New gun laws by Executive Order

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

reddoubleddbra

Sharpshooter
Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
Mulhall
To clear up the muddling of his executive orders, here is what they say according to the White House press secretary. All new firearms must be sent to an ffl and can not be sold to an individual directly. Well guess that that is already to law. Show up at the colt factory and tell them your here to pick up your new 1911 and they will need you to an ffl because they cant sell to you directly
 

KOPBET

Duck of Death
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
12,814
Reaction score
8,532
Location
N36º11.90´ W95º53.29´
To clear up the muddling of his executive orders, here is what they say according to the White House press secretary. All new firearms must be sent to an ffl and can not be sold to an individual directly. Well guess that that is already to law. Show up at the colt factory and tell them your here to pick up your new 1911 and they will need you to an ffl because they cant sell to you directly

Pretty sure you'll have to get that Colt from a dealer, before or after any EOs. Nothing new here.
 

SMS

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
15,322
Reaction score
4,282
Location
OKC area
To clear up the muddling of his executive orders, here is what they say according to the White House press secretary. All new firearms must be sent to an ffl and can not be sold to an individual directly. Well guess that that is already to law. Show up at the colt factory and tell them your here to pick up your new 1911 and they will need you to an ffl because they cant sell to you directly

I hear the gunshow in Ltown prescribing to the new rules....Get yours before the Laws change......whaaa;/

All Internet bullsh&it. There are no "new rules".
 

CHenry

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
21,651
Reaction score
13,385
Location
Under your bed
The way I understand it, its Executive action, not order. Congress still has to approve the measures. Am I wrong??

Congress doesn't have to do anything. The Executive has ordered executive agencies under his control to take certain actions that they have authority to take based on existing legislative guidance.
Looks like I am right and this entire thread is a waste of bandwidth.
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/Gun-Control/a/Executive-Actions-Versus-Executive-Orders.htm

President Barack Obama made news heading into in his second term by issuing nearly two dozen executive actions designed to prevent gun violence in the United States, one of his primary agenda items. Many of the media reports mistakenly described the policy proposals as official executive orders, legally binding directives from the president to federal administrative agencies.


But the 23 executive actions – ranging from universal background checks on anyone trying to buy guns, restoring a ban on military-style assault weapons, and cracking down on straw purchases of guns by people whose intention is to resell them to criminals – carried none of the weight executive orders carry.

So why is that? What are executive actions and how do they compare to executive orders?

Executive Actions Versus Executive Orders

Executive actions are any informal proposals or moves by the president. The term executive action itself is vague and can be used to describe almost anything the president calls on Congress or his administration to do.

But most executive actions carry no legal weight. Those that do actually set policy can be invalidated by the courts or undone by legislation passed by Congress.

The terms executive action and executive order are not interchangeable. Executive orders are legally binding and published in the Federal Register, though they also can be reversed by the courts and Congress.

A good way to think of executive actions is a wish list of policies the president would like to see enacted.

Presidents favor the use of nonbinding executive actions when the issue is controversial or sensitive. For example, Obama carefully weighed his use of executive actions on gun violence and decided against issuing legal mandates via executive orders, which would have gone against the legislative intent of Congress and risked enraging lawmakers of both parties.
 

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 12, 2007
Messages
29,530
Reaction score
15,973
Location
Collinsville
Looks like I am right and this entire thread is a waste of bandwidth.
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/Gun-Control/a/Executive-Actions-Versus-Executive-Orders.htm

President Barack Obama made news heading into in his second term by issuing nearly two dozen executive actions designed to prevent gun violence in the United States, one of his primary agenda items. Many of the media reports mistakenly described the policy proposals as official executive orders, legally binding directives from the president to federal administrative agencies.


But the 23 executive actions – ranging from universal background checks on anyone trying to buy guns, restoring a ban on military-style assault weapons, and cracking down on straw purchases of guns by people whose intention is to resell them to criminals – carried none of the weight executive orders carry.

So why is that? What are executive actions and how do they compare to executive orders?

Executive Actions Versus Executive Orders

Executive actions are any informal proposals or moves by the president. The term executive action itself is vague and can be used to describe almost anything the president calls on Congress or his administration to do.

But most executive actions carry no legal weight. Those that do actually set policy can be invalidated by the courts or undone by legislation passed by Congress.

The terms executive action and executive order are not interchangeable. Executive orders are legally binding and published in the Federal Register, though they also can be reversed by the courts and Congress.

A good way to think of executive actions is a wish list of policies the president would like to see enacted.

Presidents favor the use of nonbinding executive actions when the issue is controversial or sensitive. For example, Obama carefully weighed his use of executive actions on gun violence and decided against issuing legal mandates via executive orders, which would have gone against the legislative intent of Congress and risked enraging lawmakers of both parties.

Long story short, Barry dindu nufin... :)
 

CHenry

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
21,651
Reaction score
13,385
Location
Under your bed
The way I understand it, its Executive action, not order. Congress still has to approve the measures. Am I wrong??

Congress doesn't have to do anything. The Executive has ordered executive agencies under his control to take certain actions that they have authority to take based on existing legislative guidance.

I thought Executive Action was a movie...
Apparently so did SMS and everyone else who believes the news liers..I mean reporters.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom