Obama to issue Executive Orders on gun control
He’s been warning you for weeks that he’s going to “do something” in regards to gun control, so it looks like Obama is ready, according to “The Hill“;
Obama has been holding meetings with gun control advocates to gauge their support and solicit ideas. He met last Friday with former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who survived a gunshot to the head during a 2011 mass shooting in Tucson.
A proposal Obama is reportedly considering would classify more sellers as high-volume dealers, which would close a legal loophole that allows many sales conducted online or at gun shows to skirt existing background check provisions.
He just issued a battery of new regs last year, didn’t he? What could he have missed? Why didn’t he do this “high volume dealers” thing then? What he should do is exactly what he can do – make the FBI straighten out the NICS system. Ol’ what-his-name down in South Carolina got a gun because the FBI couldn’t make the time constraints on his background check. But you know, that would be within his purview, so he can’t admit that government isn’t functioning the way it was designed to function and actually preventing criminals from getting guns. That’s one mass shooting that falls on the FBI, that’s why someone had to make the Confederate flag the cause instead of gun laws for a change.
I guess that’s why Obama didn’t call the NRA into the Oval Office for advice.
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Gun Grabbing Fascists
Too bad the Praetorian Guard media will devote most of their time to Trump’s call to temporarily ban Muslim’s from the Middle East into the US, instead of a real trampling of the US Constitution (via the 2nd amendment) by the POTUS.
Filthy collaborators.
Wrong analogy. The Praetorian Guard was the Roman Army. They were decidedly pro-Rome, and if they didn’t think whoever was Caesar was doing the job to benefit Rome and its empire, they bumped him off.
The lamestream media is not even remotely willing to do that. They are NOT pro-America or pro-military, unless something happens to threaten their lifestyle.
The Praetorian Guard is the reason Rome lasted as long as it did. You were either a Roman citizen, or you were a barbarian. They’d have taken ISIS apart at the seams before it even put both feet on the ground, no matter how many soldiers and cash it cost.
These wafty slackers can’t compare.
The analogy was for the original intent of the Praetorian guard, which was for their creation to defend Caesar at all costs from outside aggressors and/or, even dissidents from the Roman Army. I know that as they obtained more political power, that they may have had more sway over the ruling class.
Regardless, the media we have today will do any and everything to protect their chosen one and his agenda from anybody that would dare to challenge him.
OK, I misunderstood your intent. Sorry about that.
The difference IS that the media want to deflect any animosity toward bodaprez, but it is not working very well and his time IS limited. We should all be grateful for that small favor, although I would truly love to see shrillary given the chance to fall flat on her face,just as this idjit has.
Praetorian guard? WE NEED ‘EM! lol
“A proposal Obama is reportedly considering would classify more sellers as high-volume dealers, which would close a legal loophole that allows many sales conducted online or at gun shows to skirt existing background check provisions.”
WTF does that even mean? I’m calling bullshit.
Is there such a legal loophole?
Speaking of legal loopholes, how about shutting the Terrorist Loophole in the Visa program?
I’m curious also. I’ve bought several weapons online and had to submit to a standard background check every time when I picked it up.
Dealers have to be licensed and are subject to many restrictions which do not apply to normal sellers. The law is a bit vague on when someone must get a dealer’s license , but selling a lot of guns repeatedly and making your living from it is the generally stated benchmark. My interpretation is that they are going to make the bar to becoming a dealer a lot lower – sell more than 2 guns a year, you have to be a dealer! – and good luck having this BATFE approving your license. You just know the word has already gone down to slow-roll any new applications…. I’m shocked they haven’t put Lois Lerner in charge of them.
Here’s my take, but I admit I’m not terribly familiar with these laws:
Currently, if you’re a private seller, many states allow you to sell firearms without conducting background checks. And what constitutes a ‘private seller’ is very vague, so some individual can set up shop on the internet (or at gun shows), depending on their state of residence, and sell multiple weapons without conducting background checks. So long as they aren’t a business that is selling weapons, they have far fewer regulations.
Here’s a link that has some information:
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html
I don’t know what these sales represent in terms of the volume of overall sales (or the volume of criminally-linked weapons). But since I favor what I feel is a sensible discussion on gun rights, this doesn’t seem too severe (legal business are unaffected, as are small personal sales to family, friends, etc.), and it finally removes the boogeyman of the ‘gun-show loophole’ from the liberal side of the discussion. So, we’re a bit closer to actually talking about the merits of owning weapons rather than the fear-based rhetoric.
Quite happy to hear opposing points of view; this is not an area I know a lot about.
Recent surveys (2006) of prisoners incarcerated for committing firearms-related crimes show that less than 1% of the weapons they used were obtained at gun shows. The vast majority were obtained via unlawful “street sales” or via using straw buyers (nearly 80%).
Even in 1997 (when 2% of crimes used in guns were obtained from gun shows), 93% were obtained via unlawful means.
http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/#return-note-93-32
The myth that criminals obtain their guns at gun shows is exactly that – a myth. Less than 1 in 100 guns used by criminals is obtained via that means.
Thanks for the link. This doesn’t actually surprise me in the least. Again, I see this in some ways as a Pyrrhic victory for liberals. They ‘win’, but the win accomplishes virtually nothing, and by ‘closing’ the so-called loophole, they lose one of their greatest rhetorical devices.
In other words, it’ll have a small effect on actual gun sales and sellers, and a larger effect on the fear-mongering and rhetoric when it comes to talking about guns.
Someone can argue that this is the first step of broader gun control, but I seem to remember there is a large percentage of the population for gun rights than against. I don’t see anyone being able to take very many steps in that direction.
(I may lean liberal on some things, but I come in on the side of protecting gun rights… albeit with a desire for better training requirements.)
In regards to online sales, it is illegal for anyone to ship a modern firearm to anything but a licensed FFL. So, if I want to sell guns on the internet, I can. However every gun I sell that I do not deliver face to face must be shipped to a licensed FFL. Before that licensed FFL puts the gun in the purchasers’ hands, they must pass a background check. All of the above is current law. It sounds to me that the only thing Obama can try to address is face to face sales between private sellers. Calling that a “gun show loophole” or an “online loophole” is a farce.
Again, I freely admit this is something I’m just trying to learn about, but I don’t think that’s correct. I think it’s true for FFLs, but not for private sellers mailing weapons within their state:
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/whom-may-unlicensed-person-transfer-firearms-under-gca
Again, I don’t think this law does very much, but if it does close a few loopholes like the above, and more importantly removes the ‘loophole’ discussion -which is based on fear and rhetoric, not facts!- from the arsenal of talking points, I’m okay with it. I think the impact on sellers will be relatively minimal, but I don’t know for sure since I don’t have the stats on that on hand.
It sound to me like Obama wants to classify a site like armslist.com as a “high-volume dealer”, which seems asinine to me.
As to gun shows, just pass a law that anyone who buys a table to sell modern firearms must have an FFL (I suspect that is alead the case in many states). Whatever happens in the parking lot and the alley will continue, regardless of law.
“…Armslist.com as a ‘high-volume dealer'”. Good point – asinine indeed.
I recall the Brady Campaign had a lawsuit they filed against them thrown out some time ago.
I’d guess the goal is to have people selling multiple firearms through places like Armslist be considered high-volume dealers, not the site itself.
And the ‘problem’ (it isn’t much of a problem, per Hondo’s statistics) isn’t just gun shows, it’s online in-state sales as well. I’m not a fan of additional laws, but I don’t see anything terribly wrong -inconvenient, sure, but not wrong- with ensuring that private sellers aren’t selling to people without a background check. If it’s your business, you have to do it. So why not if it’s an .. unofficial business?
LC, I think the distinction lies in the ownership of the weapons.
A private seller owns the weapon him/herself. A dealer, on the other hand, assigns ownership of the gun to his/her business.
It is possible for a dealer to sell a gun as a private seller, but they must take personal ownership of the weapon, and they may have to possess it for a minimum amount of time before selling it.
Or such is my understanding. I may be wrong. 🙂
I don’t know if one may perform a private sale online without a background check. AFAIK one may do so during a gun show, and this forms the basis for the infamous “gun show loophole” claim. Dealers still have to perform the check no matter what.
Thanks, that’s roughly my broad understanding of things as well – this centers on the murky area of what constitutes a ‘dealer’, as opposed to a ‘private seller’. Private sellers do not have to do a background check on buyers in all states, providing the purchase is being made to someone in the same state.
Basically, the regulations already in place cover a lot of ground, and this sort of Executive Order seeks to classify more ‘private sellers’ as high-volume dealers, forcing them to conduct background checks on all buyers.
I’d prefer Congress agree on this rather than it happen via Executive Order, but all in all, it seems like a relatively small step by the President and not one that’ll overly burden people acting in good faith. That said, it also won’t do a damn thing about reducing crime, since so few weapons are obtained that way.
With all due respect LC this is the Federal Govt you’re talking about here, the same people that promised that the Income Tax would never be higher than 2%.
This isn’t about any “gunshow loophole”. This is about making background checks universally required.
Which sounds like a good idea till you realize that inheriting grandpa’s deer rifle requires Uncle Phil needs a background check, and giving your son a shotgun for duck hunting requires you get little Timmy a background check, and if you forgot to do that… well that’s a federal felony.
IT’s a way of slowly making it harder and more expensive to own a firearm, and to cut off the next generation from any familiarity with firearms. Kids who’ve never been shooting become voting adults who’ve never been shooting.
People who’ve never gone shooting, never owned a gun, never known anyone who owns a gun… well they don’t see loosing their 2nd Amendment rights as any big deal… it’s not like they were using them or anything.
I don’t have much love for federal bureaucracy either, but I do think we can strike a balance whereby we ensure background checks are done for random purchases by strangers, in-state, on the internet,… but where family members can be passed firearms without that same requirement.
That, to me, sounds sensible enough. Again, I know (and you know) that most of the weapons used in crimes aren’t obtained this way, but it sounds scary – “anyone (in state) can legally purchase a weapon online without a background check!” – so eliminating that talking point from the discussion seems, to me, to be worthwhile for the pro-gun side.
Sales between private sellers/purchasers over the Internet in state. Yeah, that will prevent a lot of murder. What jurisdiction does Obama have over intrastate commerce again?
I know someone who has purchased a few firearms over the internet within his own state from private sellers. In each case, the seller would only ship to a local FFL. Obama is going to solve a problem that doesn’t exist, which is nothing new. In regards to your comment about armslist sellers above, how does one enforce that? I could open an account on armslist and list 500 firearms for sale. It doesn’t mean I actually have them. Then, how many did I sell?
Legal gun owners are not stupid LC. They understand the concept of liability. If I owned any guns and wanted to sell them via the internet, I would find a buyer, take them to my local FFL , and ask him to ship them to an FFL as specified by the purchaser….in state or not. I challenge you to go to gunbroker.com gunsamerica.com texasguntrader.com and armslist.com. Find sellers that are willing to ship to a non FFL. You can also report back on how many private sellers are “high volume”.
Also, review the USPS regs. Shipping within state to a private purchaser seems to only be relevant to long guns and not handguns…but I might be wrong about that.
Finally, I give you credit for schooling me about being able to legally ship to a purchaser’s private address in state. I was unaware that this is apparently legal. Probably because I have never seen it done.
I think you feel we’re on opposing sides to gun rights here – I know this will have a negligible effect on crime. I know legal gun owners are not stupid, and the overwhelming majority will only ship to FFLs anyway.
The thing is, for the gun control advocates, there’s a lot of rhetoric about this ‘loophole’. And, frankly, it is a loophole – one that isn’t exploited much, as Hondo’s numbers show, but in the sense that a person can legally obtain a firearm from a stranger avoiding a background check, it’s a loophole. Closing it won’t effect crime in virtually any measurable way.
So what effect will closing it have? It’s hard to say until we see how the EO is written, but I’d guess it won’t have any real impact on the majority of sellers. I could be wrong on this, and we’ll see, but as you pointed out most of the people on these websites are already shipping to FFLs, who do background checks, so not much will change in practice.
