Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is this text of Obama executive action on guns?
WND ^ | October 20, 2015 | Aaron Klein

Posted on 10/21/2015 11:06:02 AM PDT by Perseverando

The highly influential Center for American Progress, widely considered the “idea factory” for the Obama administration, has drawn up a blueprint for presidential executive action on gun control that goes beyond media descriptions of the proposal being weighed by the White House.

Since the mass shooting in Roseburg, Oregon, earlier this month, it’s been widely reported that President Obama is considering circumventing Congress with executive action to tighten federal law on gun sales.

NBC News quoted administration officials saying Obama’s major gun-control proposal would set specific guidelines for who is legally defined as a licensed gun dealer, since all licensed dealers are required to conduct background checks before conducting any sales.

The proposal, NBC News reported, would set quotas on yearly gun sales for individuals to qualify as legally being “in the business” of selling guns once they sell a certain number and thus become subject to all laws for gun dealers.

The news agency quoted sources revealing the White House is considering setting the quota at 50 or 100 gun sales per year as the threshold to trigger the requirements, although the sources added the administration has not formally settled on a specific number.

The reports of an executive action focus on a federal law that requires anyone “engage[d] in the business” of “dealing in firearms” to obtain a federal firearms license from ATF and become a licensed gun dealer.

Every licensed gun dealer is then mandated to conduct background checks prior to completing each gun sale.

Currently, the federal statute defines those “in the business” of gun sales as follows:

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; guncontrol; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

1 posted on 10/21/2015 11:06:02 AM PDT by Perseverando
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Circumventing the Constitution is unConstitutional and the mark of lawlessness.


2 posted on 10/21/2015 11:08:56 AM PDT by Slyfox (Will no one rid us of this meddlesome president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

I only buy, I never sell. Then I lose them when I go fishing.


3 posted on 10/21/2015 11:10:20 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Two can play at this: Next president should redefine “those in the business of gun sales” as the primary manufacturer only; those only gun shops and others who buy direct from factory have to undergo background checks. Love to watch the lib heads explode on that, after all turnabout is fair play, yes?


4 posted on 10/21/2015 11:14:00 AM PDT by LambSlave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

“The proposal, NBC News reported, would set quotas on yearly gun sales for individuals to qualify as legally being “in the business” of selling guns once they sell a certain number and thus become subject to all laws for gun dealers.”

In order to enforce that, they would need all private gun sales to be reported to them in the first place, which is basically de facto national gun registration.

If I want to sell my private property to another private citizen, it’s none of the government’s damn business, and I won’t report anything to them.


5 posted on 10/21/2015 11:16:03 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
As best as I can discern, all this anti-gun talk is just that (at least at this time)

There is no (again, IMO) EO signed yet

6 posted on 10/21/2015 11:17:10 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

This is just more pi$$ing into the wind!


7 posted on 10/21/2015 11:17:38 AM PDT by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
I hope we get a REAL president who overturns all of these royal edicts.

He can use the executive power play as a precedent.

8 posted on 10/21/2015 11:17:42 AM PDT by PATRIOT1876 (The only crimes that are 100% preventable are those committed by illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vette6387
This is just more pi$$ing into the wind!

Don't kid yourself. That is what everyone thought when he promised to "fundamentally change America" . The Marxists are on the move. Its going to get bloody.

9 posted on 10/21/2015 11:24:16 AM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Any firearms regulations laws or edicts are illegal. Period. O can shove his executive order up his islamonazi ***. (What an insult it is to have let such an obvious America- hating enemy agent into USA in the first place. our immigration and border enforcement services are obviously broken badly


10 posted on 10/21/2015 11:25:33 AM PDT by faithhopecharity (Brilliant, funny, and incisive Tagline coming to this space soon.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

After reading the whole article, I don’t have a huge problem with what is being proposed. I think the criteria laid out do describe what I would consider to be gun dealers that are circumventing the intent of ATF regulations, however, there need to be some exclusions such as a person who rents a table at a gun show once per year or the sale of up to a few unopened (unfired) guns per year.

Of course, I’d also want Obama, Hillary, the entire DNC and the CAP, Brady, Moms and other organizations to come out and say that this is the last time they’ll ask for any more gun control, regardless of if this has an impact on crime or “gun violence”.


11 posted on 10/21/2015 11:25:42 AM PDT by CarmichaelPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Executive Orders are not withstanding on the public, for they were created to be in-house organs only.

I refuse.


12 posted on 10/21/2015 11:26:08 AM PDT by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

Rifle Fishing is a very expensive sport. It's not for everybody.................

13 posted on 10/21/2015 11:28:33 AM PDT by Red Badger (READ MY LIPS: NO MORE BUSHES!...............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Don’t all those 4473 forms get filed by the ATF anyways?


14 posted on 10/21/2015 11:28:58 AM PDT by Roman_War_Criminal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone

“If a crime is committed and it’s not reported as a crime, did it really happen? I’ve read a number of stories about crimes either being ignored or downgraded under orders from on high.”

Yeah, but Obola is running out of time! And in this instance he stands no chance of any real change. This stuff is more of an annoyance to decent people. The only thing that would change my opinion would be a Hitlary Presidency, and that is looking far less likely as each day passes.


15 posted on 10/21/2015 11:30:18 AM PDT by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CarmichaelPatriot

The issue isn’t what’s in the EO.

The issue is how the various existing and future bureaucracies interpret and expand what is in the EO. I refer you to the most recent works of the EPA when it comes to “navigable waters.” Don’t look to Congress for relief when this hits the streets and spreads - look how thoroughly they have abandoned nearly all of the Constitutional duties.

IMHO this is stopped peacefully now before he signs the EO or through other means afterwards.


16 posted on 10/21/2015 11:32:01 AM PDT by Nip (BOHEICA and TANSTAAFL - both seem very appropriate today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando; All
Thank you for referencing that article Perseverando. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

”..., it’s been widely reported that President Obama is considering circumventing Congress ..."

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

Patriots beware! No president has the constitutional authority to circumvent Congress. In fact, the Founding States made Congress the most powerful branch of the federal government. This is evidenced by Congress’s constitutional power to impeach and remove lawless presidents and activist justices from office.

The reason that lawless Obama is getting away with his unconstitutional executive actions excuses is the following imo. The corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification Senate is not doing its job to protect the states as the Founding States had established the Senate to do. In this case, the Senate is refusing to work with the House to impeach and remove Obama from office for his unconstitutional actions.

The ill-conceived 17th amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt senators who let lawless presidents destroy our constitutional protections as well.

Remember in November ’16!

17 posted on 10/21/2015 11:32:28 AM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative
I only buy, I never sell. Then I lose them when I go fishing.

Funny how you never lose fishing poles when you go hunting.

18 posted on 10/21/2015 11:34:28 AM PDT by Starstruck (I'm usually sarcastic. Deal with it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

If you lose them fishing, you gotta keep buying.


19 posted on 10/21/2015 11:35:24 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
He has no authority to do this.

Well, no legitimate authority.

20 posted on 10/21/2015 11:35:48 AM PDT by Skooz (Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson