Wording, labels, are very important in this fight. The voices from our side have to reject the word "compromise," because that is never what it is. The anti-gun side seeks only our "surrender." It is only the pro-2A side that is asked to give something up, it is never about moving forward with improvement, only pushing our side back.
New executive orders from Obama Administration
- Thread starter Rhandhali
- Start date
The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
The Dems do not compromise . They dictate . There will be a winner , and a loser . No middle ground .
Nice idea but you can't compromise with someone who's end goal is the complete revocation of civil rights and forcible confiscation of private property. They hate us, they hate anyone who owns a gun because they are not completely and utterly dependent on the state for their own safety, they are not dependent on the state to provide for themselves. They want a pliant, servile population of ignorant, uneducated serfs who bow to the whims of a small technocratic elite. Private property in general is anathema to that, the ability to defend oneself is especially so.
01/04/2016 Obama defends forthcoming gun restrictions as constitutional.
Gearing up for a certain confrontation with Congress, President Barack Obama defended his plans to tighten the nation's gun-control restrictions on his own, insisting Monday that the steps he'll announce fall within his legal authority and uphold the constitutional right to own a gun.
Opening his final year in office on an aggressive note, Obama summoned his attorney general and FBI chief to the Oval Office to firm up a set of measures he said he'd announce over the next few days. Although the details are still uncertain, Obama's administration has been preparing behind the scenes to expand background checks on gun sales by forcing more sellers to register as dealers.
"This is not going to solve every violent crime in this country," Obama said, tempering expectations for gun control advocates calling for far-reaching executive action. "It's not going to prevent every mass shooting; it's not going to keep every gun out of the hands of a criminal. It will potentially save lives and spare families the pain of these extraordinary losses."
More than three years after the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, with many other mass shootings since, Obama is training his attention once again on a policy goal that has eluded his administration. He tried the legislative route in 2013, pushing hard for a package that included expanded background checks. But that effort collapsed spectacularly in Congress. Obama and his aides have described their inability to move the issue forward as one of the most frustrating failures in his presidency.
This time, with barely a year left in office and his political currency dwindling, Obama is eschewing Congress in favor of presidential action. Any proposal for new gun laws would be a non-starter in the Republican-controlled Congress — especially in a presidential election year.
Obama's steps were certain to draw intense opposition in Congress, and indeed, lawmakers and Obama's political opponents had already started pre-emptively panning Obama's plan. House Speaker Paul Ryan said he wasn't sure exactly what Obama would announce, but dismissed it as an attempt to divide the country and distract from Obama's "failed policies" to address terrorism.
"The president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will," said Ryan, R-Wis.
The changes to the background check would be aimed at some unregistered sellers who skirt the requirement by selling at gun shows, online or informal settings. Under current law, only federally licensed firearms dealers are required to seek background checks. The administration is expected to require more people to register as dealers by altering the criteria, such as the number and frequency of guns sold, whether sellers profit off sales, whether they advertise, rent space or tables at gun shows and pay taxes.
Other moves being considered include improving reporting of lost and stolen weapons and beefing up inspections of licensed dealers, according to people familiar with the plans who weren't authorized to disclose details before the announcement.
Yet from the campaign trail to the halls of Congress, critics were already taking the president to task, both for the expected content of the actions and for the manner in which he's taking them. Republicans and gun rights advocates pledged to derail them before they can be implemented.
Although the likeliest venue for a challenge appeared to be the courts, opponents were also examining other ways to try to stop Obama's actions. Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, the House panel chairman who oversees the Justice Department budget, threatened in a letter Monday to Attorney General Loretta to withhold money for the department if it tries to implement executive action on guns.
Mindful of inevitable challenges, the White House carefully crafted the steps with legal justifications in mind, White House officials said, and Obama added he was acting "well within my legal authority."
"I'm also confident that the recommendations that are being made by our team here are ones that are entirely consistent with the Second Amendment and people's lawful right to bear arms," Obama said.
Aiming to set the stage for a productive final year in office, Obama planned to spend the week promoting the gun effort and pushing back on its critics. He met at the White House on Monday with Democratic lawmakers who have supported stricter gun control, and planned to take his argument to prime time on Thursday with a town hall discussion about gun violence on CNN.
The initiative also promised to be prominent in Obama's final State of the Union address next Tuesday, scheduled earlier than usual this year.
Already, the issue has become a hot topic in the presidential campaign, ensuring that whatever steps Obama takes will be heavily politicized by both sides.
Democrat Hillary Clinton, who has already proposed closing the gun show loophole, cheered Obama's plans, and her chief primary rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders, called it the "right thing to do." But on the GOP side, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called Obama a "petulant child" peddling illegal executive actions, while Donald Trump said he saw no need for changes.
