PRESIDENT TO TAKE "EXECUTIVE ACTION" ON GUN CONTROL PER BIDEN
- Thread starter Moonman
- Start date
Erich
Member
Anyone interested in looking at a case in which an executive order was overturned might check out Chamber of Commerce of US v. Reich, 74 F.3d 1322 (D.C. Cir. 1996). Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) is the other big one. Both should be pretty easy to find online.
StatesRightist
Member
Anyone interested in looking at a case in which an executive order was overturned might check out Chamber of Commerce of US v. Reich, 74 F.3d 1322 (D.C. Cir. 1996). Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) is the other big one. Both should be pretty easy to find online.
Excellent, thank you.
I think I was on the same boat you were on did this happen to be over a very deep section of water
Precisely. Congress and the State governments.
They are few and rare the cases of executive orders being overturned, most by another President.
I'm anxious to see what the NRA is going to have to say.
I don't understand why we have not heard anything yet.
They must be forming a plan I would think.
I would think that whatever becomes if this will only be a start, as I would also not expect it to stop anything awful from happening again....
so then we go to stricter "controls"
there has to be a better way.
I don't understand why we have not heard anything yet.
They must be forming a plan I would think.
I would think that whatever becomes if this will only be a start, as I would also not expect it to stop anything awful from happening again....
so then we go to stricter "controls"
there has to be a better way.
Joewisc
US Veteran
jtpur
Member
We are embroiled in an ideological battle. We can have rights and guard those rights or we can allow the government, the President by executive order to whIttle those rights until we have no rights. There really can be no compromise. We either convince the public we are correct or they convince the public they are correct.I frankly do not care who thinks I am unreasonable, because, all anti gun people think That already.
There will come a time where we stand for our rights or we loose them.
I own guns mostly for self defense. Secondly to go hunting. If I have to choose a reason to own a gun I will take number one. I will defend myself against any one who try's to take my life, or my property and I will defend myself with the amount of force necessary to prevent such loss. I have no idea what the rest of you will do.
I do not know what an executive order can contain. My guess is it can be challenged in court, and depending on the Robed genius on the bench we can have a good outcome or a bad outcome. Then we must ask ourselves what should I do next. The menu is getting smaller from which to choose.
What,s for dinner tonight?
There will come a time where we stand for our rights or we loose them.
I own guns mostly for self defense. Secondly to go hunting. If I have to choose a reason to own a gun I will take number one. I will defend myself against any one who try's to take my life, or my property and I will defend myself with the amount of force necessary to prevent such loss. I have no idea what the rest of you will do.
I do not know what an executive order can contain. My guess is it can be challenged in court, and depending on the Robed genius on the bench we can have a good outcome or a bad outcome. Then we must ask ourselves what should I do next. The menu is getting smaller from which to choose.
What,s for dinner tonight?
Do you ( or anyone) have a reasonable opinion on why they have been quiet so far? By reasonable I mean NO conspiracy theories please!
I am only trying to understand how this may work.
And thank you Joe for your response above.
Last edited:
There is no real magic in what a President can do via Executive order. More important is what he CAN'T DO:
1. He cannot legislate or create new laws, since this is clearly a power reserved for the legislative branch;
2. He cannot exercise any authority under an existing beyond the borders of that law;
3. He cannot take any action that violates the Constitution, any law or treaty.
The Executive branch is tasked with enforcing laws, not creating them.
While I understand the admoition to present a reasonable front, I do not believe it is unreasonable to DEMAND that the Constitution be honored. We have been passive far too long, and have watched as our rights have been slowly eroded since the NFA in 1934.
1. He cannot legislate or create new laws, since this is clearly a power reserved for the legislative branch;
2. He cannot exercise any authority under an existing beyond the borders of that law;
3. He cannot take any action that violates the Constitution, any law or treaty.
The Executive branch is tasked with enforcing laws, not creating them.
While I understand the admoition to present a reasonable front, I do not believe it is unreasonable to DEMAND that the Constitution be honored. We have been passive far too long, and have watched as our rights have been slowly eroded since the NFA in 1934.
StatesRightist
Member
It's like negotiating a business deal or for a car, until you hear the offer on the table, attempting to negotiate the deal is bidding against yourself. It's guaranteed to cost you more in the end. You keep quiet until the other guy gives you a position or cost.
That would be my take anyway.
Window dressing imho, Biden and the NRA,the die has been cast.
