Regulation through regulatory agencies


PDA






lbmii
January 14, 2013, 02:45 PM
One method they will destroy the 2nd Amendment will be through the use of lawsuits and regulatory agencies. Regulatory agencies can pass regulations that will have little coverage or notice. In time the regulations can, as they are purposefully designed, cause tremendous destruction. Also giving lawyers the ability and angles in which to sue is an excellent way to destroy.

For example with little coverage the the Department of Justice released information requiring the ADA compliance of gun ranges:

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=active&tbo=d&rlz=1C2GGGE_enUS431US478&sclient=psy-ab&q=gun+ranges+must+be+ada+accessible&oq=gun+ranges+must+be+ada+accessible&gs_l=hp.12...23578.30257.3.32454.20.20.0.0.0.0.131.2054.10j10.20.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.t9oDqzmrxjE&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1357700187,d.b2U&fp=87ac1fa8918878c8&biw=1454&bih=726

So if you do not have a wheel chair accessible range you can figure you will be set up and sued out of business. They will financially destroy your gun range.

They will also go after ammunition by classifying it up as being such a hazardous material that shipping cost will greatly go up. Storage of ammunition in stores will become problematic and expensive. Lawyers will be given angles to sue.

Spent ammunition will be classified as hazardous waste and will be heavily regulated so as to greatly increase cost at gun ranges and the cost of ammunition. Hazardous waste remediation and earth incineration of gun range soil will become the norm. Lawyers will be given angles to sue.

Ammunition will be regulated as a consumer product, its power, range, parts content, chemical makeup, labeling content, and emissions will be regulated. Ammunition will be required to go through many third party tests and be certified. Lawyers will be given angles in which to sue.

Firearms will be heavily regulated as a consumer product. Many safety devices will be required. Extensive testing and licensing will be required before a firearm can be placed on the market. Lawyers will be given angles to sue.

The areas where one can discharge firearms will be greatly reduced. States will pass safety laws so as to prevent firearms from being discharged within range of a dwelling or commercial building.

The use of a firearm for protection will be twisted so as to find angles in which lawyers can sue.

The above methods work quite well. Similar methods were used purposefully to help destroy our American Heavy Industry. We did nothing to stop it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Regulation through regulatory agencies" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
beatledog7
January 14, 2013, 02:59 PM
And most of these agencies are not called for in the Constitution. Congressmen set them up and walked away so they wouldn't have to their job. Isn't that convenient?

dogtown tom
January 14, 2013, 03:56 PM
lbmii ....Regulatory agencies can pass regulations that will have little coverage or notice.
Horsehockey.
Regulatory agencies don't "pass" regulations, they adopt them. Congress passes laws, the President sign them. Regulatory agencies then implement the law via regulations.

As part of the regulation process the agency, ATf for example must publish and give public notice of the possible adoption of new regulation.

Secretly adopted regulations are the fodder for nutjob conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones.




For example with little coverage the the Department of Justice released information requiring the ADA compliance of gun ranges:
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=a...w=1454&bih=726
So if you do not have a wheel chair accessible range you can figure you will be set up and sued out of business. They will financially destroy your gun range.
Any range that refuses to be handicapped accessable deserves what they get.
Ranges are no different than the grocery store, WalMart or any other business open to the public. Oddly, requiring other retail businesses to be wheel chair accessable has not put them out of business.




They will also go after ammunition by classifying it up as being such a hazardous material that shipping cost will greatly go up. Storage of ammunition in stores will become problematic and expensive. Lawyers will be given angles to sue.
Paranoia...Do you have any shred of proof that this "is about to happen".
Not likely.


Spent ammunition will be classified as hazardous waste and will be heavily regulated so as to greatly increase cost at gun ranges and the cost of ammunition. Hazardous waste remediation and earth incineration of gun range soil will become the norm. Lawyers will be given angles to sue.
More unfounded paranoia.
And what the heck does the nonsensical "given angles to sue" mean? ANYONE CAN SUE BUB.....not just them thar lawyer fellers.:rolleyes:

Ammunition will be regulated as a consumer product, its power, range, parts content, chemical makeup, labeling content, and emissions will be regulated. Ammunition will be required to go through many third party tests and be certified.....
Already is, was and has been for decades.
Even new paranoid conspiracies are old.


