The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 16, 2013, 09:23 PM   #126
xnaerughiazk
Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2009
Location: Maine
Posts: 47
#4

Expect a redefining of misdemeanors for gun prohibition from Holder and it being retroactive as it was for domestic assault
xnaerughiazk is offline  
Old January 16, 2013, 11:07 PM   #127
coachteet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 2008
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 122
Quote:
Well the process will not be voluntary, it IS mandatory as of the date the signed executive order goes into effect.
Apparently you are confused about which were executive orders and which were recommendations for Congress. The president can recommend ideas, and even write full bills. This means nothing. Congress passes laws, not the president. If anything gets passed (don't be too sure anything at all will get passed), it wont look anything like what Obama or Feinstein have proposed. That's the way bills work.
coachteet is offline  
Old January 16, 2013, 11:38 PM   #128
tirod
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 21, 2009
Posts: 1,208
Does the limit at 7 round capacity thereby eliminate sales of Garands thru the CMP?
tirod is offline  
Old January 16, 2013, 11:47 PM   #129
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 2,032
Quote:
POC (Point of Contact) means a
State or local law enforcement agency
serving as an intermediary between an
FFL and the federal databases checked
by the NICS. A POC will receive NICS
background check requests from FFLs,
check state or local record systems,
perform NICS inquiries, determine
whether matching records provide information
demonstrating that an individual
is disqualified from possessing a
firearm under Federal or State law, and
respond to FFLs with the results of a
NICS background check. A POC will be
an agency with express or implied authority
to perform POC duties pursuant
to State statute, regulation, or executive
order
.
Does this mean the POC can be changed or manipulated by executive order .

Somebody a lot smarter then me needs to reed that stuff . It seems quite complex and does appear to store some if not all of your private info . Im still reading it and have not seen anything stating if the info on the computers is a complete personal history or if it's just the negative things that would proclude you from owning a firearm

EDIT:
Quote:
(c) The following records in the FBIoperated
terminals of the NICS will be
subject to the Brady Act's requirements
for destruction:
(1) All inquiry and response messages
(regardless of media) relating
to a background check that results in
an allowed transfer; and
(2) All information (regardless of
media) contained in the NICS Audit
Log relating to a background check
that results in an allowed transfer.
(d) The following records of State
and local law enforcement units serving
as POCs will be subject to the Brady
Act's requirements for destruction:
(1) All inquiry and response messages
(regardless of media) relating
to the initiation and result of a check
of the NICS that allows a transfer
that are not part of a record system
created and maintained pursuant to
independent State law regarding
firearms transactions; and
(2) All other records relating to the
person or the transfer created as a
result of a NICS check that are not
part of a record system created and
maintained pursuant to independent
State law regarding firearms transactions
I alway wanted to know why I needed to do a background check each time I buy a gun . They know I have 20 guns why do you need to check me when I buy my 21st ? clearly if I wanted to do harm I could just use one of the other 20 I already have . That explains it . They do have to destroy the records and that is why the background check needs to be done each and every time .
__________________
As of this date 8-18-14 at 6:42am I became a proud grandfather I guess I'm officially old

Last edited by Metal god; January 17, 2013 at 02:26 AM.
Metal god is offline  
Old January 16, 2013, 11:51 PM   #130
Mr. James
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 1,521
I'm not too afeared of the legislative proposals, and I'm folding up my tin foil hat on the executive orders. But make no mistake, there's very much mischief tied into those proposals, especially as they pertain to mental health records and the behavior of doctors and counselors.

I'm considered a complete, but harmless, loon by my co-workers (by virtue, if nothing else, of merely being a gun owner). Okay, the big Glasden Flag on the wall might add to it. I'd hate to think that if I was really struggling with evil ideation or a complete inability to function, I would fear seeking out help. Given this environment, I would be. Well, until I reached the poo-flinging stage.
__________________
"...A humble and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Ps. li

"When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law." —Frederic Bastiat
Mr. James is offline  
Old January 16, 2013, 11:58 PM   #131
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by tirod
Does the limit at 7 round capacity thereby eliminate sales of Garands thru the CMP?
This thread deals with National gun control. The thread that deals with the new NY State gun laws is over in the L&CR forum: New York State Gun Control - Passed!
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 02:16 AM   #132
freedash22
Member
 
Join Date: July 2, 2012
Posts: 48
Background Checks are the Best Solution

Personally, I really feel that banning semi-auto military-style rifles, standard and high-capacity magazines will not provide a lasting solution to the problem. Bad guys will simply carry more magazines. This will only serve to destroy the features and capabilities of arms available to lawful people. Background checks, I agree. But I feel that it is the right of law-abiding citizens who pass background checks, psychological tests and maybe even drug tests to own military rifles for home-defense, collecting and recreational purposes. If you are qualified, then there shouldn't be any problem to own a military-style rifle.

Last edited by freedash22; January 17, 2013 at 02:36 AM.
freedash22 is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 02:35 AM   #133
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
But I feel that it is the right of law-abiding citizens who pass background checks, psychological tests and maybe even drug tests to own military rifles for home-defense, collecting and recreational purposes. If you are qualified, why not?
You feel it's a right...that requires not only background checks, but psych evals and drug tests too? Remind me not to ask what your standards are for privileges are if you think all of that is needed for a right...

