1911Forum banner

1 - 20 of 89 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
All the stuff Obama signed remember like 15 or something didn't amount to hill of beans. He'll get sued the moment he background checks 80% stuff, that's legal and he can't change that though he'll do it and you'll be tied up in courts for years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
Cannot see how he could sign anything that has any legal merit. Now owning a lump of metal is illegal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,891 Posts
Don't forget, the ATF has, at times, ruled that a shoestring is a "machine gun."

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
166 Posts
I think they feel like they need to issue something to get the gun grabber lobby off their backs. I'm thinking won't have much in the way of teeth and it doesn't matter if to them if they get sued over it or not. They can tell the anti gunners they did something. Attention on that issue gets redirected to the courts so they can move on from gun control to what they really want to accomplish more than anything else in this moment, trying to shove another massive spending bill down our throats.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,938 Posts
I see a lot of complacency here. Don't underestimate the left's desire for control. If he signs the order with his right hand....watch the left hand. Closely
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Apparently there is a distinction between an Executive Action and an Executive Order. An Action is kind of like telling legislators that you would really like to see a law like this. An Executive Order carries with it Authority. I'm just repeating what I heard and could very well be wrong but would not be surprised if that is the case. I mean think about it. Clinton was a Gun Grabber Ditto for Obama. If all that was required was for them to proclaim through Executive order that certain firearms were banned We would all be out fishing right now
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,560 Posts
Got this from Brownells today:

We’re reaching out to you because we anticipate an increase in demand on the items included in this email – driven by what we believe will be executive actions likely to be taken by the Biden administration, as early as tomorrow (April 8, 2021).

While we do not know specifically what President Biden’s actions will be, we wanted you to be aware of this increased demand – and the fact that we will NOT be raising prices.

Brownells stands ready to fight any anti-Second Amendment action on behalf of you, our friend in freedom
.

All I have to say is BOHICA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
457 Posts
Probably blowing smoke and try to put on a tough guy act. He can't speak for long anyway. I'm sure he'll get his mis construed Assault Rifle reference in there. The biggest threat now would be going after online ammo sales.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,335 Posts
Rumored to be a "Ghost Gun" restriction... i.e. 80% build frames. Possibly also no more face to face gun sales, everything might have to go through an FFL. Internet ammo sales? Another remote possibility.

Biden and his anti-constitutionalist pal, Garland are supposed to have a press conference Thursday.

Anyhow, those were speculative actions that I heard on a talk radio show today.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
747 Posts
He can't set/change the law with an EO.

80% frames are set in law. Congress would need to change the law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Rumored to be a "Ghost Gun" restriction... i.e. 80% build frames. Possibly also no more face to face gun sales, everything might have to go through an FFL. Internet ammo sales? Another remote possibility.

Biden and his anti-constitutionalist pal, Garland are supposed to have a press conference Thursday.

Anyhow, those were speculative actions that I heard on a talk radio show today.
I won’t be surprised if it will also be something on the online sales of gun parts and ammo too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Supposedly an executive action not an executive order.
Couldn’t the “executive action” be the signing of an executive order?


He can't set/change the law with an EO.

80% frames are set in law. Congress would need to change the law.
You mean like how immigration LAW would have to be changed by Congress, yet the potato with the stroke of a pen has basically changed that? Like Obama did with the DACA bs. Point is, Congress is controlled by the dems. They’ll go along with whatever Biden does.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,526 Posts
My understanding is that an Executive Action -------- as opposed to an Order, carries little legal weight. If that's what this really is, then it's kinda like a wish list of things he would like to see happen.

Meaning it's not powerful. It's just the usual Left/Right battle raging on along with taxation issues, covid, immigration, health care, foreign policy and other such bickering.
 
1 - 20 of 89 Posts
Top