Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on December 31, 2015, 03:37:46 PM
-
The Emperor in Chief about to take action again because he is incapable of working with Congress.
Obama to announce new executive action on guns
By Jim Acosta and Kevin Liptak, CNN
Thu December 31, 2015
(CNN)President Barack Obama is expected to announce in the coming days a new executive action with the goal of expanding background checks on gun sales, people familiar with White House planning said.
Described as "imminent," the set of executive actions would fulfill a promise by the President to take further unilateral steps the White House says could help curb gun deaths.
Plans for the action are not yet complete, and those familiar with the process warn that unforeseen circumstances could delay an announcement. But gun control advocates are expecting the new actions to be revealed next week, ahead of Obama's annual State of the Union address, set for January 12.
The White House wouldn't comment directly on the exact timing or content of Obama's executive orders. White House spokesman Eric Schultz said that the President expected a set of recommendations on unilateral action to arrive at the beginning of the year.
He said Obama was "expressing urgency" for a list of steps he can take on his own after high-profile incidents of gun violence at the end of this year.
"It is complicated. That's why it's taken some time for our policy folks, our lawyers, and our expects to work through this and see what's possible," Schultz said.
Obama: It's 'insane' that people on the no-fly list can buy guns
A spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association said the group had no comment The group previously told CNN that Obama's "gun control agenda was rejected by Congress. Now, he is doing what he always does when he doesn't get his way, defying the will of the people and using executive action."
The group said at the time that Obama had his "wish list of gun control," in California but "it didn't prevent the San Bernardino attack."
"The fact is, the President's gun control agenda will only make it harder for law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to self-defense," NRA spokeswoman Jennifer Baker.
Gun control advocates and White House officials say the focus remains on the so-called "gun show loophole," which allows certain sellers of guns -- at gun shows and elsewhere -- to avoid conducting background checks before making sales.
Months after the Newtown, Connecticut elementary school massacre that claimed 26 victims, the then-Democratic majority Senate rejected a similar proposal.
Three years after Newtown, Obama lambasts inaction on guns
Congress would still need to act in order to make background checks fully universal. But advocates and administration lawyers have struck upon a provision in the law that could allow for Obama to expand the background check requirement to additional sellers.
Federal law currently requires all individuals "engaged in the business" of selling guns to obtain a license and conduct background checks on buyers. But others who only make occasional sales or are selling firearms from a personal collection are exempted from the background check requirement.
Gun control advocates say Obama could take action himself by issuing a regulation that provides expanded guidance on who falls under the "in the business" standard.
Obama calls for gun reforms in wake of San Bernardino shooting
One group, the Michael Bloomberg-helmed Everytown for Gun Safety, has provided recommendations to the White House that include creating a test for assessing who must become licensed to continue selling guns. Factors would include volume and speed of sales, and whether or not the seller relies on advertising to sell guns.
The group also recommended Obama define a gun in a "personal collection" as having been in the seller's possession for at least a year.
Before leaving for his winter vacation in Hawaii, Obama met with Bloomberg at the White House to discuss gun control.
Aside from the background check provision, people familiar with Obama's plans say his new gun control announcement will include new funding for government agencies to better enforce existing gun laws.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/31/politics/obama-to-announce-new-executive-action-on-guns/
-
American views on guns are antisocial and undemocratic.
This cannot be disputed.
They are a relic from a colonial era long gone.
I find comfort in the fact that most gun deaths are suicides.
Those Americans are predominantly Christian and republican.
This is a profound source of social change in America.
Best of all a ban on assault weapons will have no effect on these suicides.
America. Fuck yeah.
-
American views on guns are antisocial and undemocratic.
This cannot be disputed.
They are a relic from a colonial era long gone.
I find comfort in the fact that most gun deaths are suicides.
Those Americans are predominantly Christian and republican.
This is a profound source of social change in America.
Best of all a ban on assault weapons will have no effect on these suicides.
America. Fuck yeah.
Did you read this somewhere?
-
Sorry but the POTUS cannot make decrees from the oval office that are unconstitutional
-
Did you read this somewhere?
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9562
Whitemerica is killing itself off.
-
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9562
Whitemerica is killing itself off.
I perused the link. Which part says most of the gun deaths are Christian Republicans who commit suicide?
-
I perused the link. Which part says most of the gun deaths are Christian Republicans who commit suicide?
Deductive reasoning regarding the increase in white males who are predominantly republican and Christian...
Do I need to show my math here or can I simply present intelligent rhetoric?
Now should you happen to be a republican Christian with a gun who has started hating life... Please pm me. You're worth saving. I mean real saving. Not fake Jesus-Santa-Unicorn-Wonderland saving.
-
Deductive reasoning regarding the increase in white males who are predominantly republican and Christian...
Do I need to show my math here or can I simply present intelligent rhetoric?
Now should you happen to be a republican Christian with a gun who has started hating life... Please pm me. You're worth saving. I mean real saving. Not fake Jesus-Santa-Unicorn-Wonderland saving.
I'd like to see your math, from the ink you provided, in support of your claim that most suicides in the United States are Republican Christians.
-
I'd like to see your math, from the ink you provided, in support of your claim that most suicides in the United States are Republican Christians.
I'd like to see honest math for all the republican horsehsit that's supported on this board.
When I do you can count on me to match it.
-
I'd like to see honest math for all the republican horsehsit that's supported on this board.
When I do you can count on me to match it.
I see. It's pretty apparent you just made that statistic up. It's fine to have whatever opinion you want. Just don't try and act like it's supported by anything other than your "deductive reasoning." It's certainly not supported by the link you provided.
Happy New Year. I hope you see better days in Canada and can deal with your America envy a little better. :)
-
I see. It's pretty apparent you just made that statistic up. It's fine to have whatever opinion you want. Just don't try and act like it's supported by anything other than your "deductive reasoning." It's certainly not supported by the link you provided.
Happy New Year. I hope you see better days in Canada and can deal with your America envy a little better. :)
::)
-
articled is 2500 words, and they can't describe anything about what will actually be covered.
just how mad everyone is. super.
-
HONOLULU — President Obama will meet with Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch on Monday to finalize a set of executive actions on guns that he will unveil next week, according to several individuals briefed on the matter.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/01/obama-to-impose-new-gun-control-curbs-next-week/
-
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=589378.0
-
::)
You know I quickly forgot you are a 9/11 Troofer. :-\
-
American views on guns are antisocial and undemocratic.
This cannot be disputed.
They are a relic from a colonial era long gone.
I find comfort in the fact that most gun deaths are suicides.
Those Americans are predominantly Christian and republican.
This is a profound source of social change in America.
Best of all a ban on assault weapons will have no effect on these suicides.
America. Fuck yeah.
From the bottom of my coal black heart you can go fuck yourself.
the 2nd Amendment protects us from folks like Obama and the libs...and godbless the fucking NRA...not one inch on anything. But if you would like...come try and take my guns....after we're done I'll feed you to the dogs.
-
From the bottom of my coal black heart you can go fuck yourself.
the 2nd Amendment protects us from folks like Obama and the libs...and godbless the fucking NRA...not one inch on anything. But if you would like...come try and take my guns....after we're done I'll feed you to the dogs.
Your romantic advances aside...
The 2nd amendment is an outdated vestige of a colonial society. Your creative reading of it is incongruent with your literal interpretation of the English language translation of the 43rd re-write of the New Testament.
I want you to keep your guns so that you will keep killing yourselves and each other.
I agree that more guns means a better America. For everyone else you see...
-
what changes will be made? articles are all so vague.
in anything else, that kind of vagueness would be unacceptable.
but everyone loses their heads now. Last time this happened, it ended up being closing a loophole about letting felons buy full-auto or something.
