station had meal with suspect (nj1015.com)

He's completely innocent.

He just happened to be eating pizza with the victim an hour before they found him with his head bashed at the train station. And someone matching his description was seen on surveillance video running from train station around the time of the murder.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decent video on why even these weak executive actions are still a substantial threat to the second amendment. 

The very way they make their arguments is designed to alter public perception and ultimately redefine the 2A so they can later say "hey, we're not infringing on it, it doesn't represent an individual right to weapons of mass destruction".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bidens-gun-actions-could-positive-083219757.html

"The man who shot and killed 10 people in Boulder, Colorado, last month used a stabilizing brace for his semi-automatic pistol, which makes a weapon more accurate."

How many acts of violence involving a firearm are committed using a brace?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bidens-gun-actions-could-positive-083219757.html

"The man who shot and killed 10 people in Boulder, Colorado, last month used a stabilizing brace for his semi-automatic pistol, which makes a weapon more accurate."

How many acts of violence involving a firearm are committed using a brace?

I suspect the number is 1...or 10...depending on how one counts the Boulder incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...