yakdung 2,926 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I'll bet the gobmint will require all persons entering into a gun trust to be run through a background check. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SgtRaven 531 Posted January 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Republicans vowed Monday to battle President Barack Obama on his plan to enact tough restrictions on guns through executive actions.Obama said Monday he will begin announcing a series of actions on Tuesday to prevent gun violence. The actions are expected to increase the number of people who require a background check before buying a gun, including people who purchase at gun shows from "occasional sellers."Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a GOP presidential candidate, vowed to fight Obama's executive orders "tooth and nail."GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump told CNN's "New Day" Obama "keeps signing executive orders because he doesn't meet with people. I don't know, he doesn't like people I guess. … Pretty soon you won't be able to get guns."Ben Carson told CNN's Jake Tapper that while it is important to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals and mentally unstable people, he doesn't trust Obama will stop there."This is coming from a president who said, if you like your doctor, you can keep them. If you like your insurance company, you can keep them," Carson said. "Now this is like saying if you like your gun, you can keep it."Such changes should be made by Congress, not by the executive branch alone, Carson said."I don't know anybody on this issue on the Republican side, quite frankly, who is totally unreasonable who's not willing to sit down and talk about those kinds of things," Carson said.Carly Fiorina posted a video of her appearance on CNN, where she called Obama's actions "delusional, dangerous, not to mention unconstitutional.""The word that President Obama is once again going to abuse his power to try to seize our guns, sadly, surprises nobody," added Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, on the campaign trail in Iowa.Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, also campaigning in Iowa, said, "This president needs to stop focusing on what he's constitutionally forbidden to do, which is interfering with our Second Amendment.""We all are pained by the recent atrocities in our country, but no change the president is reportedly considering would have prevented them," House Speaker Paul Ryan said in as statement on his website. "We have seen consistently that an underlying cause of these attacks has been mental illness, and we should look at ways to address this problem."Obama's proposals to restrict gun rights were debated by the United States Senate, and were rejected, Ryan said."No president should be able to reverse legislative failure by executive fiat, not even incrementally."Texas Rep. John Culberson, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee, threatened to cut off the Justice Department's funding, The Hill reports.Texas Sen. John Cornyn predicted a successful court challenge. News Channel commentator Brit Hume said the rules are simply impossible to enforce.The only way to completely stop gun violence is to confiscate them all, Hume said on "The O'Reilly Factor." The constitution has been found by the Supreme Court to confer the right on an individual to keep and bear arms," Hume said. "For the moment, that ship has sailed."http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/republicans-obama-executive-order-guns/2016/01/04/id/708144/#ixzz3wKwSt7Hb Republicans vowed Monday to battle President Barack Obama on his plan to enact tough restrictions on guns through executive actions.Obama said Monday he will begin announcing a series of actions on Tuesday to prevent gun violence. The actions are expected to increase the number of people who require a background check before buying a gun, including people who purchase at gun shows from "occasional sellers."Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a GOP presidential candidate, vowed to fight Obama's executive orders "tooth and nail."GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump told CNN's "New Day" Obama "keeps signing executive orders because he doesn't meet with people. I don't know, he doesn't like people I guess. … Pretty soon you won't be able to get guns."Ben Carson told CNN's Jake Tapper that while it is important to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals and mentally unstable people, he doesn't trust Obama will stop there."This is coming from a president who said, if you like your doctor, you can keep them. If you like your insurance company, you can keep them," Carson said. "Now this is like saying if you like your gun, you can keep it."Such changes should be made by Congress, not by the executive branch alone, Carson said."I don't know anybody on this issue on the Republican side, quite frankly, who is totally unreasonable who's not willing to sit down and talk about those kinds of things," Carson said.Carly Fiorina posted a video of her appearance on CNN, where she called Obama's actions "delusional, dangerous, not to mention unconstitutional.""The word that President Obama is once again going to abuse his power to try to seize our guns, sadly, surprises nobody," added Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, on the campaign trail in Iowa.Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, also campaigning in Iowa, said, "This president needs to stop focusing on what he's constitutionally forbidden to do, which is interfering with our Second Amendment.""We all are pained by the recent atrocities in our country, but no change the president is reportedly considering would have prevented them," House Speaker Paul Ryan said in as statement on his website. "We have seen consistently that an underlying cause of these attacks has been mental illness, and we should look at ways to address this problem."Obama's proposals to restrict gun rights were debated by the United States Senate, and were rejected, Ryan said."No president should be able to reverse legislative failure by executive fiat, not even incrementally."Texas Rep. John Culberson, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee, threatened to cut off the Justice Department's funding, The Hill reports.Texas Sen. John Cornyn predicted a successful court challenge. News Channel commentator Brit Hume said the rules are simply impossible to enforce.The only way to completely stop gun violence is to confiscate them all, Hume said on "The O'Reilly Factor." The constitution has been found by the Supreme Court to confer the right on an individual to keep and bear arms," Hume said. "For the moment, that ship has sailed."http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/republicans-obama-executive-order-guns/2016/01/04/id/708144/#ixzz3wKwSt7Hb Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yakdung 2,926 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I would not put my faith in anything the GOP says. I have lost all faith. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