It's not clear how large an effect the president's action would have on keeping guns from violent criminals. Philip Cook, a Duke University professor who researches gun violence and policy, said gun shows are at least occasionally a source of weapons for traffickers, but that surveys of prisoners don't show them to be a major source.
Gearing up for a certain confrontation with Congress, President Barack Obama defended his plans to tighten the nation's gun-control restrictions on his own, insisting Monday that the steps he'll announce fall within his legal authority and uphold the constitutional right to own a gun.
Opening his final year in office on an aggressive note, Obama summoned his attorney general and FBI chief to the Oval Office to firm up a set of measures he said he'd announce over the next few days. Although the details are still uncertain, Obama's administration has been preparing behind the scenes to expand background checks on gun sales by forcing more sellers to register as dealers.
"This is not going to solve every violent crime in this country," Obama said, tempering expectations for gun control advocates calling for far-reaching executive action. "It's not going to prevent every mass shooting; it's not going to keep every gun out of the hands of a criminal. It will potentially save lives and spare families the pain of these extraordinary losses."
More than three years after the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, with many other mass shootings since, Obama is training his attention once again on a policy goal that has eluded his administration. He tried the legislative route in 2013, pushing hard for a package that included expanded background checks. But that effort collapsed spectacularly in Congress. Obama and his aides have described their inability to move the issue forward as one of the most frustrating failures in his presidency.
This time, with barely a year left in office and his political currency dwindling, Obama is eschewing Congress in favor of presidential action. Any proposal for new gun laws would be a non-starter in the Republican-controlled Congress — especially in a presidential election year.
Obama's steps were certain to draw intense opposition in Congress, and indeed, lawmakers and Obama's political opponents had already started pre-emptively panning Obama's plan. House Speaker Paul Ryan said he wasn't sure exactly what Obama would announce, but dismissed it as an attempt to divide the country and distract from Obama's "failed policies" to address terrorism.
"The president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will," said Ryan, R-Wis.
The changes to the background check would be aimed at some unregistered sellers who skirt the requirement by selling at gun shows, online or informal settings. Under current law, only federally licensed firearms dealers are required to seek background checks. The administration is expected to require more people to register as dealers by altering the criteria, such as the number and frequency of guns sold, whether sellers profit off sales, whether they advertise, rent space or tables at gun shows and pay taxes.
Other moves being considered include improving reporting of lost and stolen weapons and beefing up inspections of licensed dealers, according to people familiar with the plans who weren't authorized to disclose details before the announcement.
Yet from the campaign trail to the halls of Congress, critics were already taking the president to task, both for the expected content of the actions and for the manner in which he's taking them. Republicans and gun rights advocates pledged to derail them before they can be implemented.
Although the likeliest venue for a challenge appeared to be the courts, opponents were also examining other ways to try to stop Obama's actions. Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, the House panel chairman who oversees the Justice Department budget, threatened in a letter Monday to Attorney General Loretta to withhold money for the department if it tries to implement executive action on guns.
Mindful of inevitable challenges, the White House carefully crafted the steps with legal justifications in mind, White House officials said, and Obama added he was acting "well within my legal authority."
"I'm also confident that the recommendations that are being made by our team here are ones that are entirely consistent with the Second Amendment and people's lawful right to bear arms," Obama said.
Aiming to set the stage for a productive final year in office, Obama planned to spend the week promoting the gun effort and pushing back on its critics. He met at the White House on Monday with Democratic lawmakers who have supported stricter gun control, and planned to take his argument to prime time on Thursday with a town hall discussion about gun violence on CNN.
The initiative also promised to be prominent in Obama's final State of the Union address next Tuesday, scheduled earlier than usual this year.
Already, the issue has become a hot topic in the presidential campaign, ensuring that whatever steps Obama takes will be heavily politicized by both sides.
Democrat Hillary Clinton, who has already proposed closing the gun show loophole, cheered Obama's plans, and her chief primary rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders, called it the "right thing to do." But on the GOP side, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called Obama a "petulant child" peddling illegal executive actions, while Donald Trump said he saw no need for changes.
It's not clear how large an effect the president's action would have on keeping guns from violent criminals. Philip Cook, a Duke University professor who researches gun violence and policy, said gun shows are at least occasionally a source of weapons for traffickers, but that surveys of prisoners don't show them to be a major source.
Last edited:
The #1 way "legally purchased" (not stolen) firearms get into the hands of those who can not legally purchase them are by way of straw purchases, which are already illegal. In fact, the Feds have been using straw purchase suspects as CIs to crack down on (get rid on) legit FFL holders by administratively revoking FFLs then pleaing down the charges of the offender. This is feel good ******** to make the ignorant feel better about "gun control". It won't do a ****ing thing. It won't effect me or 95% of the people on this forum. It's just fluff and smoke in mirrors.