-
Obama meeting with AG on gun control actions, faces GOP backlash
Published January 04, 2016
FoxNews.com
President Obama is sitting down Monday with top law enforcement officials to review and finalize new executive actions aimed at tightening the country’s gun laws – a push that Republicans on Capitol Hill and the campaign trail are calling a “dangerous” overreach.
The president lit a fire under the gun control debate last week when he and his aides announced White House plans to kick off the new year with executive action on gun rules. Obama plans to meet Monday afternoon with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey and other top officials to work out those plans.
At the top of the list is an effort to expand background checks on gun sales by forcing more sellers to register as federally licensed gun dealers. The changes would be aimed at some unregistered sellers who skirt the background check laws by selling at gun shows, online or informal settings. Other moves being considered include improving reporting of lost and stolen weapons and beefing up inspections of licensed dealers, according to a person familiar with the plans.
The package includes measures this White House has long considered but not completed, mindful of the legal fight sure to follow as well as the potential for political backlash for some fellow Democrats.
Ahead of the meeting, Republicans made clear they would fight the administration and accused the president of overstepping.
"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,” House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said in a statement. “This is a dangerous level of executive overreach, and the country will not stand for it.”
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump vowed to reverse any such actions if he’s elected.
"We're not changing the Second Amendment," Trump said Saturday at a campaign rally in Biloxi, Miss. "I will veto that. I will un-sign that so fast."
But supporters of stronger action on gun control applauded the president’s new push.
"We definitely think there are things he can do," said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates for expanding background checks. Gross says his recent conversations with White House aides have left him hopeful.
"It's very clear that the White House is feeling emboldened," he said.
Obama announced the meeting with Lynch in his weekly address from his Hawaii holiday vacation. On Thursday, he'll take his argument to prime time, participating in a town hall discussion of gun violence on CNN. He's slated to make his case for changes in his State of the Union address on Jan. 12.
The high-profile rollout reflects a White House continuing to look for ways to wrap up unfinished business, despite an uncooperative Congress.
After all but ignoring the issue in his first term, Obama changed course after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in December 2012. Nevertheless, the president failed to push a package of gun measures through Congress, including one expanding background checks.
At the same time, Obama took nearly two dozen executive actions to tighten gun laws, but left a major expansion of background checks out of the mix.
But after the shooting at a community college in Roseburg, Oregon in October, Obama ordered his staff to redouble the effort to look for ways to work around Congress.
Under current law, federally licensed firearms dealers are required to seek background checks on potential firearm purchasers. But advocacy groups say many sellers are currently exempt from having to register, increasing the chance of sales to customers prohibited by law from purchasing a gun.
The administration is expected to reclassify some of those dealers using a mix of criteria, such as the number and frequency of guns sold, whether sellers profit off sales, whether they advertise, rent space or tables at gun shows and pay taxes.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/04/obama-meeting-with-ag-on-gun-control-actions-faces-gop-backlash.html?intcmp=hpbt2
-
LOL what is the exact changes we are going to see? It's been WEEK OF THIS BITCHING, and now I'm hearing "better background checks"
Are you freaking kidding me? I expected assault weapon bans, ammo spiking 5000% in price... instead it it "fewer felon a-holes can buy guns from a trunk at walmart parking lots"?
Pathetic fearmongering.
-
Your romantic advances aside...
The 2nd amendment is an outdated vestige of a colonial society. Your creative reading of it is incongruent with your literal interpretation of the English language translation of the 43rd re-write of the New Testament.
I want you to keep your guns so that you will keep killing yourselves and each other.
I agree that more guns means a better America. For everyone else you see...
I mean it...go fuck yourself...better yet come get mine. You pussies always just stop short of that don't u
-
LOL what is the exact changes we are going to see? It's been WEEK OF THIS BITCHING, and now I'm hearing "better background checks"
Are you freaking kidding me? I expected assault weapon bans, ammo spiking 5000% in price... instead it it "fewer felon a-holes can buy guns from a trunk at walmart parking lots"?
Pathetic fearmongering.
How does it start 240? Just like this...you're an idiot if u can't see that
-
How does it start 240? Just like this...you're an idiot if u can't see that
for 7 years i've been hearing how obama is taking our guns.
he's a lame duck with executive power and his big move is... better background checks.
that's it? 7 years of yelling about obama taking our guns, and he's going to bring us faster background checks that mean crazy people with warrants in TX can't drive to NM to buy a rifle?
-
I mean it...go fuck yourself...better yet come get mine. You pussies always just stop short of that don't u
Meltdown
Grow up lol...
-
fuck off...stop commenting about shit that doesn't matter to you...your Canadian right...again fuck off
-
fuck off...stop commenting about shit that doesn't matter to you...your Canadian right...again fuck off
I'm a nihilist. Nothing matters. I'm just along for the ride.
-
fuck off...stop commenting about shit that doesn't matter to you...your Canadian right...again fuck off
Canadian and believes the U.S. government shot a missile into the Pentagon on 9/11.
-
whatever....the gun shit comes out on Tuesday. Buy ammo....tons of ammo. Shotgun shells are 100 a box for $20 at Walmart of all places.
-
whatever....the gun shit comes out on Tuesday. Buy ammo....tons of ammo. Shotgun shells are 100 a box for $20 at Walmart of all places.
Was at the range yesterday with my friend Wyatt Earp. He has an arsenal enough for a small army. :) Shot for almost three hours.
-
Warms my heart......
We had a big range day about two weeks ago. They had a 15 foot bench for us in their private bay...all covered in guns and ammo. Its was 2nd Amendment heaven. I just finished a tactical Remington 870 build and am itching to break it in.
-
Canadian and believes the U.S. government shot a missile into the Pentagon on 9/11.
Plz highlight the 757
Please also quote me stating that the US gov't fired the missile.
-
Warms my heart......
We had a big range day about two weeks ago. They had a 15 foot bench for us in their private bay...all covered in guns and ammo. Its was 2nd Amendment heaven. I just finished a tactical Remington 870 build and am itching to break it in.
Nice.
-
Plz highlight the 757
Please also quote me stating that the US gov't fired the missile.
No, but I'll send you a tinfoil hat. Seriously dude, you need to leave this nutty stuff alone. You're already handicapped by being Canadian. Falling into this loony conspiracy theory will only make things much worse for you.
-
No, but I'll send you a tinfoil hat. Seriously dude, you need to leave this nutty stuff alone. You're already handicapped by being Canadian. Falling into this loony conspiracy theory will only make things much worse for you.
You introduced the topic to this thread. Then you discourage discussion.
Epic moderating.
-
From the bottom of my coal black heart you can go fuck yourself.
the 2nd Amendment protects us from folks like Obama and the libs...and godbless the fucking NRA...not one inch on anything. But if you would like...come try and take my guns....after we're done I'll feed you to the dogs.
More overreaction by a conservative nutcase....Obama really owns your mind.....all hes going to do from what I understand is to tighten up background checks at gun shows (which many conservatives agree with by the way)...no one's guns are being taken away
Your whining is becoming REALLY embarrassing
-
You introduced the topic to this thread. Then you discourage discussion.
Epic moderating.
I introduced the topic by warning headhunter that you are a 9/11 Troofer. There is really nothing to discuss. You devalue yourself when you buy into that foolishness. Nobody is going to take you seriously, except for fellow 911 Troofers.
-
More overreaction by a conservative nutcase....Obama really owns your mind.....all hes going to do from what I understand is to tighten up background checks at gun shows (which many conservatives agree with by the way)...no one's guns are being taken away
Your whining is becoming REALLY embarrassing
Yup and I'll over react every time to ensure my 2nd amendment rights aren't taken by your shitbag messiah. I'm not worried about this legislation, I'm worried about how he's doing it and what's next. When you can show me a poll that shows this please paste it. Nobody cares much about this particular topic....except those who may sell a gun collection and now can't. It does nothing more then harm or target private law abiding citizens while doing nothing against say...the murderous gangs in Chicago and others who violate pre existing gun laws. This asshole targets us but has zero problem allowing MS13 soldiers to cross the border to bolster their domestic crime operations. The guy is a American hating shitbag.
-
people making a living re-selling guns online and classified with no background check - STOPPED
crazy people with medical issues getting gun by sidestepping background check - STOPPED
Um, THIS is what yall were bitching about? THIS?
Wow, it was overblown once again, wasn't it? If only someone could have predicted this would happen. Again.
-
Yup and I'll over react every time to ensure my 2nd amendment rights aren't taken by your shitbag messiah.
Just out of curiosity, are you equally protective of other rights guaranteed by the Constitution?
-
people making a living re-selling guns online and classified with no background check - STOPPED
crazy people with medical issues getting gun by sidestepping background check - STOPPED
Um, THIS is what yall were bitching about? THIS?
Wow, it was overblown once again, wasn't it? If only someone could have predicted this would happen. Again.
Do you think that this will stop the sales AND do you think this will actually stop gun violence?
These are 2 new "laws" that will do absolutely nothing. REPEAT. NOTHING to stop criminals.
-
Do you think that this will stop the sales AND do you think this will actually stop gun violence?
These are 2 new "laws" that will do absolutely nothing. REPEAT. NOTHING to stop criminals.
Of course it won't, its just more .gov providing a false sense of security. I don't know how many times I have to say it, the government cannot protect you, the police cannot protect you. You either decide to protect yourself or be a victim.
-
Yup and I'll over react every time to ensure my 2nd amendment rights aren't taken by your shitbag messiah. I'm not worried about this legislation, I'm worried about how he's doing it and what's next. When you can show me a poll that shows this please paste it. Nobody cares much about this particular topic....except those who may sell a gun collection and now can't. It does nothing more then harm or target private law abiding citizens while doing nothing against say...the murderous gangs in Chicago and others who violate pre existing gun laws. This asshole targets us but has zero problem allowing MS13 soldiers to cross the border to bolster their domestic crime operations. The guy is a American hating shitbag.
I'll ignore your crazy rantings....At least you didn't call him a black so and so like usual...that's progress...good job ;)
-
The guy is a American hating shitbag.
I don't think he hates America.
I think he's misguided in his beliefs, but that's not hating America. I think Obama loves America. I don't think you run for President if you don't love America.
What I do think is that he's completely wrong on the issue of gun violence.
-
I introduced the topic by warning headhunter that you are a 9/11 Troofer. There is really nothing to discuss. You devalue yourself when you buy into that foolishness. Nobody is going to take you seriously, except for fellow 911 Troofers.
I agree with you that 9/11 truthers are nuts ( even though you are very selective about who you call out) but you also devalue yourself as well, oh great pontificator, when you keep on saying Obama is ruling by decree and is an emperor when I already proved in a previous thread that Obama has used his executive action powers WAY less than most presidents and even less than a lot of Republican presidents..yet you continue to fool yourself and persist with this line of argument...
-
I don't think he hates America.
I think he's misguided in his beliefs, but that's not hating America. I think Obama loves America. I don't think you run for President if you don't love America.
What I do think is that he's completely wrong on the issue of gun violence.
I agree...I don't think what he's doing will prevent gun violence much...I think its more of a historical thing...he doesn't want to leave office at a time of heightened awareness about gun violence without being able to claim he at least tried to do SOMETHING
-
I agree...I don't think what he's doing will prevent gun violence much...I think its more of a historical thing...he doesn't want to leave office at a time of heightened awareness about gun violence without being able to claim he at least tried to do SOMETHING
There is nothing TO do though.
He will make no difference what so ever.
All he's doing is placating the extreme left. I get that they put him in office, but he's wrong on this one.
If he really cared about gun violence, he would walk into Chicago's southside and talk to those people and ask them what should be done and then when they say take away guns he would turn to them and say, "How about not killing each other?"
He has also not been very good in regards to civil liberties.
None of that equates to "hating america".
If that's the case, we have not had a President who "loves America" in the past 30 fucking years. Which is just ridiculous.
-
There is nothing TO do though.
He will make no difference what so ever.
All he's doing is placating the extreme left. I get that they put him in office, but he's wrong on this one.
If he really cared about gun violence, he would walk into Chicago's southside and talk to those people and ask them what should be done and then when they say take away guns he would turn to them and say, "How about not killing each other?"
He has also not been very good in regards to civil liberties.
None of that equates to "hating america".
If that's the case, we have not had a President who "loves America" in the past 30 fucking years. Which is just ridiculous.
Yeah I really hate the stupidity of the "he hates America" argument.....however I disagree with you that he is "placating the far left" with this.....Some of the biggest voices in this whole gun thing has been the white middle class, who have been severely impacted by mass shootings and are tired of this
-
Yeah I really hate the stupidity of the "he hates America" argument.....however I disagree with you that he is "placating the far left" with this.....Some of the biggest voices in this whole gun thing has been the white middle class, who have been severely impacted by mass shootings and are tired of this
That's who the left IS at this point in time.
-
Plz highlight the 757
Please also quote me stating that the US gov't fired the missile.
If I remember it right the plane was traveling at around 400mph. The web cam was likely set at 23fps and very low resolution probably less then 480 Aimed or focused at the road, not several hundred yards away. Good chance to only see a blur in 1 or 2 frames if any at all.
But sheeple logic says a camera should have recorded the plane, just as there should have been more debris. Common sense, science and critical thinking say otherwise.
And the next part of the CT we will jump to is...... :D
-
There is nothing TO do though.
He will make no difference what so ever.
All he's doing is placating the extreme left. I get that they put him in office, but he's wrong on this one.
If he really cared about gun violence, he would walk into Chicago's southside and talk to those people and ask them what should be done and then when they say take away guns he would turn to them and say, "How about not killing each other?"
He has also not been very good in regards to civil liberties.
None of that equates to "hating america".
If that's the case, we have not had a President who "loves America" in the past 30 fucking years. Which is just ridiculous.
That would take actual leadership skills
-
That's who the left IS at this point in time.
HAHAHA!!!!..this made me laugh out loud!!!..... :D..good job
-
That would take actual leadership skills
I guess the Bushes and Clinton could have gone as well...why should Obama go??????????????????
-
coach posted that only 1.4% of guns used in crimes are purchased using the loophole.
Still a lotta crime. If ONE felon can't buy a gun... then it has helped some.
-
HAHAHA!!!!..this made me laugh out loud!!!..... :D..good job
You don't agree?
You agree that rich white people are on the right.
You agree that poor white people are on the right.
So that leaves black people on the left. Latinos on the left and middle class white people. How am I incorrect?
-
I introduced the topic by warning headhunter that you are a 9/11 Troofer. There is really nothing to discuss. You devalue yourself when you buy into that foolishness. Nobody is going to take you seriously, except for fellow 911 Troofers.
And no one takes you seriously unless they are also under educated republican gunc*ck lovers.
-
I guess the Bushes and Clinton could have gone as well...why should Obama go??????????????????
What a stupid cop out lol.
Windrow Wilson never did either so why should Obama?
I guess in your mind OB is no better than Bush or Clinton
-
Just out of curiosity, are you equally protective of other rights guaranteed by the Constitution?
Of course....might hate watching shitbag libs spout all kinds of bullshit but its protected so have at it.....
-
people making a living re-selling guns online and classified with no background check - STOPPED
crazy people with medical issues getting gun by sidestepping background check - STOPPED
Um, THIS is what yall were bitching about? THIS?
Wow, it was overblown once again, wasn't it? If only someone could have predicted this would happen. Again.
Read the law as put forth..not our bullshit back and forth. Uncle Sam is going to provide more money for mental health issues...HOWEVER...if say your son or daughter is batshit crazy or has been on ridlin because of some over reaction from a teacher, the care giver now has a duty to report that to the feds. The feds can now seize your fire arms because they are in danger of being used by your kid. Plus what exactly is the check on why I went to mental health.....the military goes to mental health for marriage related issues.....you think I'm gonna do that now and risk my guns getting seized. hell no..I'll just go to Home depot and get a shovel and some lye....or shit i just typed that...fuck...damm ATF will be at my door.
-
Do any of you trust the government that much for them to determine .....that you are competant to own a firearm. Especially having some beaurcrat determine what exactly a doc is saying and thus making a determination on their own whether you get to exercise your 2nd amendment rights?
-
Do any of you trust the government that much for them to determine .....that you are competant to own a firearm. Especially having some beaurcrat determine what exactly a doc is saying and thus making a determination on their own whether you get to exercise your 2nd amendment rights?
No, and we already know that the EO is unconstitutional.
-
But the Courts Will Stop It!, you can almost hear some litigious members of Congress say. By then the damage is already done: the pain is the process; the pain is the notice letters from the Justice Department to 2,000 occasional gun sellers, 1,000 of them who judge it not worth the risk to continue. The pain is the warrants and subpoenas to obtain the names of people who purchased booths at gun shows across the nation. The pain is the depletion of savings accounts to mount a criminal defense in the face of unlimited federal resources to press the ideological agenda.
This is how the progressive left operates when in power. It does battle on the legal margins and engages in courageous ideological incrementalism so saturated with legalese that most Americans can't understand the fight.
From PJ media.
-
Another aspect of the shitbags' gun grabbing plan....Gun trusts.
None of this means much to libs. They don't shoot or collect as much as repubs or hunters or whatever. They just don't so it doesn't matter. They think that this is an isolated thing...doesn't matter that ol Obama is undermining the Constitution...they hate guns so let the ATF do its worst. But...they love drugs and all that so the DEA is the enemy.
A Trust is a legal entity which the ATF has historically allowed to purchase firearms. Once the Trust has possession of the firearm(s) the principals of that trust are able to legally use them. When the Trust owner dies, the firearms pass seamlessly to family (or whom ever is named in the Trust) without requiring them to go through the time consuming process of transferring everything on Form 5’s to the new owner(s). - NFA items currently purchased take as much as 9 months to process through the ATF.
The Obama Administration wants to change the regulations so that Trust owners are required get photo’s, fingerprints and submit to a background check when acquiring a NFA item in the Trusts name. They also plan to impose the same changes on corporations which have historically been treated similarly to Trusts under the NFA. -
This regulation change is certain to increase the already absurd wait times for getting approval on new form submissions. Currently you can expect to wait 8-9 months for your paperwork to be approved. Should this regulation change be imposed, we can expect wait times to increase to a year or more. Since NFA firearms are rarely used in crimes, what is the point of this regulation change? The ATF and the Obama Administration can’t claim it will save lives or reduce crime because NFA firearms aren’t used in crime. It appears to be a spiteful measure intended to stick a big fat government thumb in the eye of American gun owners -
-
Part of the reason this legislation has gained traction is because of the Christopher Dorner rampage in California- the fired police officer who shot a number of fellow officers with weapons equipped with suppressors supposedly obtained through a Trust. Never let it be said that Obama or Eric Holder let a tragedy go to waste. It’s the same political cards they’ve played with Sandy Hook.
Everytime somebody does something with a gun, Obama cums in his pants.
-
Do any of you trust the government that much for them to determine .....that you are competant to own a firearm. Especially having some beaurcrat determine what exactly a doc is saying and thus making a determination on their own whether you get to exercise your 2nd amendment rights?
The Devil will be in the details here. so far, from what i read that you posted, most of this is unnecessary and not impacting the real problems. Even CNN seemed to say this morning that this is political BS about OB's legacy.
-
The Five Most Outrageous Facts About Obama’s Executive Gun Control
(http://media.breitbart.com/media/2016/01/6797310043_22436a01dc_b-640x480.jpg)
6797310043_22436a01dc_bO fficial White House Photo / Pete Souza
by AWR HAWKINS
5 Jan 2016
A January 4 White House executive order fact sheet previews the executive gun controls Obama will announce Tuesday.
The five most offensive aspects of those controls:
1. The main policy would not have stopped any recent mass shootings.
The controls expand background checks to cover more private sellers, although private sellers are not the source of guns used in mass shootings and high-profile shootings–the very kinds of incidents Obama claims he wants to reduce.
Every mass shooter and high profile shooter in recent memory–with the exception of those who stole their guns–bought their guns via background checks. For this reason, even the New York Daily News described Obama’s pending background check expansion as “meaningless,” saying, “the last 15 mass killers all passed… background checks” to acquire firearms.
2. 225 years of precedent, destroyed–without any legislative due process.
The expansion of background checks is an affront to freedom in general, because it brings private sellers under the purview of the government regardless of whether those sellers sell one gun a year or 100. Americans have been selling guns privately since 1791–that’s 225 years–and now, with a swipe of his pen, Obama is saying a portion of those sales must be handled federally and conducted via background checks.
This is a not-so-subtle slide toward universal background checks–the kind of background checks they have in California and France–and it will eventually require a gun registry database in order to be enforceable–like the registry they have in France and the one they are building in California.
3. You can be denied a gun for purely financial reasons or if you are on Social Security.
The attempt to bar certain Social Security beneficiaries from owning or buying guns because they are unable to manage their own finances.
On July 18 Breitbart News reported on Obama’s push to ban gun-possession for Social Security beneficiaries who are believed incapable of handling their own finances. On that same day the Los Angeles Times reported that a ban was being put together “outside of public view,” but the details that were known revealed the ban would cover those who are unable to manage their own affairs for a multitude of reasons–from “subnormal intelligence or mental illness” to “incompetency,” an unspecified “condition,” or “disease.”
This ban has been brought under the auspices of Obama’s executive gun control.
4. It adds more burdens to gun dealers who are already following the law.
Obama is also using executive gun control to place even more reporting requirements–read, regulations–on the backs of Federal Firearms License holders (FFLs), who are federally recognized firearms dealers. Contrary to mainstream media reports and the talking points of gun control groups, FFLs are already highly regulated and monitored by the ATF. Obama’s executive action adds one more hoop through which FFLs must jump.
5. Tax dollars for “smart guns” that nobody wants.
Obama’s executive action instructs the “Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security” to sponsor research into the “smart gun” technology and explore ways to further its use. This means using tax-payer money to pay for something the private sector has no interest in funding.
Broad interest in “smart guns” is absent because they have yet to be demonstrated trustworthy. Such guns are either fitted with biometric readers–through which they are activated by the palm or finger print or their owners–or they are paired with a bracelet or watch that emits a radio signal which activates the gun when in close proximity with it.
To date, the biometric readers raise concerns that they will fail to read the correct palm or finger print if that palm or finger is caked with blood. This means the gun is useless for self-defense. As for “smart guns” paired with watches or bracelets, even if these guns worked the result would be that thieves would simply steal the watch or bracelet along with the gun, therefore outsmarting those who designed the gun for a new level of safety.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/05/five-outrageous-facts-obamas-executive-gun-control/
-
Obama announces gun control actions, expands background checks
Published January 05, 2016
FoxNews.com
President Obama formally announced plans Tuesday to expand background checks and make other changes to America’s gun rules via executive action, bypassing Congress and fueling an election-year fight with Republicans.
“Everybody should have to abide by the same rules,” Obama said.