XD45 7,124 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 But she emphasized that the new initiative does not change any laws or regulations, and that the exception for legitimate hobbyists and collectors remains in the law. Sounds like they don't have the sack to do anything substantial. Probably don't want to get smacked down by 10,000 law suits, and lose another 50 seats in congress next election. No matter what the dims and the media claim, the people have spoken, and the people don't want more gun control. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
corbin 621 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 How do you think his proposed NFA Trust change will affect people that already have them? I assume they checked my background when I filed on behalf of the Trust. I've never even had so much as a parking ticket in my life, so whatever. But will they say "Sorry, you can't own that NFA item until we check you out"? I'm wanting to add my wife as a trust member as well. Like me, she's got a clean record. I suspect I should probably do that sooner rather than later. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
poolingmyignorance 2,191 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 How do you think his proposed NFA Trust change will affect people that already have them? I assume they checked my background when I filed on behalf of the Trust. I've never even had so much as a parking ticket in my life, so whatever. But will they say "Sorry, you can't own that NFA item until we check you out"? I'm wanting to add my wife as a trust member as well. Like me, she's got a clean record. I suspect I should probably do that sooner rather than later. It's for the rest of the individuals on your trust. ATF couldn't get past the public comments as required so in the back ground they actually sued the fed to get public comment requirements removed from their decisions, AND WON. Funny none of our pro gun lobbyist mentioned that failure. Now to add a layer of redundancy, they have an EO.Also it should be noted the verbiage used for sales " engaged in business of sales" and "cases where only 2 were sold" and no time frame is ever mentioned. This could imply they could have grounds for indictment of anybody who have ever sold more than one gun. They mention "other factors" but have not mention of what those might be. I know from reading on other cases that the ATF doesn't look at profit, as there say " you can be bad at a business, but still engaged in it" . This new EO is dangerous stuff. It created a de-facto law that has only arbitrary requirements to bring about charges. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JonWienke 131 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 ATF couldn't get past the public comments as required so in the back ground they actually sued the fed to get public comment requirements removed from their decisions, AND WON. Funny none of our pro gun lobbyist mentioned that failure. Now to add a layer of redundancy, they have an EO. When did this happen? Do you have a link? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
poolingmyignorance 2,191 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 ATF couldn't get past the public comments as required so in the back ground they actually sued the fed to get public comment requirements removed from their decisions, AND WON. Funny none of our pro gun lobbyist mentioned that failure. Now to add a layer of redundancy, they have an EO.When did this happen? Do you have a link?I recall reading it in a link on a gun blog a while back from a legit source, but now I cannot find ANYTHING about it.... so for now I guess lump it in the rumor catagory. I don't want to redact my comment because I'm sure I read it correctly, but I cannot verify it now so, I guess who cares. Sorry Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mullet Man 2,114 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I remember reading it too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JonWienke 131 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I'm only asking because the ATF took public comments on the proposed M855 ammo ban a few months ago, and got snowed under by critical public feedback opposing the ban. If they changed the process, that would be useful to know, especially how they justify it legally, since public comment periods are required by law IIRC. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
poolingmyignorance 2,191 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I'm only asking because the ATF took public comments on the proposed M855 ammo ban a few months ago, and got snowed under by critical public feedback opposing the ban. If they changed the process, that would be useful to know, especially how they justify it legally, since public comment periods are required by law IIRC. It did... but like hell if I can find it.... I've been sitting here reading PDF. after fucking PDF on the ATF website trying to find it......... google, bing and yahoo have failed me too. Man I really hope I misread it and it's not as dire as it feels. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yakdung 2,926 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) ATF couldn't get past the public comments as required so in the back ground they actually sued the fed to get public comment requirements removed from their decisions, AND WON. Funny none of our pro gun lobbyist mentioned that failure. Now to add a layer of redundancy, they have an EO. When did this happen? Do you have a link? This may help: https://www.guntrustlawyer.com/category/atf-batfe http://www.myguntrust.com/when-will-the-atfs-proposed-rule-change-go-into-effect.html Edited January 5, 2016 by yakdung Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JonWienke 131 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Nothing on that page about the ATF eliminating comment periods, just a note that reviewing 300K+ public comments was slowing down some of the ATF's rulemaking processes re gun trusts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