Lettin' the Libs lay their cards and Lies/Have Truths/Convoluted Assumptions on the table on film and recorded for history.
You can't UN-RING the BELL.
Ever hear defense attorneys say "KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT".
Biden's a real GEM, with what just rolls off his lips at times, you could probably string some
of his stuff together from the last 20 years, and ON TAPE show a REAL LOON in appearance.
You can't UN-RING the BELL.
Ever hear defense attorneys say "KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT".
Biden's a real GEM, with what just rolls off his lips at times, you could probably string some
of his stuff together from the last 20 years, and ON TAPE show a REAL LOON in appearance.
The difference between this junta and the former one in Myanmar, is the uniforms. Joe
Joewisc
US Veteran
Beemer-mark
Member
For all you lawyers out there I'll throw two bad examples -
1) Executive Order, power undefined. Congress (majority of democrats) vote no on the "Dream Act" that basically gives citizenship to illegal aliens under the age of 30. Obama issues executive order that basically overides the will of Congress. There are plenty of examples of Obama pushing the limit of Executive Orders with zero challenges.
2) Regulatory Law is far different than Constitution Law. Basically in Regulatory Law the regulatory body (say EPA or BATF) gets to determine what Congress meant when they gave the power of enforcement to the Regulatory Body. So maybe Congress meant all semi-automatic weapon are Class III and need to be registered.
Both of the above actions require a lawsuit to overturn. A lawsuit takes years with no certain outcome. Yes the Supreme Court said the 2nd amendment means what it says - it also stated the government can place restrictions on that right.
IMHO we are no longer a Republic, we are a Democracy mostly in name. I would not count too much on letters to your Congressperson pleading not to remove your rights.
Better to write a letter and ask if he thinks 100 million Citizens will comply. Do not advocate force, just ask if people don't comply how are they going to round us all up. And for us that didn't register with the local government to get a CCW license, how do they even know who we are?
1) Executive Order, power undefined. Congress (majority of democrats) vote no on the "Dream Act" that basically gives citizenship to illegal aliens under the age of 30. Obama issues executive order that basically overides the will of Congress. There are plenty of examples of Obama pushing the limit of Executive Orders with zero challenges.
2) Regulatory Law is far different than Constitution Law. Basically in Regulatory Law the regulatory body (say EPA or BATF) gets to determine what Congress meant when they gave the power of enforcement to the Regulatory Body. So maybe Congress meant all semi-automatic weapon are Class III and need to be registered.
Both of the above actions require a lawsuit to overturn. A lawsuit takes years with no certain outcome. Yes the Supreme Court said the 2nd amendment means what it says - it also stated the government can place restrictions on that right.
IMHO we are no longer a Republic, we are a Democracy mostly in name. I would not count too much on letters to your Congressperson pleading not to remove your rights.
Better to write a letter and ask if he thinks 100 million Citizens will comply. Do not advocate force, just ask if people don't comply how are they going to round us all up. And for us that didn't register with the local government to get a CCW license, how do they even know who we are?
part-time
Member
It does absolutely no good for conservatives to keep saying this is unconstitutional. Some action must be taken.
The radicals in charge will keep beating the drum until they are sure no one will fight back. Then...guns are banned. This is community organizing at its finest.
The radicals in charge will keep beating the drum until they are sure no one will fight back. Then...guns are banned. This is community organizing at its finest.
Florida_Lawdog
Member
I have 4 hand guns. If they wanted me to register them I would Send the paperwork and tomorrow. The current system of registration at the time of purchase from legitimate gun dealers just doesn't work. The reason is, handguns can be transferred 15 times between private citizens with no paperwork at all. Here in the state of Florida you can do face-to-face hand gun sales with anyone who is a resident of the state.
Maybe they could set up some kind of a title program for handguns similar to that used in motor vehicles.
One problem that the Second Amendment enthusiasts have is the spokesman that are out there representing them. In the last couple of weeks I've heard some real crazies. The fact is that both sides have a personal agenda. That's why they can't arrive at a common sense solution.
That's just my opinion I could be wrong. Best to everyone on the forum.
Maybe they could set up some kind of a title program for handguns similar to that used in motor vehicles.
One problem that the Second Amendment enthusiasts have is the spokesman that are out there representing them. In the last couple of weeks I've heard some real crazies. The fact is that both sides have a personal agenda. That's why they can't arrive at a common sense solution.
That's just my opinion I could be wrong. Best to everyone on the forum.