The president, speaking at the White House, said background checks "make a difference" and will be expanded so that they can cover purchases online, at gun shows and in other venues.
“Anybody in the business of selling firearms must get a license and conduct background checks or be subject to criminal prosecutions,” he said. Obama was flanked by victims of gun violence and introduced by Mark Barden, whose son was killed in the Sandy Hook mass shooting.
At the heart of Obama's plan is a more sweeping definition of gun dealers that the administration hopes will expand the number of gun sales subject to background checks. At gun shows, websites and flea markets, sellers often skirt that requirement by declining to register as licensed dealers, but officials said the new federal guidance clarifies that it applies to anyone "in the business" of selling firearms.
The changes were first detailed by the White House overnight, and mark a renewed bid by the president to enact gun control measures with or without Congress.
They don’t go as far as proposed background check legislation – which has failed to advance on Capitol Hill – but nevertheless have prompted allegations of executive overreach.
"No matter what President Obama says, his word does not trump the Second Amendment. We will conduct vigilant oversight,” House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said, adding that the actions “will no doubt be challenged in the courts.”
Obama, blasting the gun lobby and appearing to choke up as he discussed gun violence victims, rejected claims that he is infringing on the Second Amendment, citing other restrictions that can constitutionally apply to freedom of speech and other rights.
But Republicans said the changes would only hurt law-abiding Americans.
“He knows full well that the law already says that people who make their living selling firearms must be licensed, regardless of venue. Still, rather than focus on criminals and terrorists, he goes after the most law-abiding of citizens,” Ryan said in a statement.
“This executive order is just one more way to make it harder for law-abiding people to buy weapons or to be able to protect their families,” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a GOP presidential candidate, told Fox News.
The guidance, at its heart, aims to achieve a long-time administration goal of at least narrowing the so-called gun show loophole.
Under current law, only federally licensed gun dealers must conduct background checks on buyers, but many who sell guns at flea markets, on websites or in other informal settings don't register as dealers. The ATF has issued updated guidance that says the government can consider someone a gun dealer regardless of where the guns are sold.
The administration also said ATF is finalizing a rule to require checks for people buying certain weapons through a trust, corporation or other “legal entity.”
In an attempt to prevent gun purchases from falling through the cracks, the FBI will hire 230 more examiners to process background checks, the White House said.
In advance of the announcement, the president asserted he has the “legal authority” to act here. The president finalized the plan after meeting Monday with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey and other top officials.
“The recommendations that are being made by my team here are ones that are entirely consistent with the Second Amendment,” Obama said Monday, claiming they could “potentially save lives.”
The revived push to tighten America’s gun laws via executive action, however, has resulted in a backlash on Capitol Hill and the campaign trail.
Republicans made clear they would fight the administration and accused the president of overstepping.
Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, who chairs a key appropriations panel, warned Lynch on Monday that he would “use every tool at my disposal to immediately restrict” DOJ funding if the department proceeds with “new restrictions on our Constitutional rights.”
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump vowed to reverse any such actions if he’s elected.
"I will veto that. I will un-sign that so fast," Trump said Saturday at a campaign rally in Biloxi, Miss.
While Obama took heat from Republicans, supporters of stronger action on gun control applauded the president’s new push.
"We definitely think there are things he can do," said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates for expanding background checks. Gross says his recent conversations with White House aides have left him hopeful.
"It's very clear that the White House is feeling emboldened," he said.
On Thursday, Obama will take his argument to prime time, participating in a town hall discussion of gun violence on CNN. He's slated to make his case for changes in his State of the Union address on Jan. 12.
The high-profile rollout reflects a White House continuing to look for ways to wrap up unfinished business despite an uncooperative Congress.
After all but ignoring the issue in his first term, Obama changed course after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in December 2012. Nevertheless, the president failed to push a package of gun measures through Congress, including one expanding background checks.
At the same time, Obama took nearly two dozen executive actions to tighten gun laws, but left a major expansion of background checks out of the mix.
But after the shooting at a community college in Roseburg, Ore. in October, Obama ordered his staff to redouble the effort to look for ways to work around Congress.
The background check provision rests in the murky realm of agency "guidelines," which carry less weight than formally issued federal regulations and can easily be rescinded. Lynch said the administration chose to clarify guidelines because it allowed the policies to be implemented immediately. Left unsaid was the fact that developing regulations would have dragged out likely until Obama's presidency ends and would have generated more opportunities for Republicans to intervene.
The new guidance still exempts collectors and gun hobbyists, and the exact definition of who must register as a dealer and conduct background checks remains exceedingly vague.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/05/obama-announces-gun-control-actions-expands-background-checks.html?intcmp=hpbt1
-
about time!
-
"I believe in the Second Amendment. It's there written on the paper." Then he reminded people he is a Constitutional law professor. Seriously?
Shameful. Embarrassing.
-
You don't agree?
You agree that rich white people are on the right.
You agree that poor white people are on the right.
So that leaves black people on the left. Latinos on the left and middle class white people. How am I incorrect?
Good observation
-
I agree with you that 9/11 truthers are nuts ( even though you are very selective about who you call out) but you also devalue yourself as well, oh great pontificator, when you keep on saying Obama is ruling by decree and is an emperor when I already proved in a previous thread that Obama has used his executive action powers WAY less than most presidents and even less than a lot of Republican presidents..yet you continue to fool yourself and persist with this line of argument...
You didn't prove anything. I have never claimed the sheer number of executive orders means anything. It's the substance of those orders that matter.
-
And no one takes you seriously unless they are also under educated republican gunc*ck lovers.
Well I don't take myself seriously, so that isn't saying much. :)
Have you solved the mystery of what happened to all those passengers on the plane that didn't actually crash into the Pentagon? Alien abduction?
-
Well I don't take myself seriously, so that isn't saying much. :)
Have you solved the mystery of what happened to all those passengers on the plane that didn't actually crash into the Pentagon? Alien abduction?
Here is who was in on it according to sheeple.com
- The people who process the flight plans.
- The Air Traffic controllers who noticed the transponder went off and where it went off at
- The primary radar operators who saw and tracked unidentified radar contacts. (during 9/11, when they flew the plane to where ever they flew it to, and when they flew the plane to where ever they disposed of it)
- The fake pilots who flew the plane to where they disposed of it
- The people that disposed of the real pilots
- The people at the airport who helped the people who disposed of the real pilots
- The flight attendants who may have been suspicious of last minute changes in a flight crew
- The real flight attendants who were supposed to be on the plane
- The people at the airline who schedule who is supposed to be on the plane, flight crew attendants etc.
- The people at the location where they took the plane
- The people who killed the passengers
- The people who help dispose of the plane
- The people in other countries that have satellite tracking capabilities
- The people in our country who operate satellite tracking
- The people in the government who planned and organize this
- The people who commanded the plan.
If the plane was taking over remotely:
- The mechanics who were sent home that day
- The people who schedule the mechanics
- the people who made and delivered the remote control devices
- The people who installed the remote control devices
- The people who controlled the plane.
- anyone who had any contact to where the plane was when they installed the devices
This proves that SPECTER is REAL!!
-
Here is who was in on it according to sheeple.com
- The people who process the flight plans.
- The Air Traffic controllers who noticed the transponder went off and where it went off at
- The primary radar operators who saw and tracked unidentified radar contacts. (during 9/11, when they flew the plane to where ever they flew it to, and when they flew the plane to where ever they disposed of it)
- The fake pilots who flew the plane to where they disposed of it
- The people that disposed of the real pilots
- The people at the airport who helped the people who disposed of the real pilots
- The flight attendants who may have been suspicious of last minute changes in a flight crew
- The real flight attendants who were supposed to be on the plane
- The people at the airline who schedule who is supposed to be on the plane, flight crew attendants etc.
