Firearms Talk banner

41 - 60 of 77 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,792 Posts
re

Where in the hell did that come from?
You tell me what "domestic violence against their partners" means.

"Biden will direct the administration to begin the process of requiring buyers of so-called ghost guns — homemade or makeshift firearms that lack serial numbers — to undergo background checks, according to three people who have spoken to the White House about the plans. He is expected to be joined at the event by Attorney General Merrick Garland," POLITICO reported Wednesday. "Other executive actions remain unclear. But stakeholders have speculated that the president could announce regulations on concealed assault-style firearms; prohibitions on firearm purchases for those convicted of domestic violence against their partners; and federal guidance on home storage safety measures."
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,792 Posts
More links from other websites for your reading pleasure:

Biden Expected to Announce Gun Control Actions | Politics | US News

"sources speculate Biden could announce regulations on concealed assault weapons, prohibitions on firearm purchases for people convicted of domestic violence crimes"

White House announcing gun violence executive actions (ajc.com)

President Joe Biden is expected to announce a series of executive orders on Thursday that, sources say, are designed to address gun violence in the U.S.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,542 Posts
Background checks violate the express terms of the 2A, "...shall not be infringed."

Advancing the argument, I think that background checks run afoul a combination of the spirit and intent of the 4A, subjecting one to having unreasonable searches of his person, and the 5A of double jeopardy and of proving ones' innocence to exercise a right.

Some are expressly squarely on point, and other clauses very very close. And our forefathers couldn't have conceived of the mega-data collection, storing, and spying that has evolved either, nor having to prove innocence to use a right. The massive data bases and the litany of crimes that have been created against the people are simply wrong and big violations of our rights.

In the 4A, the operate term is not papers/effects so much as it is the UNREASONABLE searches. It's unreasonable for the government to snoop, create phonebooks worth of laws, warehouses of data on people, and demand they submit to a UNREASONABLE search of said data so they could simply EXERCISE a RIGHT. It's not reasonable, even if the government controls the information to be searched.

The second half of the 5A is violated with the 4473. "Have you ever... ?" is a question that some might answer in a way that will prohibit possession. It's a direct violation of the 5A. To submit to the 4473 check, one must be a witness against himself and complete paperwork in which he might either have to lie or bear witness against himself. One is also subjected to more punishments for the same offense each time one is denied the right for a past crime for which the sentence is completed (I would argue that being denied a firearm does put one is jeopardy of life since it's a prime self defense arm). And there's really no due process considerations, especially when non-violent crimes or distant crimes or petty issues are a denial factor.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Horse s**t. I think the lead council needs to go back to law school.

Laws or rules make by the legislature or the executive are legal until such a time as the Supreme Court rules otherwise. That is why there are a lot of people doing time at the greybar over gun law violations. You would think that those poor trodden upon souls, viewing the world through iron bars, would hire our lead council to bring justice to the world. After all, it is so simple you would have thought it would have already been done...... The founding fathers did not put the administration of the Constitution into the hands of the gun forum legal scholars.

Since you bring up the suggestion that the founding fathers could not have anticipated the conditions of the 21st century, (and I agree with that) then perhaps the entire Bill of Rights or, in fact, the entire Constitution needs a modern facelift. Who is to say that we should have to live with laws that are 250 years old?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maineiak

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
This is a story about mights, which sounds similar to mites, which are the little bugs that live on birds butts and are relatively insignificant to most of the world.

So far, I have seen no Biden's mights that I find overly oppressive anyway. The big "gun grab" of right-wine lore, and NRA fable, is not yet under way. But, keep sending those checks, just in case.
The fly in that porridge is , chain you dont consider any gun control that is passed as unconsititutional or oppressive . At least going by your posts .

No slow joe cant do hardly anything directly concerning guns by EO.

Thats all bluster cuz the gun grabbing traitors that helped him steal the election are all over him to back up all the wind he blew about guns .

And the house cant get any past the senate.

I wouldnt send money to the NRA ever.
GOA NAGR sure. The faster the NRA dies the better off we will be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
Horse s**t. I think the lead council needs to go back to law school.

