I'm curious to hear some of the opinions of other politically-minded folks out there to see how they think any/all new regulations will happen (and which ones). I don't think Obama and his cronies can pass a major gun-regulation bill through the House of Representatives (HOR) that is controlled by Republicans. The House has a strategic advantage (for gun owners) of their Republican representatives covering primarily rural areas. Also, the fact that there are 435 HORs means that these reps cover a much smaller voting base that is more likely to be familiar with their the Congressman that actually represents them. I don't see any way these Republicans in the HOR can expect to vote for a Gun Regulation bill and actually expect to get re-elected by their constituents the next time their name appears on the ballot. Obviously, Obama will have Pelosi push the bill through the Senate first since it can fly through the Democratically-controlled Senate easily. This will also allow the liberal media to build pressure behind the bill before it gets to the House. But what happens at that point? Does it fail in the House and then Obama tries to use Executive Orders to pass legislation however he deems fit? Just wanted to get some opinions from others on how they see this REALISTICALLY playing out.
-
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/
Obama vs. Guns: How will it actually happen?
- Thread starter VoteRedTeam
- 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:
I think we'll get universal background checks. Republicans will cave on that because a majority of Americans support it. I don't think even the dems have the votes for anything else.
After the background check passes, the politicians will congratulate themselves for getting something done and the population will go back to sleep while the administration uses backdoor methods like Obamacare to regulate our lives further, including guns.
After the background check passes, the politicians will congratulate themselves for getting something done and the population will go back to sleep while the administration uses backdoor methods like Obamacare to regulate our lives further, including guns.
It aint over, till its over. If it dies tomorrow or goes to the Senate then dies or gets through the Senate to the House. Does not matter. We must keep the pressure up on the politicians.
I know this is going to happen no matter what. The media is going to down play the pro gun effort and glorify the anti's, even if nothing gets passed. The sheep will always believe what the Liberally biased media tells them. Right now the word is the AWB cant pass, no way. Bull Hockey, until it's dead and forgotten it always has a chance in one form or another to pass and infringe on our rights.
Be ever vigilant and know the Liberals do not want common sense gun control. Their ultimate goal is absolute total disarmament of every American citizen (with the exception of the chosen elite).
I know this is going to happen no matter what. The media is going to down play the pro gun effort and glorify the anti's, even if nothing gets passed. The sheep will always believe what the Liberally biased media tells them. Right now the word is the AWB cant pass, no way. Bull Hockey, until it's dead and forgotten it always has a chance in one form or another to pass and infringe on our rights.
Be ever vigilant and know the Liberals do not want common sense gun control. Their ultimate goal is absolute total disarmament of every American citizen (with the exception of the chosen elite).
I look for the bastards to use the nanny state health care system and related regulations to press further into private matters, redefine 'mental illness', and attempt to predict whom MAY be a risk despite no history of mental illness or criminal behavior, all in an effort to infringe upon individual rights..... to keep us safe, of course.
That's the real danger with these expanded background checks. The gun grabbers will vastly expand the definition of 'mental illness' to keep us from purchasing guns.
I don't think most of us want truly unstable people buying guns, but it's a non-black and white area that can be exploited by a government and bureaucracy that's more inclined to keep guns away from us than allow us to exercise our 2A rights.
El Jefe doesn't really give a rat's patoo about gun control. He mouths the words to keep him in good graces with the Dems. After a suitable period he will jettison this and move on to other things. Also he will try to keep a low profile heading into the 2014 mid-terms.
Had it not been for Sandy Hook he would not have even tried this, but Di Fi and the "shoulder thing" woman forced his hand.
I honestly don't see how this is going to work, given the federal laws and regs on confidentiality of health records. If the State has probable cause to believe health records are relevant to a particular case, they can access them. But a UBC would result in a universal NEED for the government to access health records. Suddenly you would not need to be a suspect of anything, except that the government fears you might someday want to purchase a gun, so it should have access ahead of time to your records. Pre-Crime here we come.
jblomenberg16
Grandmaster
I think the "universal" background checks will pass in the way of requiring the current NICS checks for all sales. In otherwords, all sales must go through FFL's, and FTF private sales are no longer legal.