- The people at the location where they took the plane
- The people who killed the passengers
- The people who help dispose of the plane
- The people in other countries that have satellite tracking capabilities
- The people in our country who operate satellite tracking
- The people in the government who planned and organize this
- The people who commanded the plan.
If the plane was taking over remotely:
- The mechanics who were sent home that day
- The people who schedule the mechanics
- the people who made and delivered the remote control devices
- The people who installed the remote control devices
- The people who controlled the plane.
- anyone who had any contact to where the plane was when they installed the devices
This proves that SPECTER is REAL!!
lol A bunch of tinfoil hat dummies.
-
it boggles the mind how this scumbag goes up there and just repeats lies and misinformation over and over again.
Obama is the greatest con man in American history.
none of these proposals will do anything to affect anything, other than causing some pains in the asses of some honest citizens, but it just goes to show how the Left will chip away at the 2nd ANY WAY THEY CAN, that nothing is too small, nothing too trivial, in their quest to 'get rid of guns' .
-
The Volokh Conspiracy's Jonathan Adler says Obama's new gun control measures are legally meaningless -- just restatements of the current law. And if they were more than that, they'd be unconstitutional.
He notes that today's actions were not executive orders, but executive actions, specifically "guidances" on current rules, not new rule-makings. The rule-making would be a lengthy process (requiring public notice, and going through the bureacracy, I suppose) which Adler doubts Obama could even finish before his term was up.
So the executive action does not disturb current law; it simply either restates it or clarifies it.
Adler thinks two possible reasons for doing this are to "chill" what he calls "marginal" gun sales (sales by people who are in a nether real between "dealer" and "hobbyist," signalling maybe to them they should err on the side of caution) and as a strictly political show that he's "doing something" for his base.
-
The Devil will be in the details here. so far, from what i read that you posted, most of this is unnecessary and not impacting the real problems. Even CNN seemed to say this morning that this is political BS about OB's legacy.
Is it time to panic yet oz? Can we get upset now?
-
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED......in other news my Jan ammo order came in. Order now before 223 becomes impossible to get for a few months
-
Bought a Kriss vector a while back, glad I got in before the rush
-
Of course....might hate watching shitbag libs spout all kinds of bullshit but its protected so have at it.....
I'm glad to hear that. Kudos.
-
The logic of the POTUS
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/071/217/large_v3/abe468e9.jpg?1449630922)
-
You didn't prove anything. I have never claimed the sheer number of executive orders means anything. It's the substance of those orders that matter.
oh brother ::)..changing the content of discussion to suit your argument...you have constantly pontificated that Obama is an emperor and uses his exec order powers to rule over the U.S. by decree....then I start a thread with stats that PROVE that this is simply not so and that MANY OTHER presidents have done the same thing in numbers that FAR EXCEED what Obama has done.....GEORGE BUSH HIMSELF did the same and circumvented congress many times YET...no word from the peanut gallery (of which you are a part) about that....
NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN, instead of admitting you were wrong in designating Obama as an emperor (as I proved your hypothesis wrong) Now we switch the argument to the CONTENT of those exec orders....
you never cease to amaze, oh great pontificator
-
oh brother ::)..changing the content of discussion to suit your argument...you have constantly pontificated that Obama is an emperor and uses his exec order powers to rule over the U.S. by decree....then I start a thread with stats that PROVE that this is simply not so and that MANY OTHER presidents have done the same thing in numbers that FAR EXCEED what Obama has done.....GEORGE BUSH HIMSELF did the same and circumvented congress many times YET...no word from the peanut gallery (of which you are a part) about that....
NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN, instead of admitting you were wrong in designating Obama as an emperor (as I proved your hypothesis wrong) Now we switch the argument to the CONTENT of those exec orders....
you never cease to amaze, oh great pontificator
I haven't changed anything. I haven't admitted anything. Obama does think he is an emperor and, as today shows, is still trying to act like an emperor. He doesn't respect the separation of powers. That's why he has been repeatedly checked by the courts.
Trying to do some kind of numerical tally of executive orders is simplistic and precisely the kind of tactic I expect from an Obamabot.
-
I haven't changed anything. I haven't admitted anything. Obama does think he is an emperor and, as today shows, is still trying to act like an emperor. He doesn't respect the separation of powers. That's why he has been repeatedly checked by the courts.
Trying to do some kind of numerical tally of executive orders is simplistic and precisely the kind of tactic I expect from an Obamabot.
again simply amazing......and you're supposed to be a mod at that...very disappointing
-
again simply amazing......and you're supposed to be a mod at that...very disappointing
::)
-
::)
8)
-
No matter which side of the debate you fall on this Onion article (http://www.theonion.com/graphic/how-firearm-background-checks-work-52121) explaining how background checks work is great:
- Step 1: Second Amendment rights violated.
- Step 2: Applicant uses Form 4473 to lie about previous drug use.
- Step 3: Records of applicant’s felony history submitted for review if state of South Carolina feels like it.
- Step 4: Close friends and family are interviewed by federal agents in order to understand the buyer’s true sense of identity—their hopes, their dreams, their fears, and their general perception of their core essence or “self”—a deeper insight that no set of paper forms could ever achieve.
- Step 5: Applicant fills out lengthy form detailing their mental health history and future.
- Step 6: Proprietor of Carson’s Pawn & Guns entrusted with entering buyer’s info into federal Criminal Background Check System.
- Step 7: FBI shamans check the buyer for any spiritual health issues during a two-day ayahuasca ceremony.
- Step 8: Anyone seeking to buy a military grade automatic weapon or assault rifle is required to wait until the firearm dealer unlocks the case and hands it to them.
- Step 9: Any applicant who is denied from purchasing a weapon at a Federal Firearms Licensee attends a regional gun show.
- Step 10: Customer politely thanked for choosing to purchase firearm through legal means.
-
The logic of the POTUS
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/071/217/large_v3/abe468e9.jpg?1449630922)
END THREAD
-
Is it time to panic yet oz? Can we get upset now?
No chicken little, read the fine print.
No one is taking your guns.
You can still buy guns.
;)
-
No chicken little, read the fine print.
No one is taking your guns.
You can still buy guns.
;)
Hmm so before it was we can't get upset bc he hasn't done anything yet and now although he has done something we can't get upset bc he isn't taking away guns even though he has created a plan in the past in which it would....when oz when????
-
Hmm so before it was we can't get upset bc he hasn't done anything yet and now although he has done something we can't get upset bc he isn't taking away guns even though he has created a plan in the past in which it would....when oz when????
Are you still able to buy a gun Tony? Has anyone come to take your guns?
-
Bought a Kriss vector a while back, glad I got in before the rush
No shit....the 9mm one? How do u like it
-
Are you still able to buy a gun Tony? Has anyone come to take your guns?
baby steps O.....baby steps. Ammo taxes are next.
-
No shit....the 9mm one? How do u like it
No I got the .45, I actually haven't shot it yet. I got the pistol and I'm in the process of getting a tax stamp to turn it into an sbr. It's a big unwieldy pistol but should make a real nice sbr, I'll let you know when I shoot it
-
That thing will do some damage. Its a weird gun but friggen cool. Did u get an SBR cool guy stock? I was screwing around with one at the Texas gun festival (gotta love texas) it makes the that weapon very functional.....plus a red dot and suppressor. I'll stop spending your money ;D
-
That thing will do some damage. Its a weird gun but friggen cool. Did u get an SBR cool guy stock? I was screwing around with one at the Texas gun festival (gotta love texas) it makes the that weapon very functional.....plus a red dot and suppressor. I'll stop spending your money ;D
Haha I got the original stock from Kriss I know they make an adapter that will allow you to put an ar style tube stock on it but I kinda like the look of the original one.
