Skip to comments.Obama ‘Seriously Considering’ Using Executive Authority to Tighten Gun Laws
Posted on 10/09/2015 7:34:57 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Washington Post is reporting that President Obama is considering an end run around Congress to make some changes to existing gun laws. In particular, he is considering “imposing new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers.”
Under Obama’s proposed executive fiat, dealers who sell more than an arbitrary number of guns will need to obtain a license from the ATF and perform background checks on consumers.
This latest overreach comes on the heels of a tragic shooting at the gun-free Umpqua Community College. Obama has asked his team to scrub what kinds of authorities do we have to enforce the laws that we have in place more effectively to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
We are hopeful we can find a way to do this, said one senior administration official, who noted that lawyers were still working through details to ensure that the rule could pass legal muster. Its a lot more clear today than it was a year ago how to work this out.
So what’s on Obama’s executive action agenda that will presumably stop the gun violence?
“The proposed executive action aims to impose background checks on individuals who buy from dealers who sell a significant number of guns each year. The current federal statute dictates that those who are ‘engaged in the business’ of dealing firearms need to obtain a federal license and, therefore, conduct background checks but exempts anyone ‘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.’ ”
We now know that the Oregon shooter purchased his weapons legally and passed a background check to do so. “All were traced to a federal firearms dealer,” said Celinez Nunez, an agent with the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
The Sandy Hook shooter stole weapons from his mother.
The Aurora movie theater shooter bought his guns legally and passed a background check.
The man who shot former congresswoman and gun-control activist Gabrielle Giffords passed a background check.
The man who shot two Virgina journalists live on the air passed a background check.
So, what is the purpose of Obama’s proposed expanded background checks? Do we have any evidence that expanding the definition of a gun dealer will decrease gun violence?
This is just another useless, empty gesture that inconveniences law-abiding citizens and doesn’t deter criminals and lunatics.
Understood, thanks. So I guess that somehow now the ATF is going to have to determine private sellers who exceed their ‘large sales volume’ threshold to somehow compel them to file for a FFL. I did not see any mechanism how the feds will determine, track, prove private sales volume. Hmmmm probably cannot be done without registering all private guns to determine any movement through sales maybe ?
It’s going to be much, much more than that. Every gun purchase will require proof that you aren’t going to resale the gun. They’ll have to know the inventory of every gun owner to enforce compliance. That’s going to be expensive and invasive.
Please you live in Florida and believe that.
O should have used the term "unlicensed dealer" which would be more correct. The way the federal law reads it's very hard to prove that an individual isn't buying and selling to "enhance" their gun collection. As a Life member of the NRA its hard to defend this administration's crap but private sales usually avoid the NICS check, at least here in Florida.
O is talking about individuals that are not FFL dealers who buy and sell large numbers of personally owned guns for profit.
But doesn’t the State have laws on the books for this? Having been to gun shows, I don’t know of anyone who could buy a gun without first having the dealer have an FFL or the person buying the gun to go thru a back ground check?
I guess there could be people in the parking lots doing this, but that would go against State Law, wouldn’t it?
Better make it "use of a firearm in the commission of a felony". I'd hate to get "the chair" for shooting a duck or two over my limit.
Thank you...that answered questions I had....
Holy crap....they already do!
Is it 1776 yet?
No...his mother did.
But there are places where the use of a gun IS a crime, even in self-defense. They'd love that! Kill all the people who had the temerity to defend themselves...
Using “Executive Action” to circumvent the Bill of Rights?
I don’t think that will fly.
It’s a serious miscalculation to mess with the 2nd Amendment.
It’ll be a hard lesson for Obama to learn.
RE: Using Executive Action to circumvent the Bill of Rights?
Obama is an Alinskyite.
Saul Alinsky does not and never has taught changing things ( or the constitution ) via a big bang approach.
It is always via the slow, subtle, baby steps approach.
Just look at what happened to gay marriage....
First, you appoint judges who will overturn state referendums that ban gay marriage.
Then, you turn to the deep blue states and support their legislature in legislating to legalize gay marriage.
You at first voice opposition to it and then a few years later, tell everyone that you have “evolved” on the issue.
You then appoint Justices to the Supreme Court who will vote to legalize gay marriage.
You then ignore such laws as DOMA and refuse to enforce it.
Then, with all the judges you have in place, allow the gay activists to challenge DOMA in the courts.
You get your buddies in Hollywood and the popular music business to make films and music sympathetic to the gay marriage cause for mass consumption to slowly but surely indoctrinate the youth.
Eventually, without even the nation voting on it, and with DOMA safely declared unconstitutional, you go for the big prize — SUPREME COURT deciding the only recognizing traditional marriage is unconstitutional.
With that, any American who refuses to recognize this decision as the “law of the land” ( Kim Davis, Christian bakers and photographers, etc ), are persecuted.
What makes you think this Alinsky-ite tactic can’t be implemented for the second amendment?
It might take years, but THAT is Alinsky’s genius. He HAS time and national complacency on his side.
None of the so-called mass murderers were criminals before they committed their acts. They obtained guns legally and passed background checks. And your run-of-the-mill street criminals don't comply with registration laws or background check laws when they get their guns to commit their crimes with. Why do you think we call them criminals! Duh!
So again this is all for naught and just makes it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to get their guns. Obama is playing to his base and the non-information voters of the democRAT party.
There. I fixed it.
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.