Laws or rules make by the legislature or the executive are legal until such a time as the Supreme Court rules otherwise. That is why there are a lot of people doing time at the greybar over gun law violations. You would think that those poor trodden upon souls, viewing the world through iron bars, would hire our lead council to bring justice to the world. After all, it is so simple you would have thought it would have already been done...... The founding fathers did not put the administration of the Constitution into the hands of the gun forum legal scholars.

Since you bring up the suggestion that the founding fathers could not have anticipated the conditions of the 21st century, (and I agree with that) then perhaps the entire Bill of Rights or, in fact, the entire Constitution needs a modern facelift. Who is to say that we should have to live with laws that are 250 years old?
Anybody that doesnt want a new revolutionary war would be my guess.

The founders put the constitution under nobodys administration. It is the supreme law of the land as written until such time as it is amended as precribed by the founders.
Not changed at the whim of politicians, lawyers, judges , and tottering old dementia patients.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Joe is clueless about anything going on including Major having a biting problem. It's his handlers telling him where to sign after squinting his eyes to read the script on the teleprompter after just waking up from another nap. Some people might regret trying to "get the job done".

I just wish there was competence to get anything good done right now besides spending money like a drunken demorat with a stolen credit card.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
Horse s**t. I think the lead council needs to go back to law school.

Laws or rules make by the legislature or the executive are legal until such a time as the Supreme Court rules otherwise. That is why there are a lot of people doing time at the greybar over gun law violations. You would think that those poor trodden upon souls, viewing the world through iron bars, would hire our lead council to bring justice to the world. After all, it is so simple you would have thought it would have already been done...... The founding fathers did not put the administration of the Constitution into the hands of the gun forum legal scholars.

Since you bring up the suggestion that the founding fathers could not have anticipated the conditions of the 21st century, (and I agree with that) then perhaps the entire Bill of Rights or, in fact, the entire Constitution needs a modern facelift. Who is to say that we should have to live with laws that are 250 years old?
False, and I don't care for the personal attacks.

News flash. Many innocent men are in jail due to inept/corrupt legislatures, inept/corrupt police, and/or inept/corrupt judges. Many many thousands have been exonerated after years or decades of injustice. Here's a list of over 2700 in the last few decades compiled by the U. of Michigan law school. The National Registry of Exonerations - Exoneration Registry

Legislatures can and often do pass unConstitutional laws, law enforcement selectively enforces, and even Judges twist the meaning to suit their views (aka "Legislating from the Bench").

We can look at many cases, but let's just look at US v. Miller wherein the Court ruled that short shotguns served no military purpose, and therefore fell outside of the 2A protections. Say what? Short shotguns are also known as the blunderbus, of the most notoriously useful personal arm for all manner of land and naval warfare between fighting Soldiers or Sailors. Blunderbuss



The fact is, the BoR is a near perfect document and the folly of man since has often twisted obvious meanings to suit their agendas or flawed intellect.

There are at least two major flaws in the Miller Court's ill-logic and lack of historical context.
1. The 2A does not pin lawfulness on how useful or useless a firearm is. There is no "military only" clause. And in fact, any and all manner of guns including a single shot musket or a fully auto rifle, or shotguns, handguns, revolvers, etc. have all served in some military role at some point.
2. If it is implied that it's "military only" (which it is not) then the blunderbus would clearly be included in the umbrella of 2A protections.

That's just two of the glaring problems. Later legislatures and courts would twist and strain and come up with all manner of nonsense including "sporting purpose" changes to guns. Show me "sporting purpose" in the 2A...

As to our forefathers and what they might have envisioned, you've twisted and missed the mark and point. They purposely left the writings OPEN to broad favorable interpretations and not linked to the tech of the era which showed high intellect. They knew tech would advance. The writings are as relevant today as they were when the ink was still wet. Anyone with a brain knows "persons, houses, papers, and effects" is broad enough in concept to include wireless smartphones and emails. Speaking freely includes typing on a keyboard sending data thru satellites to distant recipients. And keeping and bearing firearms without restriction is for free men so they may defend their state and anything therein.

There's no other reasonable interpretations. Yet our government continues to usurp its authority and grab power from the people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,161 Posts
In less than 3 months Biden has opened the border, increased racial tensions and is now going after law abiding citizens.
Biden's handlers are pushing their socialist agenda.
Small minded politicians with a God complex are running the country.
God help us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
Horse s**t. I think the lead council needs to go back to law school.