You're telling me, I have a glock 21 so I can interchange mags but now I need a suppressor for sure and another red dot....lots of money but sure damn fun
-
baby steps O.....baby steps. Ammo taxes are next.
Baby steps to what? The 2nd amendment is too much ingrained into our identity as a nation. You will see regulation come a go, but the day when a law abiding citizen can't buy or own a gun becuase the 2nd amendment is repealled isn't coming anytime soon
-
Are you still able to buy a gun Tony? Has anyone come to take your guns?
That depends. Is he trying to buy a gun from a private seller who is now considered a "gun dealer"?
-
'84
-
The logic of the POTUS
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/071/217/large_v3/abe468e9.jpg?1449630922)
No matter what you think, this is very meaningful.
-
That depends. Is he trying to buy a gun from a private seller who is now considered a "gun dealer"?
I haven't read the details of the new laws or executive orders, or reinforcement of whatever laws they are called yet.
But can a person buy a gun from a private seller now?
-
I haven't read the details of the new laws or executive orders, or reinforcement of whatever laws they are called yet.
But can a person buy a gun from a private seller now?
It depends on the state.
Some yes. Some no.
-
It depends on the state.
Some yes. Some no.
Do you have a link to that info?
(not that i don't trust you, i just want to read more on it)
-
Do you have a link to that info?
(not that i don't trust you, i just want to read more on it)
It's pretty common law.
Like for instance, in Virginia, I can buy a gun at a gun show or from anyone else.
Virginia's laws are here:
http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms.shtm#FAQ
California has different laws.
They must be registered as a dealer
See California laws here:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs#3
-
I haven't read the details of the new laws or executive orders, or reinforcement of whatever laws they are called yet.
But can a person buy a gun from a private seller now?
Yes. That's one of the reasons a lot of people are upset about this. He rewrote the law.
Here is the current requirement in Hawaii:
Transfer, Possession of Firearms
You may not lend any rifle or shotgun to anyone younger than 18 except for the purposes of hunting or target shooting.
Except for the purposes of hunting or target shooting, you may not possess any firearm owned by another without a permit from the police chief.
For the purposes of hunting or target shooting, you may lend a lawfully acquired rifle or shotgun to an adult for use within the state for up to 15 days without a permit from the police chief. If the firearm is to be used outside the state, it may be on loan for up to 75 days.
You may not knowingly lend a firearm to any person who is prohibited from ownership or possession of a firearm.
You may not bring into the state an assault pistol or sell or transfer an assault pistol to anyone other than a licensed dealer. If you acquire an assault pistol through inheritance or bequest, you must render the weapon permanently inoperable, sell or transfer it to a licensed dealer or turn it in to the Hawaiʻi Police Department within 90 days.
Anyone 16 years of age or older or anyone younger than 16 when accompanied by an adult may carry and use any lawfully acquired rifle or shotgun and suitable ammunition while engaged in hunting or target shooting or traveling to and from the place of hunting or target shooting.
If you sell or transfer the ownership of a handgun, you must obtain the recipient’s permit at the time of sale or transfer. You are required to sign the permit in ink and submit the permit to the Hawaiʻi Police Department within 48 hours of the transfer via hand delivery or registered mail.
If you sell or transfer the ownership of a rifle or shotgun, you must submit a Sale/Transfer of Rifle/Shotgun form (PDF) (HTML) to the Hawaiʻi Police Department within forty-eight hours of the transfer via hand delivery or registered mail. The form must be completed and signed in ink by the vendor or transferer.
http://www.hawaiipolice.com/services/firearm-registration
-
AP fact check: Obama gun-control actions wouldn’t have stopped any mass shooting
January 6, 2016
by Ed Morrissey
To paraphrase Samuel Johnson: media fact-checks on Barack Obama’s claims about guns may not be done entirely well … but one is surprised to find them done at all. Following Obama’s emotional press conference yesterday, both the Associated Press and the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler conducted some research into his claims and his proposals. Both of them found serious holes in Obama’s arguments.
Let’s start with the AP’s Michael Sisak, who corroborated arguments gun-rights advocates have been making ever since word began leaking out about the executive actions Obama would take:
The gun control measures a tearful President Barack Obama announced Tuesday would not have prevented the slaughters of 20 first-graders at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, or 14 county workers at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California. …
Those measures are seen as crucial to stemming gun suicides — the cause of two-thirds of gun deaths — by blocking immediate access to weapons. But, an Associated Press review shows, they would have had no impact in keeping weapons from the hands of suspects in several of the deadliest recent mass shootings that have spurred calls for tighter gun control.
The shooters at Sandy Hook and San Bernardino used weapons bought by others, shielding them from background checks. In other cases, the shooters legally bought guns.
Sisak appends his analysis with a detailed list of mass shootings over the past three-plus years, and notes in each why the changes announced by Obama end up being non-sequiturs. The only shooting that might have been prevented by federal action should have been stopped anyway. Dylann Roof had a drug arrest on his record, which should have flagged his application to purchase a firearm, but a records screw-up allowed Roof to buy his weapon — and Obama’s proposals wouldn’t have changed that, either.
In fact, hardly anyone buys their weapons through the supposed “loophole” Obama purported to close yesterday, Liz Peek argues:
Access to guns by unfit people has almost nothing to do with the “gun show loophole,” which turns out to be another one of those convenient myths that has driven Obama policy–like the false suggestion that a goodly share of our prison population are innocent victims of overly-harsh drug laws.
After the Sandy Hook tragedy, President Obama convened a group overseen by Vice President Joe Biden to study gun control issues. In a 2013 speech, the president proposed various policies meant to check such killings, including expanding background checks to private sales of firearms. He noted that any sales through federally licensed vendors require background checks to eliminate those with a criminal history or mental health issues, but also claimed, “It’s hard to enforce that law when as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted without a background check.”
This assertion was debunked by FactCheck, which points out that the dubious 40 percent statistic emerged from a 1994 telephone survey of only 251 individuals. The author of that study told Politifact that he has “no idea” if that number is valid; Biden takes pains when discussing the topic to say the figure may be incorrect. Other analysts cite 4% as a more accurate share of gun sales through unlicensed dealers, given that a large number of the people surveyed said they had received guns from friends or relatives.
A 2001 survey of state and federal prisoners discovered that less than one percenthad bought their weapons at a gun show. Another study, of inmates of the Cook County jail, claimed that 70 percent of those locked up had acquired their weapons from friends or gang members; another favorite source was “straw” purchases made by someone capable of passing the background check. Only two had actually had actually bought a gun at a store.
Still, Obama kept pushing this notion as a pressing reason for acting unilaterally to do … not very much, as it turns out. “The problem is some gun sellers have been operating under a different set of rules,” Obama claimed. “A violent felon can buy the exact same weapon over the Internet with no background check, no questions asked.” This is absolute poppycock, at least as far as the law is concerned, which applies to all commercial/retail gun sales. Glenn Kessler found himself deluged by demands for a fact check, and responded today with a two-Pinocchio rating for this statement:
Administration officials say his point was that electronic commerce has made it easier for prohibited people such as felons to obtain firearms (or to hide such transactions from scrutiny behind the dark Web). Put in those terms, his statement is reasonable. Illegal markets often exploit new forms of commerce.
But many readers believed Obama was asserting the rules were different for the Internet — that it legally permitted violent felons to obtain guns.
We agree that Obama’s language is slippery and could be confusing to the average person who doesn’t know anything about FFLs and interstate requirements. There is nothing unique about the Internet; the laws governing private transactions and interstate sales are exactly the same. It’s the same as offering to sell a gun on a bulletin board, except the bulletin board is significantly larger. The Internet, and eletronic payment systems such as PayPal and Bitcoin, have certainly facilitated transactions that in the past would have been more difficult to arrange.