So Democrats will parade it around as a victory, even though it’ll likely be challenged in court, but that’s just politics. The real effect, in my opinion, is that one of the greatest ‘weapons’ of the gun-control sorts is rendered useless. We’ve seen politician and pundit alike fear-mongering because of this ‘loophole’ – how anyone can buy a gun without a background check. Closing this means they can’t resort to that sort of fear mongering any more. The discussion has to move on towards something closer to the actual merits (yes, and dangers) of guns in society, and how to tackle the real problems instead of the imaginary ones.
I feel that’s a net-positive result for gun rights.
I don’t see how anyone can feel good about closing this “loophole” when face to face sales between private sellers are unaffected. “Feeling good” does not meet my criteria for effective legislation. I don’t “feel good” knowing that everyone has access to affordable health care, because they don’t.
Gun dealers are high-fiving each other this morning. Obama has been the best gun salesman ever! Governor Dumbass in CT is doing the same, but I think they’re going to be challenged in court immediately regarding the no-fly list provision, as it should be.
The right leaning AM station here in CT is reporting that the ACLU is on the side of this ‘no fly list’ nonsense being unconstitutional. I don’t know why Obezie’s lapdog Dannel is trying to tighten the gun laws even further. Oh, nope, just put that together. Those Dems love being sued by the NRA/GOA/NSSF/CCDL et al so they can act like victims.
Look, if he wants to issue EOs that ultimate do nothing, let him and do so without too much negative comment. Pretend we hate it. Then he’ll think it was enough and move on.
Let’s see, the same side of the political spectrum that says NOT to judge all Muslims for the actions of a few want to go full throttle on all law-abiding American Gun Owners over the actions of a few murderers and terrorists. They give us the “If you see something, say something” bit saying something about Muslim suspects automatically labels one as “racist” and/or “islamophobic” and the current United States AG has threatened to persecute anyone saying anything bad about the goat-raping fleabags.
LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER!
And executive orders can be overturned, you know.
Only if you overturn the executive who ordered them, however.
The ultimate in pitting the country against itself: turning half the population into criminals, and put the other half in charge of them. I have come to the conclusion that this Administration has no intention of allowing any elections in this country except that they put soldiers in the streets first. However that has to happen.
They don’t survive the administration that implemented them, unless the new administration signs on as well.
And if we have a Republican president in 2017, yeah, you see where I’m going.
And Preezy Total Pussy can issue all the Gun Control Executive Orders he wants. I’m willing to bet a dollar to a doughnut that WWNC (We Will Not Comply) will kick in (just like in NY, CT, CO, WA, OR), and over 90% of gun owners will give those fine EOs ALL the attention they so thoroughly deserve, i.e., “File 13”, NONE.
Remember CT’s latest gun registry con game? It’s been said that MAYBE five percent of Gun Owners complies with that and let’s not forget the many Sheriffs across the country who have said THEY will not comply with or enforce shit like what B-HO is proposing!
This is all I got …
One more:
And for the coveted Trifecta …
Just for shits and giggles…
The M-60 machine gun. If you’re gonna waste time on the internet, at least learn something that you might not have known.
Or if you carried her, this bitch has a life of her own and is willing to share it at 550 RPM. (Rounds Per Minute)
OINK OINK!!
The PIG. A bitch to clean but great to shoot. I miss that weapon.
I never had the pleasure. Though I hear it’s decidedly less pleasurable to hump up a mountain.
While in the bush, I was the Assistant Gunner. As I recall I packed 250 rounds for the “pig” everyone else in the squad packed 100 rounds. Talk about sweating while packing that SOB around! The links would be rusted after one day of humping. The M60 was a difference maker.
Once I started flying, I was assigned two M60’s the only humping I did then was from the conex to our UH1H. Much easier!
I know I’m an old fart but,(without starting the video,just looking at the picture) right hand feed? When (or did it ever) did that happen? Or is that a somehow reversed photo?
Never had to hump a ground mode pig for any distance (just out to a range and back), but I know how to work a M60D. Nothing better than running a pure string of tracers through a shotgun barrel right about twilight time to give the door gunner a good sized piece of lumber in his britches.
That’s the feed tray and magazine well of an M249 SAW in your video link. I don’t have time to watch the whole video, but that isnt the pig.
I am still getting wrapped around the axle about how a President can issue an Executive Order that affects the daily lives of the citizens of this country. I thought the purpose of an Executive Order was to set policy for the Executive Branch’s departmental happenings.