Firearms will be heavily regulated as a consumer product. Many safety devices will be required. Extensive testing and licensing will be required before a firearm can be placed on the market.
What year is this? Already been there done that OP.



The areas where one can discharge firearms will be greatly reduced. States will pass safety laws so as to prevent firearms from being discharged within range of a dwelling or commercial building.
Where the heck have you been?
This is old, old, old news. There will never be enough ranges to satisfy all shooting sportsmen.
Find a better topic for an alarmist post.



The use of a firearm for protection will be twisted so as to find angles in which lawyers can sue.
Sorry, but you are flat out ignorant of the law.
Anyone can sue anyone else anytime and anywhere.

It does not mean they will be successful.

Shadow 7D
January 14, 2013, 04:12 PM
Please remember that everytime you buy gas, you are paying a EPA fine
the one they have levied on refineries for NOT using Cellulosic Ethanol (a technology that is NOT currently in existence)

that's right they are fining people for failing to use something that doesn't exist...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/business/energy-environment/companies-face-fines-for-not-using-unavailable-biofuel.html?_r=0

ON the ADA thing, it's a legal morass, take a disabled person, who wants to rent a gun they can't handle (and in this case has NO actual want...) who acts belligerently etc. and the range refuses service.

they turn around and sue for a ADA/civil rights discrimination
even if the case gets tossed on the first hearing, the range will be out 10+K (and if the case is taken up by the DOJ ADA/CR office, it cost the plaintiff nothing...)

Or EPA/ anti organizers teaming up with environmental groups and suing ranges for lead pollution in ground water...

Don't think it will happen, look at the oil industry.

joeschmoe
January 14, 2013, 04:29 PM
I agree with dogtown tom's points. Yes they can move the grey line to make it difficult, but not tinfoil paranoia about technical tricks to secretly ban things out of existence.
It's tough all over. Every business has tons of hoops to jump through to keep the doors open. Gun ranges and ammo companies are not special.
I dare you to try to make any product and sell it to the public. You will find out what I'm talking about.

Make stuffed animals and try to sell them. See what legal hurdles you will face. Welcome to 2013.

dogtown tom
January 14, 2013, 06:16 PM
Shadow 7D .....ON the ADA thing, it's a legal morass, take a disabled person, who wants to rent a gun they can't handle (and in this case has NO actual want...) who acts belligerently etc. and the range refuses service. they turn around and sue for a ADA/civil rights discrimination
even if the case gets tossed on the first hearing, the range will be out 10+K (and if the case is taken up by the DOJ ADA/CR office, it cost the plaintiff nothing...)

Wow, just wow.:o Your post is embarrassing.
1. The ADA is NOT a "legal morass" its a vital and important law that allows wheelchair users and others with disabilities ACCESS to buildings and facilities that EVERYONE else can use.

2. Your complete and total ignorance of what a disabled person can or cannot handle (ie "a gun they can't handle") is appalling. I know several active shooters, both kids and adults who are damn fine shooters. They can handle any handgun, rifle or shotgun you give them. Two won their wheelchair via service in the US military......you want to be the one to tell them they can't shoot? It may surprise you that a guy in a wheelchair can outshoot a lot of guys who still have use of their legs.

3. Your example of a disabled person who becomes belligerent and subsequently sues.......IS FREAKING LAUGHABLE. It wouldn't matter if the person was disabled, black, gay, an immigrant, a senior citizen, woman or 25 year old white male with long hair.....the law is the law.

NOTHING, repeat NOTHING in the ADA requires you to serve a belligerent customer or a jerk. A person with a disability has to jump through quite a few steps before DOJ would ever get involved. You are wholly and completely in error if you think the simple act of refusing service to a jerk (whether disabled or not) puts you in violation of the ADA.

joeschmoe
January 14, 2013, 06:20 PM
ADA has been law since 1990. Get over it. Wheelchair access and brail signs are just not a big deal on businesses that serves the public.