I. agree no compromise. They (lib's) say the republicans won't compromise so will they, just a way to throw it back at them.
Put
sixgundunn
Wheelgunner
Certainly this new executive order would virtually eliminate private sales on the BayouShooter forum as well as similar forums, would it not?
Is this sarcastic? Because no, no it would not.
No but for the hustlers who sell here and are in fact in the business of flipping guns for profit might want to rethink things.
According to the quotes in this article, it very well may..
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...-private-gun-sales-require-background-checks/
sixgundunn
Wheelgunner
I'm afraid that the Breitbart article is correct and that the days of firearms classifieds on Bayou Shooter and other similar forums are numbered by the wording and intent of this Executive Order.
I doubt it will have that kind of impact. I don't see that kind of exec order power being allowed to hold water with the congress in republican control. just my opinion, I could be wrong.
WildBillKelso
Well-Known Member
From the EO:
This ladies and gentlemen is "chilling effect" language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect
The people that wrote this and the POTUS have read enough court opinions to reasonably call this a deliberate attempt at a chilling effect. Chilling effects have been seen as unlawful as outright rights infringement. Action should be taken to make them clearly define when an FFL is needed.
Also, their mental health section sounds like expansion. They are already using the VA and now social security will be involved in identifying people to be prohibited that cannot manage their affairs. It sounds due process of being adjudicated mentally defective might be weakened. Is the level of proof and protections within procedure the same in administrative law with an administrative law judge as it is in big boy court?
This ladies and gentlemen is "chilling effect" language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect
The people that wrote this and the POTUS have read enough court opinions to reasonably call this a deliberate attempt at a chilling effect. Chilling effects have been seen as unlawful as outright rights infringement. Action should be taken to make them clearly define when an FFL is needed.
Also, their mental health section sounds like expansion. They are already using the VA and now social security will be involved in identifying people to be prohibited that cannot manage their affairs. It sounds due process of being adjudicated mentally defective might be weakened. Is the level of proof and protections within procedure the same in administrative law with an administrative law judge as it is in big boy court?
I have said this on numerous issues the past two years, and ate my foot each time. Why would it hold true on this matter?
Sample of 3 letters I just wrote to my representatives
Dear Representative/Senator/Title X
I am writing to you to express my outrage at the most recent dictatorial outburst of the current administration. This is yet another example of an abusive pattern of the President forcibly imposing his personal will and opinions on a Congress and People who do not share them. I wish to thank you for your continued defense and advancement of our Second Amendment civil rights. I trust that you and your colleagues will continue to do so, and that you will resist the Presidents repeated attempts at violating the separation of powers. Again, thank you. Your efforts on the behalf of the People of this state have not gone unnoticed.
Regards,
Yourname, Formal titles if any
NRA Member (you should be)
SAF Supporter (you should be)
Dear Representative/Senator/Title X
I am writing to you to express my outrage at the most recent dictatorial outburst of the current administration. This is yet another example of an abusive pattern of the President forcibly imposing his personal will and opinions on a Congress and People who do not share them. I wish to thank you for your continued defense and advancement of our Second Amendment civil rights. I trust that you and your colleagues will continue to do so, and that you will resist the Presidents repeated attempts at violating the separation of powers. Again, thank you. Your efforts on the behalf of the People of this state have not gone unnoticed.
Regards,
Yourname, Formal titles if any
NRA Member (you should be)
SAF Supporter (you should be)
Latest posts
-
-
-
WTS: (Final price drop) New Tanfoglio Limited Pro Large Frame 9mm
- Latest: terrencetec
-
-
-
Members online
- PECEMKR
- SGT ROCK
- cjnspecial
- 323MAR
- J. W. Harris
- Wagpewpew
- Lbanks
- MrBul35
- cowherd boy
- lesgeaux
- john17427
- pangris1
- Gatordude
- OtterBob
- CyberSlacker
- 70mikenike70
- ONTARGET7.62
- JaylinBurd
- LaBelle
- navops
- JR1572
- terrencetec
- Speedtrucker
- electronicwiz
- Tboy
- grantharris1945
- Woodiemack
- bricklayer
- bush_hog
- BIGBORE44
- sapthol
- BlakeLavespere
- MMeuni
- Gmac
- LSUpete2023
- sksshooter
- chrishalexander
- rheology1
- Kipp Castaing
- John913
- nomadicdread
- Mxav
- rcourv7
- Bigboi
- Abby Normal
- GunRelated
- SouthernInsanity
- enutees
- WhereIsIt?
- pdufrene