Drawing up standards for all the additional testing would be extremely complex and rife with possibilities for abuse and failures of the system. Neither a psych eval or drug tests could be completed in a timely manner or reliably on site at LGSs, creating a de facto waiting period and a logistic nightmare. Who's going to pay for all this? How do you define "military rifle"?

For all these reasons and more I reject your notion of "the right of a law-abiding citizen". It amazes me that the idea of submitting to further and further intrusions which are more and more invasive seems to come so naturally to so many as of late.
sigcurious is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 03:08 AM   #134
freedash22
Member
 
Join Date: July 2, 2012
Posts: 48
Gun Control

Understood sigcurious, I feel that a lot of your opinions are realistic and just, especially with the problems excessive health testing will cause but let me explain. First off, I do not believe gun control laws like this will fix anything. Smaller magazine capacities and a ban on military-style (all rifles that are modelled after existing military rifles with semi-auto fire i.e. AR-15 and AK47) rifles? Armor piercing bullets? Nope.

The new laws I feel are a problem because they can be warped by gun-control activists into excessive measures i.e. armor piercing bullets being "all pointed bullets" (rifle cartridges) or all bullets that can pass through a level IIa vest (covers almost all +P pistol rounds) and Military-style rifles being "scary" black rifles. God forbid one day someone goes on a shooting spree with a pistol with a 10-round magazine and then all of a sudden 5-round magazines is the new legal standard.

However, as a responsible owner of firearms myself I am simply expressing my concerns about how we can possibly prevent people with psychological issues from causing damage with legally-purchased firearms. I have great respect for responsible gun owners. Why? Because all the lawful gun owners I know will do everything they can to protect others from harm. But when mentally unstable people get their hands on firearms and do damage it ruins the image of responsible gun owners everywhere. Which is unfair but this is how the media spins it. This is the reality I find to be unfair.

And about your point on who is going to pay for all these tests and background checks, I agree. I think it should be the government. I know with the current deficit that may no longer be an option but I cannot see why it cannot be so. The US government can bailout big banks with billions and even trillions of dollars with taxpayer's money but have no money for armed guards in schools to protect children? Seriously? And then the corrupt bankers get ridiculous bonuses with taxpayer's money? I feel like that is just plain unfair to all taxpayers everywhere. Just my 2 cents.
freedash22 is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 09:01 AM   #135
flyinpolack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 4, 2010
Posts: 152
Here's a question??

With all of this talk about "assault weapons"
Where does that leave the NFA Items, & people that own them?
__________________
Buy American, or don't bitch when you wind up on the bread line.
www.smokerbuilder.com
flyinpolack is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 09:05 AM   #136
jknight8907
Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2006
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyinpolack View Post
With all of this talk about "assault weapons"
Where does that leave the NFA Items, & people that own them?
The media isn't aware that they exist.

Sent via teletype
jknight8907 is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 09:24 AM   #137
Alabama Shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
Quote:
The media isn't aware that they exist.
May as well keep it that way. They would be shocked when they found out my "silencer" does not go "pew, pew"

__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday.
Alabama Shooter is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 10:24 AM   #138
Chaz88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 4, 2010
Posts: 1,007
I think the medical and mental health angel is a slippery slope that ends in a quagmire of quicksand.

At some point, even if just for a few seconds, everyone could be judged as a threat to themselves and others.

It has been mentioned that privacy concerns could keep people from seeking help, I am sure it would.

But has any thought been given to the people that have not committed violent crimes because they felt safe in asking for help, then went on to be productive citizens?

Asking for help with mental or emotional problems is already stigmatized in this country. If privacy in the medical professions is abdicated to the "greater good" I am confident it will increase violence because many people, that would have been successfully treated, will not feel safe in asking for help.
__________________
Seams like once we the people give what, at the time, seams like a reasonable inch and "they" take the unreasonable mile we can only get that mile back one inch at a time.

No spelun and grammar is not my specialty. So please don't hurt my sensitive little feelings by teasing me about it.
Chaz88 is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 10:36 AM   #139
lcpiper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
Quote:
However, as a responsible owner of firearms myself I am simply expressing my concerns about how we can possibly prevent people with psychological issues from causing damage with legally-purchased firearms.
You can't prevent it at all, not with legally purchased weapons much less with illegally acquired weapons. That's part of the problem, some folks think they can prevent and control with laws. All a law does is regulate law abiding citizens and form a justification to punish the law breaker for his unlawful actions. But they can't stop anything.
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223

Last edited by lcpiper; January 17, 2013 at 11:38 AM.
lcpiper is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 10:51 AM   #140
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 979
16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

They may ask. My response will be no. It's none of their damn business if I own firearms.

And a small aside to this. The other day at the podiatrist's office they were asking various medical questions. One of which was. "Do I wear a seat belt while riding in an automobile." My response was. "What relevance does this have on my treatment?"
dajowi is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 11:35 AM   #141
lcpiper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
Let me link you guys to a few "good examples" of an Executive Order so you get a better feel for what they look like in writing. Then you can make up your own mind as to how they compare with what we have been shown.