My guess is in that legislation will be inclusion of a subversive means in which the various Federal "Alphabet Agencies" can more closely keep tabs on who is buying what. Today you get cleared for either "Long Gun" or "Hand Gun." I would expect there to be some aditional categories. We probably won't see an "Assault Weapon" category per se, but there may be some divisions to long guns and hand guns to include "Semi-auto vs. manual action (bolt, pump, etc.)" and "Semi-Auto vs. Revolver."
I also think there will be a toned down AWB in bits and pieces. Probably no bans on particular weapons as that seems to be losing popularity right now. What we will most likely see will be a series of highly complex regulations and license requirements on certain items.
1) Restrictions on "high cap" magazines. It may come in the form of prohibiting on-line sales of them under the interstate commerce framework and / or some sort of special license required to sell them. Said license may also prohibit a dealer or manufacturer from selling to civilians if they also sell to military and law enforcement agency contracts. This would drive current manufactures and dealers to have to decide which market they want to play in. My guess is with other measures it would be difficult to make a profit in the civilian market.
2) Restriction of "military" caliber ammunition. Would probably come in two forms. First a tax on calibers that carry a military designation such as 5.56, 7.62Nato, 7.62x39, etc. Gray area would be the "civilian" equivalent such as .223 Rem, .308 Win, etc.
Second will be an attempt to limit bulk purchases. Probably again through prohibiting on-line sales, as well as requiring a license to sell military caliber ammunition. The license fee would of course be steep and make it out of the reach of most LGSs. That would also include limits on transactions per customer.
3) Limitation of supply in a few ways. First, there will be restrictions on selling anything deemed as "military surplus" into the civilian market. Anything from ammunition (such as the millions of rounds coming out of the former Soviet states) to the guns and parts themselves.
Second, combined with licenses above, there will likely be some controls placed on manufactures to try to buy out existing capacity (in the form of new bids and contracts) and make it difficult to add new capacity (e.g. licensing required to expand ammunition facility would be difficult to get, potentially through the EPA or others).
Third, I do expect there to be some attempt to drive up the prices on reloading supplies. We've not heard much about this at all in the media, but many of us that reload have still added to our stock of supplies none the less. Again, I expect there to be some additional licensing required to sell components, and most likely a prohibition of online sales of components.
The way I see it is that if they can't push an outright ban through, they may try to at least tax them to generate some revenue as well as try to drive prices up, as if the prices weren't already high due to the potential of a ban! Doing so may create certain barriers to entry preventing many average Americans from being able to afford to own guns and shoot them.
Conversly, it makes an environment ripe for "prefered" dealers and manufactures to dominate the market. If you are thinking that it smells like a government takeover of the industry, you get my drift. It also would stink like any other potential anti-trust scenarios.
Obama is going to double down on it the State of the Union address, meaning the "gun control debate" will get some more press and attention. I expect the federal government to look ot continue to keep its fingers in the pot in many different forms.
My guess is in that legislation will be inclusion of a subversive means in which the various Federal "Alphabet Agencies" can more closely keep tabs on who is buying what. Today you get cleared for either "Long Gun" or "Hand Gun." I would expect there to be some aditional categories. We probably won't see an "Assault Weapon" category per se, but there may be some divisions to long guns and hand guns to include "Semi-auto vs. manual action (bolt, pump, etc.)" and "Semi-Auto vs. Revolver."
I also think there will be a toned down AWB in bits and pieces. Probably no bans on particular weapons as that seems to be losing popularity right now. What we will most likely see will be a series of highly complex regulations and license requirements on certain items.
1) Restrictions on "high cap" magazines. It may come in the form of prohibiting on-line sales of them under the interstate commerce framework and / or some sort of special license required to sell them. Said license may also prohibit a dealer or manufacturer from selling to civilians if they also sell to military and law enforcement agency contracts. This would drive current manufactures and dealers to have to decide which market they want to play in. My guess is with other measures it would be difficult to make a profit in the civilian market.
2) Restriction of "military" caliber ammunition. Would probably come in two forms. First a tax on calibers that carry a military designation such as 5.56, 7.62Nato, 7.62x39, etc. Gray area would be the "civilian" equivalent such as .223 Rem, .308 Win, etc.
