Biden says EO is on the table...

Or that it's easier and requires less political power. Think about it like this: you're the leader of a group of 10 people. 3 of the others agree with you, 3 disagree, and 3 are on the fence. Which is easier, to try and convince the 3 fencers to see your point of view, or say "I'm the leader, we're going with my choice."

They will do whatever they can get away with under an EO, they've just been waiting for the opportunity, which they now have. The country is on their side now, they think, so why bother with Congress.

So, what sorts of things are allowable under an EO?

Can they, for example, forbid the future sale of military brass, bullets, etc. to civilians? Restrict imports? 'Encourage' the EPA or other bureaucracies to make rules that make it more difficult to obtain or use weapons or ammo?

Wow, another thread on E.O.s. Remember, executive orders are not a way to make law. They are a method of directing the federal law enforcement agencies under the President's command (as head of the Executive branch) as to how he wants them to enforce discretionary facets of existing federal laws.

He can't deliver an E.O. that makes AR-15s illegal, or makes them NFA firearms. He can't hand down an E.O. that makes <10 round mags illegal. He might be able to make a few changes which we wouldn't like, but he has nothing like the power that the Congress wields here.

But that won't stop him from declaring what he wants as the way it shall be and having the backing of the media and many members of Congress and probably SCOTUS as well.

This president makes no distinction between what is allowed by the Constitution and what is not. He considers himself, for all intents and purposes, the King of the United States and therefore above the law. He also believes that Congressional leadership will not stand up to him, and he may be right about that; it hasn't so far.

Good post, Sam.

The gun prohibitionists are saying this stuff to rattle us. They want to create a sense of inevitability about more gun regulations. Congress is where the battle will be fought.

I am not a political expert by no means but for some reason it seems like most EO's always seem to become law and they never go challenged.

Click to expand...

It is probably in Obama's best interests that they remain unchallenged. If he overreaches in an EO and it gets litigated to SCOTUS, the result could be a new limitation on presidential power. It is in his best interests not to allow this to happen.

Then couldn't he re-instate the AWB by EO? that's not enacting a new law per se.

The gun prohibitionists are saying this stuff to rattle us.

Click to expand...

I don't think it is so much to rattle us as to assure the masses that "something will be done" and they are "pursuing every available option."

Telling people that you'll leave no stone unturned tends to placate them.

Sam1911 said:

Wow, another thread on E.O.s. Remember, executive orders are not a way to make law. They are a method of directing the federal law enforcement agencies under the President's command (as head of the Executive branch) as to how he wants them to enforce discretionary facets of existing federal laws.

He can't deliver an E.O. that makes AR-15s illegal, or makes them NFA firearms. He can't hand down an E.O. that makes <10 round mags illegal. He might be able to make a few changes which we wouldn't like, but he has nothing like the power that the Congress wields here.

Click to expand...

Thank you for continuing to supply some much needed fact on the E.O. panic.

I'll add that it's Congress' control of budget allocation that is probably its most powerful tool for pushing back against E.O.s it doesn't like.

He seems to be testing whether the people still have the will to use the 2A for it's original purpose.

"
Wow, another thread on E.O.s. Remember, executive orders are not a way to make law. They are a method of directing the federal law enforcement agencies under the President's command (as head of the Executive branch) as to how he wants them to enforce discretionary facets of existing federal laws.

He can't deliver an E.O. that makes AR-15s illegal, or makes them NFA firearms. He can't hand down an E.O. that makes <10 round mags illegal. He might be able to make a few changes which we wouldn't like, but he has nothing like the power that the Congress wields here."









You tell him that. I never thought that it was legal to take a citizens life without due process but they have done that using drones in Afghanistan. He can issue the order but it will have to be litigated through the Courts to overturn it and that can take years.

Queen_of_Thunder said:

I never thought that it was legal to take a citizens life without due process but they have done that using drones in Afghanistan.

Click to expand...

I believe you're referring to al-Awalki; that was in Yemen. He renounced his citizenship when he went overseas, joined a foreign enemy at war with the U.S., and proceed to wage war against the U.S. As such, the international laws of war applied; fair target, fair kill.

Back on topic: any President can issue an E.O., true, but whether or not it can and will be enforced is another matter altogether.

So we are now taking what Biden says as gospel? That moron can barely tie his own shoelaces.

Obama acting without Congress?

This article suggests that Obama may use Executive Orders as a means of circumventing Congress in an effort to implement more gun control measures. How far reaching can these Executive Orders potentially go?

I suspect an EO could be used to place AR-15's and whatnot on an NFA list, or perhaps to require person-to-person sales to go through an FFL. Beyond that, I'm not sure... and, of course, I'm just speculating about what he might do:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/politics/gun-control-battle/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

I expect that any EO will hit the industry rather than the buyer, as was done with reporting multiple rifle sales by dealers in the border states.

The POTUS absolutely cannot issue any EO that creates new law. An EO can only clarify existing law. This has already been established by the SCOTUS.

The Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution. Presidents since this decision have generally been careful to cite which specific laws they are acting under when issuing new executive orders.

Click to expand...

For all I know, Biden and Zero might dress up in women's panties and dance to the music score of "Rocky", but they cannot force anyone else to do so.

One very revealing thing Biden said in the article was his admission: "There are executives orders, there's executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet."

In other words, they don't know what they're talking about, and he just admitted it.

Thanks, Sam.

Yet another topic that should be a sticky.........

This is expected. Obama and his allies rammed Obamacare through by devious means; he has routinely exceeded his authority and made numerous recess appointments, when the Senate was not in recess in order to sidestep troublesome confirmation hearings; gutted the work requirement from the 1994 welfare reform law, in spite of both constitutional limits on the power of his office, and of clear and unambiguous text in the law specifically prohibiting this very thing; and decided to selectively enforce immigration laws to achieve the effects of the "dream act" when he and his party couldn't get it through congress. Was there ever any doubt he'd exceed his authority in the same way over the issue of gun control?

It's probably going to take a legal challenge to whatever executive orders he issues, and get the supreme court to rule it unconstitutional. And at that, we'd better get that accomplished before Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Roberts, or even Kennedy dies or retires and Obama can appoint a replacement, who will unquestionably be very liberal. If that happens before the issue comes up, we're sunk.

He does like his EO's, pretty sure he has signed more than all other presidents combined.

Until something happens or fails, I'm going to hope it doesn't happen, campaign to make it not happen, but still mentally prepare for if it does happen. From an activism perspective, I'd rather assume a subpar outcome so I know what to work against.

Obama can get Biden to make up these fake committees but if he can't get Congress to pass a law, he is out of luck for the most part.

I can see military brass being destroyed and also SKS ammo banned from import. That is about all Obama can do, just like Slick banned Norinco SKS's from being imported and old man Bush pulled the deal on FN FAL's.

He might be able to make a few changes which we wouldn't like, but he has nothing like the power that the Congress wields here.

Click to expand...

What changes could he do with EO?