But if that precedent basically amounts to "from hence forth we will enforce the laws we have", is that a bad thing? Isn't this what we have been saying, that we don't need new laws, but to enforce those laws already on the books?Middle Age Russ wrote:The teeth they have is setting precedent. If they survive court rulings in any way, these actions will have expanded the power of the executive branch at the expense of individual liberty -- another step, and perhaps a giant one since it messes with individual rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, toward tyranny.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Obama acting on executive action”
- Tue Jan 05, 2016 2:18 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Obama acting on executive action
- Replies: 73
- Views: 13441
Re: Obama acting on executive action
- Tue Jan 05, 2016 1:27 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Obama acting on executive action
- Replies: 73
- Views: 13441
Re: Obama acting on executive action
Somebody please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't see these actions today as much more than pandering to his political base... they don't have much teeth.
1. Internet sales requiring a background check - They already do, unless both buyer and seller are both residents within the same state. If they are within the same state, the transaction falls under state laws. I don't think the EO changes this, as the President is part of the executive branch, not the legislative branch. Only the legislative branch has the power to create law, and these are already on the books as law.
2. Being in the business - What does that mean? That needs to be defined. I don't see how it will affect a person that is selling a personally owned firearm, or even a collection. I have 3 people in my household, and we have 4 cars. If I were to sell one of the cars, or even all 4, that doesn't make me a dealership... Even if I am constantly buying, selling, and trading to build my collection, that does not mean that I am in the business of selling firearms... Unless one is selling for profit and it is part of their livelihood, I just don't see them being "in the business of selling firearms"
3. I am not knowledgeable enough to speak on the NFA items. I understand that the CLEO will be notified, but it appears that the ATF will do that, not the individual or the trust who is obtaining the stamp. It does appear that there are changes though regarding the trust.
Am I off base on this?
1. Internet sales requiring a background check - They already do, unless both buyer and seller are both residents within the same state. If they are within the same state, the transaction falls under state laws. I don't think the EO changes this, as the President is part of the executive branch, not the legislative branch. Only the legislative branch has the power to create law, and these are already on the books as law.
2. Being in the business - What does that mean? That needs to be defined. I don't see how it will affect a person that is selling a personally owned firearm, or even a collection. I have 3 people in my household, and we have 4 cars. If I were to sell one of the cars, or even all 4, that doesn't make me a dealership... Even if I am constantly buying, selling, and trading to build my collection, that does not mean that I am in the business of selling firearms... Unless one is selling for profit and it is part of their livelihood, I just don't see them being "in the business of selling firearms"
3. I am not knowledgeable enough to speak on the NFA items. I understand that the CLEO will be notified, but it appears that the ATF will do that, not the individual or the trust who is obtaining the stamp. It does appear that there are changes though regarding the trust.
Am I off base on this?