6500rpm 670 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 B.O.H.I.C.A. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yakdung 2,926 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 ^ If I form a trust, that's what I'll name it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dad2142Dad 6,559 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 It's funny with his tears he never mentions the slaughters that take place back in chitown. I guess those don't count. Nor do the ones that come from releasing shitbags early or illegals that Mexico would just execute..... Shame people will actually listen to the lies and fake tears..... P.S. Did you catch Biden in the background with his best sad puppet face? 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yakdung 2,926 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) A couple of things I'm still waiting for: - Eric Holder and Obama prosecuted for gun running instrumental in the death of officer Brian Terry. - A full background check and citizenship verification of the President. Edited January 5, 2016 by yakdung 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yakdung 2,926 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/01/05/judge-napolitano-why-obamas-executive-action-on-guns-is-unconstitutional.html?intcmp=hpbt2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WhiskeyMinion 300 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Published yesterday by the ATF explaining who needs to apply for FFL https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download Edited January 6, 2016 by WhiskeyMinion Quote Link to post Share on other sites
XD45 7,124 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 There is a great deal of conflicting information flying around about this. The claim that "no laws or rules were changed" vs "occasional sellers will now require a license". Which is it? If they really do think that they can make occasional sellers get a license they are more seriously fucked in the head than I thought. Not that he hasn't made it clear that he WANTS that, but that he actually thinks he can get away with it. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spacehog 2,218 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 If their intention is to have private citizens be required to obtain an FFL for any private sale, then how about suing the Federal Government to make it easier and less costly to obtain one. Instead of limiting access how about adding tens of millions of FFLs in the US. I know this is fantasy, but it would be hilarious if this crap backfired and that was the result. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SHOTGUN MESIAH 855 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 The general consensus around here is that these new actions will actually speed up the process for buying a gun. Isn't it great when you have an ignorant president….. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JonWienke 131 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 The general consensus around here is that these new actions will actually speed up the process for buying a gun. Isn't it great when you have an ignorant president….. Mostly when doing NFA purchases--the CLEO signoff requirement is being dropped completely. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yakdung 2,926 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 The diversity ass clown speaks. This guy is really fucking dumb. Again, I want to see his college grades and transcripts. http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/01/05/obama-i-know-the-second-amendment-you-knowi-taught-constitutional-law-n2100257 In “The Bridge,” Obama-friendly biographer David Remnick concedes that Obama was an “unspectacular” student at Columbia and at every stop before that. A professor who wrote a letter of reference for Obama reinforces the point, telling Remnick, “I don’t think [Obama] did too well in college.” http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/why-did-obama-seal-his-transcripts/ 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SgtRaven 531 Posted January 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 15 Things Every American Needs to Know About Obama's Gun Control Orders http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/obama-gun-control-orders-american/2016/01/05/id/708206/#ixzz3wQGUHAVA President Barack Obama unveiled his forthcoming executive actions on gun control on Monday, and will spend the week promoting them in the press. The formal announcement will come at a White House ceremony on Tuesday, and Obama will also host a live town hall meeting in conjunction with CNN on Thursday. Gathered below are 15 things every American needs to know about the new executive orders. 1. The orders stop short of requiring universal background checks — According to Politico, "While Obama cannot unilaterally require universal background checks, top administration officials predicted the new guidelines would sweep in all but the most casual sellers." 2. House Speaker Paul Ryan said Obama is subverting the constitution — "While we don't yet know the details of the plan, the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will," he said in a statement, the Washington Examiner reported. "His proposals to restrict gun rights were debated by the United States Senate, and they were rejected. No president should be able to reverse legislative failure by executive fiat, not even incrementally. The American people deserve a president who will respect their constitutional right — all of them. This is a dangerous level of executive overreach, and the country will not stand for it." 3. Ted Cruz responded by raffling off a shotgun — On Sunday, the senator from Texas set up a webpage offering his supporters the change to win a shotgun engraved with his presidential campaign logo, MarketWatch reported. Cruz also said he would undo Obama's executive orders and strengthen Second Amendment rights as president. 