The first one I chose from memory, the others I chose at random.

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-10290.pdf

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13205

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13218

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13128

http://www.archives.gov/federal-regi...der/11478.html

http://www.archives.gov/federal-regi...der/10399.html

This is the most recent executive order signed by President Obama just last year that is currently on record.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012...2012-30310.pdf


Now I haven't seen any documentation that looks like any of these yet, have you ?
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223

Last edited by lcpiper; January 17, 2013 at 11:55 AM.
lcpiper is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 02:38 PM   #142
Buzzard Bait
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 338
explaint to me I'm slow

OK, explain to me I'm not seeing as much here as I thought I would. I thought he was going to name 23 new laws we would have to swallow. I'm seeing for example "time for congress to renew and reinstate the 10 round limit on mags and reinstate and strengthen the assault weapons ban". Well that's not a out right ban,or a new law, that's asking congress to pass one which I kind of doubt that they can. But asking congress to act is way different than saying this is now the new law. Or am I missing something? I thought he was just going to say this is now the law.That's not what I think I heard. I have to admit my disgust for communism and this man makes it very hard to listen to him or even read what he has done.

Last edited by Buzzard Bait; January 17, 2013 at 02:52 PM.
Buzzard Bait is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 02:47 PM   #143
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Location: Mesquite Jungle Desert, West Texas, USA
Posts: 2,467
I see where doctors who accept Medicare, Medicaid and other government insurance are gonna get strong armed into disqualifying people from firearm ownership. Withholding funding is the Feds greatest weapon. I see highway funds and the like getting withheld from states with gun rights too.
__________________
Navin R. Johnson: "He hates these cans!!!! Stay away from the cans!!!!"
rickyrick is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 03:18 PM   #144
Buzzard Bait
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 338
get real can't any one in politics just say get real

Ok so where do criminals acquire guns? Would not it be realistic to think the marketplace would be something like the trunk of a car in an alley some place. Does any one think the proper forms will get filled out during this transaction? Or that any regulation of any type would have any effect? The complete ban on illicit drugs of all the different types has worked well hasn't it? The real problem might be the complete and total failure of the criminal Justis system to identify and catch criminals, and to rehabilitate any of the few they do catch and the inability to identify the ones who can't be rehabilitated and keep them incarcerated. If anything the prison system has become a college for criminals where they go in armatures and come out highly trained professional criminals almost like getting a degree.
bb
Buzzard Bait is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 03:22 PM   #145
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
This has been said many times, already, but Executive Orders are very limited in what they can do. They can clarify or direct how Executive agencies implement laws passed by Congress. EOs do not create law.

What Obama is doing is promulgating EOs on one hand, while trying to spur Congress into passing tougher laws on the other hand. It is a two-pronged approach.

Note that in the case of EOs that Congress has not liked, Congress has specifically witheld funding (example, CDC firearm research - which is why Obama is trying to cajole Congress into funding that).
MLeake is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 03:27 PM   #146
SPEMack618
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,455
The BATFE director position EO is also due in part to fear on behalf of the Executive Branch that Congress wouldn't confirm a nomination for a BATFE director without Fast and Furious questions.

I have written my Congressional representatives saying that I don't want them to confirm a BATFE director until that lying, thieving, murdering group of thugs answers for Fast and Furious.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Big Sister: "You should be sponsored by Allen"
Me: "If you can't shoot good, at least look good walking to the firing line."
Big Sister: "Can you not afford a Pelican? Then buy an Allen gun bag."
SPEMack618 is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 03:46 PM   #147
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,936
The very sad reality of these EO's Obama is so desperately trying to sell by stooping to the lowest level of using children to pull at the heartstrings of the American people is just disgraceful , have already proven to not curb violence and will not stop the tragedies in the future like Obama is trying to portray they will.
shortwave is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 04:30 PM   #148
lcpiper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
MLeake I understand what you are saying, but try to see what I am saying.

What we have been shown is one thing. But we have been told something else and the real thing looks very different as well.

Look at those links on Executive orders and you will see some things they have in common. The are grounded in an accepted executive power, the President's way of saying, "hey, this is my job to do". The have a date when they will take effect. Depending on purpose they have many common elements. None of these elements are on any of the short summary statements of what these EOs are?

I don't believe the real language has been given to us. I do know that on TV he stated and showed us himself signing the documents.

So what did he sign and why have they not released the true language of the documents?
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223
lcpiper is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 04:50 PM   #149
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
lcpiper, what happens is that the EO, if they are actual directives, go to the indicated agency and to Government Printing Office (GPO). The GPO then prints and releases the EO's to the Federal Register.... That's when we get to see exactly what was written/directed (unless, of course, it relates to National Security).

This is what I'm waiting for, before I make too many asinine comments.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 17, 2013, 04:57 PM   #150
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,130
When they are released, they'll be posted here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-r...ecutive-orders

They're not there yet, and I've been checking umpteen times per day. I'll sound the call when they show up, if nobody beats me to it.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14981 seconds with 9 queries