Cosmoline
January 14, 2013, 06:27 PM
So if you do not have a wheel chair accessible range you can figure you will be set up and sued out of business.

Or you can just build a ramp with volunteer labor. Anyway every public range I know of IS wheelchair accessible, and should be. Considering the number of disabled shooters who got that way serving the country, opposition to the ADA at gun ranges is not a good idea. Some states like California have their own versions of the law that are much more intrusive and suit-based, but the federal one has helped a lot of people.

Shadow 7D
January 14, 2013, 06:47 PM
Never said it isn't, but Dogtown, it's not embarrassing
it's the truth, My wife was trained by one of the guys in a wheelchair you see padlocked to buses or lamp poles on a street corner in 'History of ADA' posters, I know what the world looked like before ADA and universal design, and fully understand what a 2 inch lip mean, MUCH better than you. He said lawsuits took too long (not that they weren't a good hammer) just that you usually could point out that the suit would cost more than the retrofit.

It has helped MANY
unfortunately, there are ways for it to be twisted if it is seen as a useful tool for those who have the time (many disabled) or money (special interest)

Where did I ever say that individuals with disabilities can't be good shooters, I offered ONE example of how the laws could be used to mess with a otherwise legal business by someone with an agenda. Many ranges won't rent except to members or without referrals (too many suicides)

you want to attack me, or say, question my credential, feel free to PM me
Or, go look at environmental law.

abajaj11
January 14, 2013, 06:54 PM
regulatory agencies are branches of the Executive and derive their power from implementing laws already passed.
Any NEW gun control laws passed by Congress while the Executive is still under this POTUS will be implemented to the n'th degree in taking away freedoms. For old laws existing before he took office, he has a precedent that he cannot stray too far from.
Bottom line: No more gun control laws. We already have 20000+ of them.
:)

gbran
January 14, 2013, 07:54 PM
Ah, yes, the 4 branches of gov't;

Executive
Legislative
Judicial
Regulatory

alsaqr
January 14, 2013, 08:00 PM
And most of these agencies are not called for in the Constitution. Congressmen set them up and walked away so they wouldn't have to their job. Isn't that convenient?


Congrats, methinks you have got it.

Frank Ettin
January 14, 2013, 08:09 PM
...Regulatory agencies can pass regulations that will have little coverage or notice...Balderdash.

A regulatory may adopt regulations only if and to the extent authorized by a statute enacted by Congress and signed by the President. Before adopting regulations, an agency must give public notice of proposed rule making and allow a period for public comment prior to finally adopting the regulations.

Any regulations adopted must be within the scope permitted by the underlying statute upon which they are based.

Wolfman131
January 14, 2013, 09:52 PM
Quote:
Firearms will be heavily regulated as a consumer product. Many safety devices will be required. Extensive testing and licensing will be required before a firearm can be placed on the market.

Original quote[/B]dogtown tom: What year is this? Already been there done that OP.

One common refrain echoed by anti-gun advocates is that the firearms industry is unregulated. To most people, this sounds alarming. How can the gun industry have no oversight or government regulation? The truth is the gun industry is regulated. It is not, however, regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) or the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

[B]In 1976, the Consumer Product Safety Act was amended. In part, the amendment reads, "The Consumer Product Safety Commission shall make no ruling or order that restricts the manufacture or sale of firearms, firearms ammunition, or components of firearms ammunition including black powder or gunpowder for firearms."

This exemption for firearms and ammunition was necessary because anti-gun advocates, namely Handgun Control, Inc., (now the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence) petitioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission in June 1974, to adopt "a rule banning the sale of bullets for handguns."

Since it was not the intent of the Consumer Product Safety Act to empower the Consumer Product Safety Commission with the authority to ban ammunition, the petition was denied. The commission, in response to the petition, said, "The commission does not believe that Congress, in establishing the commission and in transferring to it the authority to administer the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, intended to confer upon the commission the authority to ban handgun bullets."


