Posted on 01/05/2016 12:08:19 PM PST by Sean_Anthony
....Mostly
For the last few weeks, gun owners and constitutionalists have been wringing their hands, worried that Obama’s executive orders would implement the left-wing wish list of gun control tropes. We heard he was going to ban “large capacity†magazines, or limit sales of so-called “assault weapons.†There were also rumors that he was going to unilaterally strip 2nd Amendment rights based on nebulous watchlists. Two days ago, when he said his orders would be entirely consistent with the Constitution, he tipped his hand. He was going to do none of that.
For the most part, what he did do was restate existing law and focus on a mythical epidemic of unlicensed dealers operating online and at gun shows. Via USA Today:
It’s yet another violation of the Constitution and further erosion of our God-given rights (which are recognized, not granted, by the Second Amendment). No real American should shrug this off.
I disagree with Mr. Laurie.
The very vagueness and flimsiness of the Obama edict opens the door to reckless, ad hoc prosecutions that may or may not hold up but will cause untold expense and hardship on whomever is targeted.
Wrong.
They amount to a lawless tyrant.
Next on his agenda: Address the disproportionate numbers of people of color in prisons by pardoning violent criminals. Make it harder to send violent crackhead gangbangers (just the ones of color) to prison.
This is common in Federal laws.
A good example of this would be interstate highway standards. When you drive from one end of the country to the other and notice that all the road signs look the same, it isn't because Congress sat down one day and passed a law with detailed requirements for highway sign colors, letters, spacing, etc. More likely, Congress just passed a law requiring all interstate highway signs to have uniform standards that would be established by the Federal Highway Administration.
Any legislation by executive order is wrong, it’s a misuse of power. Their purpose is to direct the execution of Congressional established law, not to create it.
However, I was expecting something much, much worse. I think it’s a game. He is going to see if he can sneak this by the RINO’s, which he will. Then just keep upping the game with more EO’s to see how far the RINO’s will let him go.
It’s like junior steeling just one cookie and waiting to see what mommy does. I think mommy should break junior’s little hand.
Just never tell a doc, psych or otherwise, you own a weapon or firearm. Never.
Well, not really. His grasp of and dedication to the limits the Constitution imposes upon his office is such that he'd do that stuff and still say that.
He probably shouldn’t be allowed to buy any guns (nor under the “doctrine” of “constructive possession”, be allowed to be in his residence or other location where those present are armed).
This assumes that Obama won’t act on his own illegal directive.
He has. He will.
And then the pain and cost of litigation will damage some American families.
I told my wife today... “With Obama’s new rules, I can still buy guns...I just can’t sell’em.” She asked... “Why would you sell’em?”.
I love my wife.
As was the case before Nobama opened his mouth, the ATF gets to choose who to prosecute as an unlicensed gun dealer, and the courts get to decide if the AFT was right or wrong. There is no hard and fast rule regarding a dollar figure or number of sales that defines a "gun dealer" from an average Joe selling from his own collection.
That’s what I’m trying to determine, what specifically the law says. If it uses the term “gun dealer” without any definition, or if it has some specifics. Trying to see how far Obama stretched the law, and whether he created it out of whole cloth or just gave it an expansive interpretation. I don’t have expertise in gun law and regulation.
Yeah but we can trust the DOJ. /s
The law defining “engaged in the business†is very, very clear (PDF).
…a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms. A dealer can be “engaged in the business†without taking title to the firearms that are sold. However, the term does not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms
http://bearingarms.com/sound-fury-signifying-nothing-rundown-obamas-executive-orders/ That's what I was wanting to know.
[[Just never tell a doc, psych or otherwise, you own a weapon or firearm. Never.]]
It won’t matter if you tell them or not IF you’ve ever had and antidepressant prescribed to you or antipsychotic etc- everyone who has ever had these WILL be immediately added to the gubmint watch list and possibly even prevented from owning a gun due to ‘possible problems’ in the future- People accused of domestic abuse will be put on the l ist- people with any violent tendencies or anger issue will be automatically added to the list- etc etc etc
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.