Laws or rules make by the legislature or the executive are legal until such a time as the Supreme Court rules otherwise. That is why there are a lot of people doing time at the greybar over gun law violations. You would think that those poor trodden upon souls, viewing the world through iron bars, would hire our lead council to bring justice to the world. After all, it is so simple you would have thought it would have already been done...... The founding fathers did not put the administration of the Constitution into the hands of the gun forum legal scholars.

Since you bring up the suggestion that the founding fathers could not have anticipated the conditions of the 21st century, (and I agree with that) then perhaps the entire Bill of Rights or, in fact, the entire Constitution needs a modern facelift. Who is to say that we should have to live with laws that are 250 years old?
So, if Biden signs an executive order requiring the arrest of every member of a gun forum, then that's a legal order? If Trump had ordered the disbandment of Congress, that would have been a legal order?

That the government has the guns to enforce whatever they choose does not mean that whatever they choose is legal. You're suggesting that there is no such thing as tyranny because anything the government does is legal.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,792 Posts

Here are the six actions, from the White House "fact sheet."

The Justice Department, within 30 days, will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of “ghost guns.”
The Justice Department, within 60 days, will issue a proposed rule to make clear when a device marketed as a stabilizing brace effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act.
The Justice Department, within 60 days, will publish model “red flag” legislation for states.
The Administration is investing in evidence-based community violence interventions.
The Justice Department will issue an annual report on firearms trafficking.
The President will nominate David Chipman to serve as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.
 

·
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
·
2,477 Posts
"Ghost gun" is a pretty broad term. I think their ultimate aim is to include any component for an AR build that doesn't have a serial number on it that matches the receiver a "ghost gun." Just my opinion.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,533 Posts
Well its happening here as we speak and unless u like being a subject to a socialist regime in a nation full of people who dont know one day to the next if they are male or female , you better have a problem with that.

Of course what happens here doesnt affect you . Unless of course your country is attacked by a major power and needs bailing out.
We wont be capable of doing that much longer either if Plugs and pals arent thwarted.
Helping out works both ways like in Afghanistan, the UK could have stayed out of it, but decided to help their allies. I am sure the vast majority of Americans are well aware if they are male or female, who is in power will not change that, and nothing to do with teaching religion in schools.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
So far all of this but his appointee are " proposed" and models.

States that will tolerate red flag have them already. The others will simply go on as usual.
How plugs intends to regulate " ghost guns " is a mystery. First hell have to get the ATF to change their definition of a 80% lower.
Selling a homemade gun with no serial no is already illegal.
And there is no way to enforce the bc if he gets it. If a person wanting one has half a brain there is no way to prove when the person got the lower or where.
Its all feel good liberal BS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
So far all of this but his appointee are " proposed" and models.

States that will tolerate red flag have them already. The others will simply go on as usual.
How plugs intends to regulate " ghost guns " is a mystery. First hell have to get the ATF to change their definition of a 80% lower.
Selling a homemade gun with no serial no is already illegal.
And there is no way to enforce the bc if he gets it. If a person wanting one has half a brain there is no way to prove when the person got the lower or where.
Its all feel good liberal BS.
While true, that it's ALL feel good liberal BS, it's more red tape for everyone to figure out, work around, etc. More muddy gun laws atop prior muddy gun laws. How many hours of your life would you figure you have spent trying to navigate gun laws to be in compliance? How much money poured into a pit to navigate to be in compliance? Me, probably hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars which could have been more productively used elsewhere, like car maintenance, growing a garden, playing with my dog, doing enjoyable productive hobbies, donating time/money to charity, etc.

Nope. Stupid nonsensical made-up laws to confuse, deter, and harass ... by the thousands. Bury gun owners in thousands of confusing, needless, contradictory, illogical laws - most of which expressly violate the 2A by the way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
Helping out works both ways like in Afghanistan, the UK could have stayed out of it, but decided to help their allies. I am sure the vast majority of Americans are well aware if they are male or female, who is in power will not change that, and nothing to do with teaching religion in schools.
Absolutely the UK could have stayed out of it.
And had they done so do you really believe the U.S. could not have done the exact same thing alone?
I get Presidents likeing to build " coalitions" because its politically a good look

But the U.S. hardly needs any help anywhere in the world militarily to do what it needs to do.
 
41 - 60 of 77 Posts
Top