"Ahh" as you can see, no, firearms have not been regulated as you have fallaciously implied. ;)

dogtown tom
January 14, 2013, 10:01 PM
Wolfman131 "Ahh" as you can see, no, firearms have not been regulated as you have fallaciously implied.
Seriously.:rolleyes:
Try reading the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Then read up on what ATF does as far as testing in the Technical Branch.

lbmii
January 14, 2013, 10:39 PM
It is true that these regulatory agencies give public notice. However, coverage by the press is minimal. Furthermore the purpose of the future regulations will be to weaken the 2nd Amendment.

Dog Town Tom, you know not what you write. Regulatory agencies take generalized and broadly worded policy mandates and then fill in the details with what is known as rule-making. I am in a line of work where I deal with this stuff. It is in the details my friend that they plan to hang you and I.

Trust me Dog Town Tom they are going to use regulations for the purpose of attacking the 2nd Amendment. It will be worded for things like safety, handicap access, environmental, health, and whatever else they can dream up. But the alliterative purpose will be anti-firearm.

Wolfman131
January 14, 2013, 11:10 PM
Seriously.:rolleyes:
Try reading the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Then read up on what ATF does as far as testing in the Technical Branch.
One common refrain echoed by anti-gun advocates is that the firearms industry is unregulated. To most people, this sounds alarming. How can the gun industry have no oversight or government regulation? The truth is the gun industry is regulated. It is not, however, regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) or the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

In 1976, the Consumer Product Safety Act was amended. In part, the amendment reads, "The Consumer Product Safety Commission shall make no ruling or order that restricts the manufacture or sale of firearms, firearms ammunition, or components of firearms ammunition including black powder or gunpowder for firearms."

This exemption for firearms and ammunition was necessary because anti-gun advocates, namely Handgun Control, Inc., (now the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence) petitioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission in June 1974, to adopt "a rule banning the sale of bullets for handguns."

Since it was not the intent of the Consumer Product Safety Act to empower the Consumer Product Safety Commission with the authority to ban ammunition, the petition was denied. The commission, in response to the petition, said, "The commission does not believe that Congress, in establishing the commission and in transferring to it the authority to administer the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, intended to confer upon the commission the authority to ban handgun bullets."


From the NSSF website. Tabacco is now regulated, firearms are now the sole remaining "unregulated consumer product" in the USA!

Why the crappy attitude?

Alaska444
January 14, 2013, 11:16 PM
From the NSSF website. Tabacco is now regulated, firearms are now the sole remaining "unregulated consumer product" in the USA!

Why the crappy attitude?
Ask the coal miners and coal generated electric power plants what the power of regulation is on their lives?

http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/20459/coal-mine-layoffs-shutdowns-result-from-government-regulation

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/07/epa-regulations-force-ga-power-company-to-shut-down-coal-fired-generators/

316SS
January 14, 2013, 11:25 PM
Take the time to read the text of S.3361, the "Write the Laws Act" introduced by KY Senator Rand Paul. He is of the opinion that Congress has delegated, in violation of the Constitution, the power vested in the Legislative branch to administrative agencies not provided for in the Constitution, which blur the lines of the Legislative and Executive branches.

An excerpt:

Sec. 151. Nondelegation of legislative power

`(a) Definition- In this section, the term `delegation of legislative powers'--

`(1) includes--

`(A) the creation or clarification of any criminal or civil offense; and

`(B) the creation or clarification of any non-criminal regulation, prohibition or limitation applicable to the public, or some subset thereof, that is not fully and completely defined in an Act of Congress, except that the Executive Branch of government may be delegated authority to make factual findings that will determine the date upon which such an Act is implemented, suspended, or revived;

My emphasis.

