It was my way of saying this has been going on for decades on both sides of the aisle and we need a full overhaul of both sides if we ever want our freedoms back. If those who idolize him are butt hurt then good as it makes my point even clearer that people on both sides of the aisle want to rewrite history and will again with this president IF we don't put a stop to his cronies and vote in real constitution following officials.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Administration announces new gun control measures
- Thread starter turnandshoot4
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
It was my way of saying this has been going on for decades on both sides of the aisle and we need a full overhaul of both sides if we ever want our freedoms back. If those who idolize him are butt hurt then good as it makes my point even clearer that people on both sides of the aisle want to rewrite history and will again with this president IF we don't put a stop to his cronies and vote in real constitution following officials.
The Bubba Effect
Grandmaster
Did someone say fip out and panic?
(i'm partly posting to agree with bogwalker, bu mostly because I just love the smiley)
To All,
As a C&R holder I absolutely despise this nonsense. These new rule changes won't do a single thing to reduce crime or stop another mass shooting.
All that President Obama did was throw a bone to his gun control nut supporters.
That said, I am content at this time. The reason is, you see, is that NO permanent damage has been done. The President can claim a token measure or victory for his wing, this will get them off his back, and he will move on.
Then, in three (3) years IF we can get a Pro2A dude (or dudette) in the WH this can be as easily removed as it was put into place. Who knows? It may even be illegal somewhere and overturned in the courts.
Never forget - what can easily be done can just as easily be undone.
Again, for the record, I hate this nonsense and wish it had never happened. It is pointless! I am just looking at it as a temporary speedbump and the glass is half full. Be thankful that the [STRIKE]idiots[/STRIKE], uh, [STRIKE]goobers[/STRIKE], legislators didn't pass any laws!
Panic over. Time to move on. Wait until November 2015 and HOPE for CHANGE!
Regards,
Doug
As a C&R holder I absolutely despise this nonsense. These new rule changes won't do a single thing to reduce crime or stop another mass shooting.
All that President Obama did was throw a bone to his gun control nut supporters.
That said, I am content at this time. The reason is, you see, is that NO permanent damage has been done. The President can claim a token measure or victory for his wing, this will get them off his back, and he will move on.
Then, in three (3) years IF we can get a Pro2A dude (or dudette) in the WH this can be as easily removed as it was put into place. Who knows? It may even be illegal somewhere and overturned in the courts.
Never forget - what can easily be done can just as easily be undone.
Again, for the record, I hate this nonsense and wish it had never happened. It is pointless! I am just looking at it as a temporary speedbump and the glass is half full. Be thankful that the [STRIKE]idiots[/STRIKE], uh, [STRIKE]goobers[/STRIKE], legislators didn't pass any laws!
Panic over. Time to move on. Wait until November 2015 and HOPE for CHANGE!
Regards,
Doug
Last edited:
I'm not optimistic. Bush could have undone the Clinton ban on imports from China. But he didn't.
To my knowledge (possibly flawed) an executive order stands unless and until the legislature passes (and pres signs) a law that amends or abolishes it.
Executive order | Define Executive order at Dictionary.com
executive order
noun ( often initial capital letters ) an order having the force of law issued by the president of the U.S. to the army, navy, or other part of the executive branch of the government.
FAQ's About Executive Orders
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order_(United_States)
United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law,[SUP][1][/SUP] since issuances are typically made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress, some of which specifically delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation), or are believed to take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution. However, these perceived justifications cited by Presidents when authoring Executive Orders have come under criticism for exceeding executive authority; at various times throughout U.S. history, challenges to the legal validity or justification for an order have resulted in legal proceedings.
executive order
noun ( often initial capital letters ) an order having the force of law issued by the president of the U.S. to the army, navy, or other part of the executive branch of the government.
FAQ's About Executive Orders
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order_(United_States)
United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law,[SUP][1][/SUP] since issuances are typically made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress, some of which specifically delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation), or are believed to take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution. However, these perceived justifications cited by Presidents when authoring Executive Orders have come under criticism for exceeding executive authority; at various times throughout U.S. history, challenges to the legal validity or justification for an order have resulted in legal proceedings.
I posted this several days ago and a couple posters said I was paranoid.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...dment/310339-gun-control-executive-order.html
One does wonder what else the ATF has up their sleeve.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...dment/310339-gun-control-executive-order.html
One does wonder what else the ATF has up their sleeve.
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
1. The executive order on "military weapons" does not change anything.
2. The proposed ATFE rule on gun trusts was proposed by NFA collectors, NFA firearms collectors group initiated ATF gun trust rule change - National gun rights | Examiner.com
Are we tired from running around the conference room table yet?
2. The proposed ATFE rule on gun trusts was proposed by NFA collectors, NFA firearms collectors group initiated ATF gun trust rule change - National gun rights | Examiner.com
Are we tired from running around the conference room table yet?
funeralweb
Expert
WTH?! Did the POTUS watch "Gran Torino" for the in-flight movie on his last trip aboard AF-1? Clint Eastwood was menacing-looking with his M-1. Or maybe he watched Full Metal Jacket......SMDH
Yeah, I bet it was Gran Torino. Seeing a citizen defend his property against thugs just didn't sit right with the President.
shooter521
Certified Glock Nut
That's about par for the course. NFATCA says "How 'bout if you eliminate the CLEO signature for everyone, but you can require background checks for trust holders?" and ATF says "OK, we'll require background checks and CLEO signature for trust holders".
How 'bout enough with the "good ideas," guys?
ETA - here's NFATCA's spin:
http://www.nfatca.org/pubs/NFATCA_Statement_083113.pdf
"the government ****ed us!" Really? I'm shocked.
Last edited:
Noway Jose
Marksman
His view of a gun? Probably from behind with it canted 90 degrees to the side.
This is nothing more than a huge middle finger to the american people, he is taking a jab at the gun collectors, cuz he knows this will not hurt him in any way with his voting base, instead they will think he is doing a great thing! This makes him look good since the articles are about "gun control" when in reality it doesnt really do much of anything on gun control. So its a win win for him, he pisses off the people that stopped him from getting something by taking away a tiny piece of the puzzle. Plain and simple this man is a CHILD
That's about par for the course. NFATCA says "How 'bout if you eliminate the CLEO signature for everyone, but you can require background checks for trust holders?" and ATF says "OK, we'll require background checks and CLEO signature for trust holders".
How 'bout enough with the "good ideas," guys?
did one not need to have a background check when having a gun registered with a trust before this EA?
Site Supporter
Members online
- BillD
- Jndturner317
- glocktoys
- Bigdog357
- BoilerWes
- Brad69
- edwea
- duanewade
- Chewie
- RangeJunkie
- gregr
- sharpetop
- loudgroove
- armalitesheepdog
- sakima
- deo62
- Zjhagens
- Cozy439
- Old Dog
- Steel and wood
- bloodandgutsmurphy
- DoggyDaddy
- ChrisK
- chevy2
- PowderApe
- 85Cosmo
- indyblue
- XDdreams
- Trading_Fool
- ghunter
- Gabriel
- mattdennis3
- Hopper
- DCR
- darkkevin
- Lee11b
- blain
- AmericanBob
- Jowl1
- BeDome
- Whitey
- williamsburg
- Jacob271
- Twinsen
- joreharr
- Bucky623
- JTL165
- Creedmoor
- rbhargan
- Bighoss91