Second will be an attempt to limit bulk purchases. Probably again through prohibiting on-line sales, as well as requiring a license to sell military caliber ammunition. The license fee would of course be steep and make it out of the reach of most LGSs. That would also include limits on transactions per customer.
3) Limitation of supply in a few ways. First, there will be restrictions on selling anything deemed as "military surplus" into the civilian market. Anything from ammunition (such as the millions of rounds coming out of the former Soviet states) to the guns and parts themselves.
Second, combined with licenses above, there will likely be some controls placed on manufactures to try to buy out existing capacity (in the form of new bids and contracts) and make it difficult to add new capacity (e.g. licensing required to expand ammunition facility would be difficult to get, potentially through the EPA or others).
Third, I do expect there to be some attempt to drive up the prices on reloading supplies. We've not heard much about this at all in the media, but many of us that reload have still added to our stock of supplies none the less. Again, I expect there to be some additional licensing required to sell components, and most likely a prohibition of online sales of components.
The way I see it is that if they can't push an outright ban through, they may try to at least tax them to generate some revenue as well as try to drive prices up, as if the prices weren't already high due to the potential of a ban! Doing so may create certain barriers to entry preventing many average Americans from being able to afford to own guns and shoot them.
Conversly, it makes an environment ripe for "prefered" dealers and manufactures to dominate the market. If you are thinking that it smells like a government takeover of the industry, you get my drift. It also would stink like any other potential anti-trust scenarios.
Obama is going to double down on it the State of the Union address, meaning the "gun control debate" will get some more press and attention. I expect the federal government to look ot continue to keep its fingers in the pot in many different forms.
jblomenberg16
Grandmaster
I think you are right about FTF. Tough to control. What could happen though is something much like FTF of other controled items. It happens all the time, but if you get caught, it could have some serious legal consequences (if the prosecutor / judge / jury enforce the full extent of the laws).
There are those who say "A ban will never happen"..."The politicians know what a hot potato this is and will not touch it because they want to be re-elected"..."The senate and the house have not even voted on anything yet". And they are right.
But that is the crux of the problem. The average citizen has seen how our government has hurt small business and individuals with out of control regulations, taxes and fees. Regulations, taxes and fees that have not been voted on by the senate or house. But from the EPA, OSHA, NLRB and a half dozen other acronym government organizations. These regulations, taxes and fees have changed our world, but were not voted on. Regulations, taxes and fees will be used to limit access and increase the cost of firearm ownership. No voting needed.
The government could used regulations to stop the import of all firearms and ammunition. Unless your law enforcement of course. That means no Glock, CZ, Beretta, Benelli, Armscor, Walther, Izhmash, Steyr, Tanfoglio, Sig Sauer, Uberti, Aguila ammo, Bear / Wolf / Tula ammo, Fiocchi ammo, PMC ammo, Prvi Partizan ammo, Sellier & Bellot ammo. And they won't outright ban these items...that would probably take a vote from congress. No...they will simply make it financially impossible to import. Just like our wonderful 922r rule, they could make a rule that 90% of the materials in any product needs to be produced and manufactured here in the USA. That sounds like you are supporting the US...right? Now what do you think would happen to the industry if that happened. There is no way for a foreign product to have 90% American components. They might as well build in the US. However, it would probably take several decades for US manufacturing to increase enough to supply for the demand. Several decades that they could use to make laws more stringent or just outright ban guns.
They could use those other acronym departments to enact fees and taxes that would make firearm ownership prohibitive. Just like Chicago's "violence fee" and "ammunition fee" that was proposed. What if the ATF said there is now a $500 fee for every firearm purchased and a $2,000 fee for NFA items like suppressors, SBR's and the like. And every round of ammunition would have a $.50 fee to help cover the cost of health care for shooting victims. Again, that sounds like you are helping hurt people...right? Nope...you have made firearm ownership difficult at best and financially impossible for most Americans.
People keep saying "it will never happen" because of the current political environment in the house and the senate. Keep in mind that in the past few years, there have been 40,000 laws that hit the books nationwide EACH YEAR.