Wolfman131
January 14, 2013, 11:28 PM
Ask the coal miners and coal generated electric power plants what the power of regulation is on their lives?

http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/20459/coal-mine-layoffs-shutdowns-result-from-government-regulation

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/07/epa-regulations-force-ga-power-company-to-shut-down-coal-fired-generators/
I'm sorry, but I have not the slightest notion of what it is that you're getting at!

dogtown tom
January 14, 2013, 11:30 PM
Wolfman131 Quote:
One common refrain echoed by anti-gun advocates is that the firearms industry is unregulated. To most people, this sounds alarming. How can the gun industry have no oversight or government regulation? The truth is the gun industry is regulated. It is not, however, regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) or the Consumer Product Safety Commission.....From the NSSF website. Tabacco is now regulated, firearms are now the sole remaining "unregulated consumer product" in the USA!

Why the crappy attitude?
You believe that firearms are unregulated?
You may be the only member of any gun forum that believes that.
Oh.....please explain why you copied and pasted a quote that disagrees with your premise.:scrutiny:

Alaska444
January 14, 2013, 11:32 PM
Take the time to read the text of S.3361, the "Write the Laws Act" introduced by KY Senator Rand Paul. He is of the opinion that Congress has delegated, in violation of the Constitution, the power vested in the Legislative branch to administrative agencies not provided for in the Constitution, which blur the lines of the Legislative and Executive branches.

An excerpt:



My emphasis.
That would be a good thing to accomplish IF Rand Paul can get his bill through congress. However, there is NO CHANCE of it even coming to the floor with the current dem leadership. It is dead in the water BEFORE it comes to the forefront. In fact, it is already dead and it was in the last session as well.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3361

Frank Ettin
January 14, 2013, 11:51 PM
It is true that these regulatory agencies give public notice. However, coverage by the press is minimal....Press coverage of most legislation is minimal as well. What's important is that the advocacy groups stay on top of this stuff and organize responses.

...Dog Town Tom, you know not what you write. Regulatory agencies take generalized and broadly worded policy mandates and then fill in the details with what is known as rule-making. I am in a line of work where I deal with this stuff...Actually, Tom is pretty much spot on. In my thirty plus years of practicing law, I dealt with this sort of stuff a lot, including negotiating on behalf of clients with agencies on changes to proposed regulations. In fact, I wrote a lot of regulation text for clients that was ultimately adopted by agencies.

Alaska444
January 14, 2013, 11:57 PM
I'm sorry, but I have not the slightest notion of what it is that you're getting at!
Obama will regulate what he wishes to regulate, even with his mandatory comment requirements. I have participated in a direct manner for the last 4 years in dialysis regulatory changes and have made additions to public comments more than once. Sadly, the CMS dialysis regulations appear to get more and more convoluted every year and less and less patient oriented.

I am not putting a whole lot of hope in this process for guns after seeing how much they have screwed up dialysis regulations that give America the worst outcomes in the developed world.

If you don't believe that firearms are already regulated, wait until Obama gets a chance to be creative with existing gun regulations. Just as he has shut down the coal industry pretty much single handedly, or is moving in that direction, I have no optimistic outlook on what he can or cannot do with gun regulations and current law.

Wolfman131
January 15, 2013, 12:43 AM
You believe that firearms are unregulated?
You may be the only member of any gun forum that believes that.
Oh.....please explain why you copied and pasted a quote that disagrees with your premise.:scrutiny:
It is not, however, regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Act

You're not even on the same page, try calming yourself down, it will enhance your interpersonal communication skills substantially.

dogtown tom
January 15, 2013, 10:51 AM
Wolfman131 Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom
You believe that firearms are unregulated?
You may be the only member of any gun forum that believes that.
Oh.....please explain why you copied and pasted a quote that disagrees with your premise.

Quote:
It is not, however, regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Act

You're not even on the same page, try calming yourself down, it will enhance your interpersonal communication skills substantially.
Don't worry about my calming down........answer the question.
You posted a quote that disagrees with your own premise.....why?:confused:

Frank Ettin
January 15, 2013, 11:17 AM
Too much heat and not enough light.

If you enjoyed reading about "Regulation through regulatory agencies" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!