Posted on 11/23/2020 11:10:18 AM PST by COBOL2Java
A recent article in Michael Bloomberg’s gun control propaganda arm, The Trace, detailed what it called “7 Ways Biden Could Go It Alone on Gun Violence Prevention.” The article noted that the would-be president’s own website states, “Joe Biden ... knows how to make progress on reducing gun violence using executive action.”
“Executive action” in this case means legally-binding steps the president asserts he can take without the Congress actually enacting or amending specific laws.
Of course, it’s the constitutional duty of the president to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” But that merely begs the question of what is a legitimately “faithful” interpretation of the law.
One possible clue that an interpretation of the law is not faithful is when the executive branch suddenly finds a completely novel, and notably expansive, reach to a law that has been on the books for many years. This clue is even stronger when the impacts of this reinterpretation would be felt mainly by the executive’s political opposition. Judged by these standards, the gun grabbers are clearly goading Biden to act as a monarch instituting decrees out of whole cloth, and not merely as an administrator of existing rules.
After all, then Vice-President Biden was supposedly the point man for the gun control push Barack Obama launched during his second term. Obama has made a point of repeatedly emphasizing how lack of “progress” on gun control was the most frustrating and anger-inducing aspect of his presidency. The Obama-Biden administration spent years searching for ways to unilaterally clamp down on Americans’ access to firearms. Now, however, gun controllers are suggesting that even more, and more dramatic, executive actions against firearms and their owners were somehow left on the table as lawful options.
The Trace article linked to a letter from a coalition of gun control groups suggesting various ways the “Biden-Harris Transition Team” could supposedly use executive authority to diminish the right to keep and bear arms.
Among the dozens of proposals were some that are largely symbolic and unlikely to do much of anything. But others would effectively change longstanding principles of law and even criminalize the possession of firearms that law-abiding Americans currently obtain and own legally.
Obama, for example, was heavily pressured to pursue “universal background checks” by making casual, infrequent sales of firearms subject to a federal firearms dealer’s license. Yet that was a bridge too far even for the Obama ATF. The agency instead released “guidance” on the issue that did not establish the specific numerical trigger for licensing gun controllers had demanded, instead focusing on the “specific facts and circumstances of [the seller’s] activities.”
The gun control coalition, however, hopes Biden will be more aggressive, urging him to “[f]urther clarify which gun sellers must obtain a federal firearms license from ATF.”
Their letter additionally calls for an outright ban on “ghost guns.” While it doesn’t explain or define this term, it is frequently used by the media and other gun control advocates to describe unserialized firearms, including those that Americans make for their own lawful use. Any attempt to ban such homemade firearms, which have been a lawful aspect of American gun culture since before the nation’s founding, would be clear overreach.
The Trace article goes even further, urging Biden to instruct ATF to reclassify popular firearms currently owned by millions of Americans as regulated under the National Firearms Act, which requires special government permission and taxation for making, transfer, and possession. This suggestion was based, in turn, on a proposal by the leftist Center for American Progress. The guns mentioned include braced pistols and shotguns with bird’s head-style grips like the Mossberg Shockwave or the Remington TAC-14.
Should such reclassification occur, these millions of gun owners would suddenly be in felony possession of firearms they had previously obtained legally and in good faith. While it’s possible an “amnesty” could be declared – perhaps allowing the owners to register and obtain tax stamps for their guns or even just to surrender them without prosecution – there’s no guarantee this would be the case. Yet even the best-case scenario would still have the gun owners declaring themselves as such to a hostile and disapproving federal government and paying a $200 tax for each newly-classified firearm.
Should any of these scenarios come to pass, persecuted gun owners would have nowhere to turn but the courts. Fortunately, as the NRA has noted repeatedly, one of President Trump’s most enduring legacies has been his progress in reshaping the federal judiciary with appointees who are dedicated to the rule of law and the original meaning of the U.S. Constitution.
Whether this backstop will curb the gun-grabbing ambitions of a possible Biden-Harris administration remains to be seen. But as The Trace article makes clear, their supporters and funders in the gun-ban lobby remain as insistent and unhinged as ever.
And “they” would never shop the courts right?
And we need to respond like they have for the last 4 years. Tie up every EO in the courts.
You will NEVER get them. Now go STFU.
So, by executive fiat, a President can nullify the 2nd amendment. I guess so, because currently we don’t seem to follow that silly Constitution anyway, right?
Here it comes.
Now all you need is for a President or Gov to declare something is dangerous.
No law, no voting on a law.
It is just deemed dangerous.
Just try Biden.
One thing about it, they're not making any bones about their intentions...on anything.
I’m old, tired and pissed off - come and take them, bitches.
It’ll just get shot down in SCOTUS. Why would they even waste their time?
I would like to know how grabbing guns from law abiding citizens will stop “gun violence”...........
Send more money so Wayne can buy new suits.....
If they do this they will get slammed in 2022 in both the house and the senate.
The left is running around like they just got a new sportscar, but insurance statistics show that is when you are most likely to wreck the car.
They just cannot help themselves.
Force politics and ‘wag the dog’ BS ain’t gonna fly!
When enough people in a population withdraw consent the government and its law become illegitimate.
Because prohibition worked so well in the 1920’s and 30’s.
Ya...I remember the movie “Executive Action”.
When the confiscaters are staring down the business end of my ____ they will know what the law is.
Good luck trying to get all semi-automatics classified as NFA items.
Similarly with requiring an FFL for any transfer: you have to be in the "business" of selling firearms, which would mean it must be above the "hobby" level as the IRS classifies it.
The biggest direct threat is if they tried to pull an FFL holder's license if he didn't treat an "assault weapon" as an NFA item, but even that I think would be dispensed with in the courts fairly quickly.
There are a lot more than two choices, none of which are nice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.