Just look to this inspirational quote "The more you complicate the pluming, the easier it is to stop up the drain." Scotty on Star Trek.
Just complicate the plumbing with regulations, taxes and fees and the anti-gun crowd can accomplish their goal without a single vote.
But that is the crux of the problem. The average citizen has seen how our government has hurt small business and individuals with out of control regulations, taxes and fees. Regulations, taxes and fees that have not been voted on by the senate or house. But from the EPA, OSHA, NLRB and a half dozen other acronym government organizations. These regulations, taxes and fees have changed our world, but were not voted on. Regulations, taxes and fees will be used to limit access and increase the cost of firearm ownership. No voting needed.
The government could used regulations to stop the import of all firearms and ammunition. Unless your law enforcement of course. That means no Glock, CZ, Beretta, Benelli, Armscor, Walther, Izhmash, Steyr, Tanfoglio, Sig Sauer, Uberti, Aguila ammo, Bear / Wolf / Tula ammo, Fiocchi ammo, PMC ammo, Prvi Partizan ammo, Sellier & Bellot ammo. And they won't outright ban these items...that would probably take a vote from congress. No...they will simply make it financially impossible to import. Just like our wonderful 922r rule, they could make a rule that 90% of the materials in any product needs to be produced and manufactured here in the USA. That sounds like you are supporting the US...right? Now what do you think would happen to the industry if that happened. There is no way for a foreign product to have 90% American components. They might as well build in the US. However, it would probably take several decades for US manufacturing to increase enough to supply for the demand. Several decades that they could use to make laws more stringent or just outright ban guns.
They could use those other acronym departments to enact fees and taxes that would make firearm ownership prohibitive. Just like Chicago's "violence fee" and "ammunition fee" that was proposed. What if the ATF said there is now a $500 fee for every firearm purchased and a $2,000 fee for NFA items like suppressors, SBR's and the like. And every round of ammunition would have a $.50 fee to help cover the cost of health care for shooting victims. Again, that sounds like you are helping hurt people...right? Nope...you have made firearm ownership difficult at best and financially impossible for most Americans.
People keep saying "it will never happen" because of the current political environment in the house and the senate. Keep in mind that in the past few years, there have been 40,000 laws that hit the books nationwide EACH YEAR.
Just look to this inspirational quote "The more you complicate the pluming, the easier it is to stop up the drain." Scotty on Star Trek.
Just complicate the plumbing with regulations, taxes and fees and the anti-gun crowd can accomplish their goal without a single vote.
Some more out of the box possibilities are the banning of lead in bullets to drive up cost, mandatory and expensive insurance for gun owners, hazmat fees on live ammo, and restrictions on ammo possession.
I really hope FTF deals don't disappear. About the only way I get a good deal on a firearm any more.
I really hope FTF deals don't disappear. About the only way I get a good deal on a firearm any more.
I can see ATF doing stings every now and then to stop face to face sales. They will make it so that unless you actually know the person you are buying the firearm from, you will be worried that the guy is actually a fed and you are in deep do-do.
I can almost see another box to check on the 4473, "Have you ever looked at someone funny?" If you answer "Yes" then you are deemed unfit to own a firearm. If you answer "No" they will say you are a liar and lying on a federal for disqualifies you from the firearm purchase.
Just say no to universal background checks.
I can almost see another box to check on the 4473, "Have you ever looked at someone funny?" If you answer "Yes" then you are deemed unfit to own a firearm. If you answer "No" they will say you are a liar and lying on a federal for disqualifies you from the firearm purchase.
Just say no to universal background checks.
It's pretty bad when a noob like me can recognize someone trying to boost their post count. C'MON MAN!
Why should we put up with ANY of the above? We've been free for over 200 years and somehow managed to make it this far. Screw the Feds. They want to call me a felon starting in 2013, call me a felon. I'll live in my free world until they try to finally take my freedom. I've had enough. I was born a free man and God dammit I am going to die a free man.
devious169
Sharpshooter
Its all smoke and mirrors, simple diversion tactics. They come out w this AWB bull just to get people freaking out about the second amendment while they rape every other part of the constitution. That just the " political " way to backdoor society. Wake up America !!!!!