4. Donald Trump would "unsign" the orders as president — The GOP frontrunner told a packed rally in Biloxi, Mississippi, on Sunday that he is opposed to Obama's gun control plans. "There's an assault on the Second Amendment. You know Obama's going to do an executive order and really knock the hell out of it," Trump said, according to CNN. "You know, the system's supposed to be you get the Democrats, you get the Republicans, and you make deals. He can't do that. He can't do that. So he's going to sign another executive order having to do with the Second Amendment, having to do with guns. I will veto. I will unsign that so fast." 5. Marco Rubio vowed to undo Obama's orders on "day one" — Speaking Sunday evening in New Hampshire, the second primary state and a thoroughly pro-gun state, Rubio said Obama "has waged war on the Constitution" by issuing executive orders against the Second Amendment, Time magazine reported. "Don’t worry," he continued, "on my first day in office, behind that desk, don’t worry, those orders are gone." 6. The orders will reduce background check exemptions for many hobbyists — Currently, gun sales by hobbyists and collectors do not require background checks, but sales by professional gun dealers "engaged in the business" of dealing guns do require background checks (and also require the seller to obtain a federal license). The new executive orders will seek to limit hobbyist exemptions by clarifying an existing law so that sellers who sell firearms at gun shows and online can be classified as professional gun dealers, USA Today reported. This will narrow, but not close, what some call the "gun show loophole." 7. Hobbyist exemptions are not based on sales location or numbers — After meeting with Obama on Monday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch said, "Let me be clear: It’s not where you are located but what you are doing that determines whether you are engaged in the business of dealing in firearms." Likewise, the order does not set a numerical threshold on what differentiates hobby sales from professional sales. Lynch did note, however, that as few as two gun sales have in the past triggered background check requirements, as determined by the courts. 8. Exemptions will be determined holistically — White House Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett said the ATF will take into account all the "facts and circumstances" of the gun seller when determining exemption status. Things like business cards, ability to take credit-card payments, profit margins, and original packaging are all part of the equation. 9. Obama requested more money for mental healthcare — The president requested $500 million be added to the federal budget in order to improve access to mental healthcare. 10. The FBI's background check system will get more staff — One of Obama's executive orders requires the hiring of more staff, 230 examiners, so that the government is equipped for "processing background checks 24 hours a day, 7 days a week," Fox News reported. This is a roughly 50-percent staff increase. 11. The orders will NOT ban large capacity magazines — Ahead of the announcement, the Obama administration considered several measures that it ultimately decided it didn't have the power to do. One of those things was banning large capacity magazines for firearms, USA Today reported. 12. The orders will NOT ban people using the terrorist "no fly" list — After the San Bernardino terrorist attack, many called for banning anyone on the federal "no fly" list from obtaining firearms. Many said this was a terrible idea, as many prominent people and representatives who are clearly not involved in terrorist activity have appeared on the list in the past. 13. Obama also issued a presidential memorandum on "smart guns" — According to USA Today, "Obama directed the departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security to study 'smart gun' technology to prevent accidental gunshots and allow better tracking of lost and stolen guns — with the idea of using the federal government's purchasing power to encourage gun makers to market safer firearms." 14. The orders would not have stopped recent mass shootings — Obama's executive orders would not have stopped the San Bernardino shooters, nor the Charleston church shooting, as perpetrators in neither case bought their guns under the hobbyist exemption. In fact, after the terrorist massacre in San Bernardino, The Associated Press reported, "The deadly shooting in San Bernardino happened in a state with some of the nation's toughest gun laws: California bars assault weapons, blocks the sale of large-capacity magazines, and requires universal background checks for all gun purchases." 15. The Supreme Court could stall and strike down Obama's orders — After the president tried to unilaterally overhaul the nation's immigration system via executive order, the Supreme Court issued an injunction, and the legality of the orders is now under review, Politico reported. Like the immigration orders, Obama's gun control measures could also come under judicial review. http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/obama-gun-control-orders-american/2016/01/05/id/708206/#ixzz3wQGgKEN3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yakdung 2,926 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Did I read what this guy said correctly?: "House Speaker Paul Ryan said Obama is subverting the constitution". Another guy that needs to find another line of work, 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SHOTGUN MESIAH 855 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 (edited) This is one of the bad things to come from this whole mess. Better keep your trap shut when you visit your DR. http://news.investors.com/010516-788091-obamacare-extended-to-policing-guns.htm The general consensus around here is that these new actions will actually speed up the process for buying a gun. Isn't it great when you have an ignorant president….. Mostly when doing NFA purchases--the CLEO signoff requirement is being dropped completely. Seriously…..I didn't hear about this. So we actually got something out of all this…..unbelievable! Edited January 6, 2016 by SHOTGUN MESSIAH Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 just take a look at HR4269 to see what they are after Quote Link to post Share on other sites
su16a 84 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Obama vs. the NRA: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/02/obamas-plan-to-tigthen-gun-laws-sets-up-rematch-with-powerful-gun-rights-group-nra.html?intcmp=hpbt1 What’s really frightening when you open the link you posted and scroll down to the bottom you’ll see Obama has a 43% Approval rating and only a 51% Disapproval rating. Wow, this guy is clearly not packing the gear and 43% of those polled think he’s doing great, its mind boggling... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
XD45 7,124 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 47% of the people in this country have taken the blue pill, and washed it down with cool aid. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.