Obama erred in saying the rules are different for Internet sellers. They face the same rules as other sellers — rules that the administration now says it will enforce better.
Clearly, Obama wasn’t faulting enforcement; he demanded changes in the law, challenging Congress to act to close this supposed “loophole.” His language is slippery and dishonest, and it has been consistently both on this point for years. Kessler gave him two Pinocchios for getting it wrong, but the error in this case has been repetitive and deliberate. Kessler does a good job of getting the facts straight, but seems a bit too gracious under the circumstances to a president who’s been demagoguing on this false premise for a very long time. Kudos for taking up the challenge, but I’d have leaned toward the four-Pinocchio result, with an extra scolding for trying to sell this with a super-sized serving of lachrymose.
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/06/ap-fact-check-obama-gun-control-actions-wouldnt-have-stopped-any-mass-shooting/
-
Yes. That's one of the reasons a lot of people are upset about this. He rewrote the law.
Here is the current requirement in Hawaii:
Transfer, Possession of Firearms
You may not lend any rifle or shotgun to anyone younger than 18 except for the purposes of hunting or target shooting.
Except for the purposes of hunting or target shooting, you may not possess any firearm owned by another without a permit from the police chief.
For the purposes of hunting or target shooting, you may lend a lawfully acquired rifle or shotgun to an adult for use within the state for up to 15 days without a permit from the police chief. If the firearm is to be used outside the state, it may be on loan for up to 75 days.
You may not knowingly lend a firearm to any person who is prohibited from ownership or possession of a firearm.
You may not bring into the state an assault pistol or sell or transfer an assault pistol to anyone other than a licensed dealer. If you acquire an assault pistol through inheritance or bequest, you must render the weapon permanently inoperable, sell or transfer it to a licensed dealer or turn it in to the Hawaiʻi Police Department within 90 days.
Anyone 16 years of age or older or anyone younger than 16 when accompanied by an adult may carry and use any lawfully acquired rifle or shotgun and suitable ammunition while engaged in hunting or target shooting or traveling to and from the place of hunting or target shooting.
If you sell or transfer the ownership of a handgun, you must obtain the recipient’s permit at the time of sale or transfer. You are required to sign the permit in ink and submit the permit to the Hawaiʻi Police Department within 48 hours of the transfer via hand delivery or registered mail.
If you sell or transfer the ownership of a rifle or shotgun, you must submit a Sale/Transfer of Rifle/Shotgun form (PDF) (HTML) to the Hawaiʻi Police Department within forty-eight hours of the transfer via hand delivery or registered mail. The form must be completed and signed in ink by the vendor or transferer.
http://www.hawaiipolice.com/services/firearm-registration
This is the new law?
-
It's pretty common law.
Like for instance, in Virginia, I can buy a gun at a gun show or from anyone else.
Virginia's laws are here:
http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms.shtm#FAQ
California has different laws.
They must be registered as a dealer
See California laws here:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs#3
But in the context of Obama new law has anything really changed?
-
But in the context of Obama new law has anything really changed?
Yes... the feds are now requiring every state to require all sales to be registered as dealers.
As DE stated (And you know how I hate to agree with anything he says), it would not change anything in regards to the shootings that have occurred, but it is another way to track who has purchased what guns.
I am not a fan of these databases.
I don't even like the fact you have to have a drivers license to be honest. Perhaps I just grew up in the wrong era.
-
This is the new law?
No. That's the existing law in Hawaii.
-
Yes... the feds are now requiring every state to require all sales to be registered as dealers.
As DE stated (And you know how I hate to agree with anything he says), it would not change anything in regards to the shootings that have occurred, but it is another way to track who has purchased what guns.
I am not a fan of these databases.
I don't even like the fact you have to have a drivers license to be honest. Perhaps I just grew up in the wrong era.
I agree it wouldn't change anything regarding the shootings. Its more of political pandering for his legacy i think.
As far having to have a licence to sell (retail) in every state? I am not sure where i stand on this. i think at least it should be a state issue just like a liquor license is.
-
No. That's the existing law in Hawaii.
How is the law going to change in Hawaii?
-
I agree it wouldn't change anything regarding the shootings. Its more of political pandering for his legacy i think.
As far having to have a licence to sell (retail) in every state? I am not sure where i stand on this. i think at least it should be a state issue just like a liquor license is.
That is also a state thing.
For instance, in California, you can sell liquor if you buy a license to sell it. Including bottles.
In Virginia, you can not buy a bottle of liquor at any place but a state store.
Virginia has their State ABC stores where you buy bottled liquor. California allows private people to sell liquor if licensed.
The laws are state laws and are not subject to federal mandates. I can see this being fought and overturned as the states have laws regarding guns already.
-
How is the law going to change in Hawaii?
Now a private party selling a gun can be considered a "dealer" and subject to criminal penalties. From the White House website:
Clarify that it doesn’t matter where you conduct your business—from a store, at gun shows, or over the Internet: If you’re in the business of selling firearms, you must get a license and conduct background checks. Background checks have been shown to keep guns out of the wrong hands, but too many gun sales—particularly online and at gun shows—occur without basic background checks. Today, the Administration took action to ensure that anyone who is “engaged in the business” of selling firearms is licensed and conducts background checks on their customers. Consistent with court rulings on this issue, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has clarified the following principles:
◦ A person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms regardless of the location in which firearm transactions are conducted. For example, a person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms even if the person only conducts firearm transactions at gun shows or through the Internet. Those engaged in the business of dealing in firearms who utilize the Internet or other technologies must obtain a license, just as a dealer whose business is run out of a traditional brick-and-mortar store.
◦ Quantity and frequency of sales are relevant indicators. There is no specific threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensure requirement. But it is important to note that even a few transactions, when combined with other evidence, can be sufficient to establish that a person is “engaged in the business.” For example, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors also were present.
◦ There are criminal penalties for failing to comply with these requirements. A person who willfully engages in the business of dealing in firearms without the required license is subject to criminal prosecution and can be sentenced up to five years in prison and fined up to $250,000. Dealers are also subject to penalties for failing to conduct background checks before completing a sale.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/04/fact-sheet-new-executive-actions-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our
-
Now a private party selling a gun can be considered a "dealer" and subject to criminal penalties. From the White House website:
Clarify that it doesn’t matter where you conduct your business—from a store, at gun shows, or over the Internet: If you’re in the business of selling firearms, you must get a license and conduct background checks. Background checks have been shown to keep guns out of the wrong hands, but too many gun sales—particularly online and at gun shows—occur without basic background checks. Today, the Administration took action to ensure that anyone who is “engaged in the business” of selling firearms is licensed and conducts background checks on their customers. Consistent with court rulings on this issue, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has clarified the following principles:
◦ A person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms regardless of the location in which firearm transactions are conducted. For example, a person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms even if the person only conducts firearm transactions at gun shows or through the Internet. Those engaged in the business of dealing in firearms who utilize the Internet or other technologies must obtain a license, just as a dealer whose business is run out of a traditional brick-and-mortar store.
◦ Quantity and frequency of sales are relevant indicators. There is no specific threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensure requirement. But it is important to note that even a few transactions, when combined with other evidence, can be sufficient to establish that a person is “engaged in the business.” For example, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors also were present.
◦ There are criminal penalties for failing to comply with these requirements. A person who willfully engages in the business of dealing in firearms without the required license is subject to criminal prosecution and can be sentenced up to five years in prison and fined up to $250,000. Dealers are also subject to penalties for failing to conduct background checks before completing a sale.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/04/fact-sheet-new-executive-actions-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our
Yeah that's a little vague. Although the rest of the text strongly implies someone who is in the business of selling firearms or its part of their business.