The reason why he is trying to push gun legislation so hard is, IMveryHO, it’s his last hope to do SOMETHING.
Of all of his campaign promises, the only thing he managed to actually pass was Obamacare, and it’s turned into a national laughing-stock. He “ended” the war in Iraq, and now we’re dealing with ISIS (exactly what GWB said would happen, btw).
He promised to close GITMO – still open.
The national debt has doubled under his administration, and let’s not forget Fast and Furious, Benghazi, NSA domestic spying, and all of the other scandals that the REAL JV team has had happen.
His last inkling of hope of a positive legacy of any kind is in gun control. The NRA isn’t going to let that happen, and he’s pissed about it.
According to business news this morning, households lost up to $2.6 trillion of their value in the second quarter and another $1.2 trillion in the third.
If he really wanted to do something, he’d just take a permanent vacation and go play golf, and fade from memory.
E-6:
I think that the reasons that he is writing EOs is straightforward.
1. he can say that he did something. “I am not a do-nothing resident, I did something!”
2. he can point to the conservative reaction and say to the Democratic base, “do you want those people running the country? No? Do you think that Democrats should be running the country? Then get off you ass and go out and vote!”
The big goal is the big reaction leveraged by the brown-nosing press.
He cannot get legislation through Congress but he can write EOs. He is doing what he can do.
Haha, that’s what I was going for, but I wrote my post before I had any coffee.
https://theintercept.com/2014/07/23/blacklisted/
describes how little due process is required to get onto the lists.
Jonn – someone says I am plotting to build a bomb becasue I bought powder. You are a known associate – you go on the list.
Hondo – your contact info is in my phone – you go on the list
PH2 – I flirted with you multiple times texting – you go on the list
I belong to a baseball team satirically called “Presidential Overthrow” cuz our star pitcher Bill Clinton lost us the championship by missing a crucial throw to second…. they ALL are on the list.
Far-fetched… but scarily, all possible.
Can we put some idjits on that list?
no, idjits vote democrat, they cannot be on the list.
Hell, you could have a heated argument with some dolt of an airline employee at the ticket counter and end up on the no-fly list, I personally think it’s something that would make Hitler, Stalin or Lenin blow a wad in their britches!
Someone’s ex-wife, or ex g/f can call the FBI or BATFE and tell them that you shared your thoughts on overthrowing the government, or converting an AR to full auto and, Bazinga, you’re on the list.
Sounds like more redundancy. He’s trying to pass a law that would classify an FFL dealer and a private seller. Private sellers are already defined as someone who doesnt rely on sales for their livlihood. Which is why private sales as they’re defined don’t occur very often. Somehow liberals think that means you can sell an entire arsenal without a background check. That’s illegal no matter how you look at it. The problem always comes back to lack of enforcement. How about telling the FBI and ATF to get their shit together before signing Executive Orders that are redundant?
Last time I checked, such an executive order would be an unconstitutional overreach. The Executive Branch doesn’t make laws. Congress does. The Executive Branch is responsible for the enforcement of laws established by Congress. So the Glorious Leader can eat a dick (Valerie Jarrett’s?).
And in celebration of Barry newest tantrum, I just took personal responsibility for the maintenance and preservation of a piece of American history produced by Remington Arms in 1918 for an American Soldier fighting the Germans in France. The Soviet Socialist Republic of California has added some additional hoops to jump through, but fuck ’em.
OMG!
A miltary grade weapon? [Gasp]
Indeed, US Rifle, Caliber .30 M1917. Otherwise known as a “US Enfield.”
A high-capacity military-style assault weapon designed to kill large numbers of people quickly. It even has–GASP–a bayonet lug! Imagine how much deadlier it could be if it was all black!
You made me think about it, and I looked. I certainly don’t have as large of a gun collection as most of you, but every rifle I own has a bayonet lug on them, haha.
Background checks for background checks on top of the background checks.
He’s powerless when it comes to firearms. Every time he opens his mouth about them Americans buy them in record numbers. At this point he’s just stomping his feet like a child.
I hope when Trump comes into office on the first day he literally cancels every single executive order Obama wrote during his presidency.