Ammo For Sale

« « Deep fried gun | Home | Fire Bob Costas » »

President to bypass congress on semi-autos

Classify them as NFA by executive order. Color me skeptical.

29 Responses to “President to bypass congress on semi-autos”

  1. Pete Says:

    The lawsuits will be epic.

  2. Bryan S. Says:

    Leave it to cable news to talk about restricting rights to a background of RPGs and beltfed weapons.

  3. Dave Says:

    He has said he’ll work with congress when possible and bypass them where possible. So, anything out of this guys is possible.

  4. bluesun Says:

    Good luck with cooperation.

  5. Kristophr Says:

    If he classifies them as MGs, then they will all need to be repaired so that they fire full-auto immediately.

    Or did this ‘tard intend to declare them all to be contraband?

    I predict lawsuits and non-compliance.

    And I suppose free states will have to just declare CCW holders to be state militia and start issuing them M-16s.

    As usual, this Jug eared Freak has no clue what he is about to bite off.

  6. SPQR Says:

    He can’t reclassify by Executive Order. The definitions are statutory.

    Stupid rumor.

  7. Bobby Says:

    Something like this would be the best thing to happen to gun owners, as it would be completely indefensible in court.

    The biggest issue is what problems the reactions of the people would cause until those cases are over …

  8. Steve Says:

    This was done with the streetsweeper shotgun, and remains even after x-rails and Saiga shotguns.

    Is it possible? Absolutely. Make em’ title 2 with a stroke of the pen.

    And here is something else to think about:

    As the executive, the POTUS retains exclusive right to ban any import. He can ban all imports of guns, ammo, or parts before breakfast, with no possibility of stopping him in any way.

    Remember Norinco AK’s and all that nice copper washed ammo? Ban on barrel imports?

    Oh yeah, I do remember.

  9. John Smith. Says:

    I would be extremely surprised if he did such a thing. Obama is Not a brave man and this would be a brave albeit stupid thing to do from any standpoint you take!

  10. Cargosquid Says:

    “And I suppose free states will have to just declare CCW holders to be state militia and start issuing them M-16s.”

    hahahahaha THAT would be great!

  11. comatus Says:

    The White House’s designated beneath-the-radar point man is Univ of Mich law professor Steven P Croley. None of this will happen without his input. Keep him in your thoughts and prayers, so to speak.

  12. Brad Says:

    The threat sounds plausible to me, I’m afraid.

  13. adam Says:

    Good fucking luck.

  14. R Says:

    In other news: the sky is falling. I suppose that will make it hard for the UN to fly in with their black helicopters though.

  15. McThag Says:

    The thrust of “our” spokesman in the video is that this will happen under the readily convertible standard.

  16. Roger Says:

    Nothing that that corrupt bastard does would surprise me. He has, bit by bit expanded presidential powers significantly. An executive order here, a bypass of congress there, a recess appointment here, assigning power to un-elected, un-approved czars there.
    We the people, the congress and the press sit by idly watching our freedoms eroded and like fools, we re-elected him.

    Roger

  17. HL Says:

    Thos of you who think this couldn’t happen are working under the assumption that this administration cares a wit about following laws and constitutional processes.

    Yes, lawsuits will fly…by those who can afford to file them. In the 2 years it takes to sort them out so much damage will be done that it won’t matter who wins.

  18. Tam Says:

    Steve,

    This was done with the streetsweeper shotgun, and remains even after x-rails and Saiga shotguns.

    That’s because shotguns, being metallic cartridge weapons with bores larger than .5″, are all Destructive Devices by definition, and even the humblest single-shot H&R Topper exists only because of a ‘sporting purposes’ regulatory exemption to the statutory definition.

  19. Geodkyt Says:

    Given the “readily restored” definition that ATFE has SUCCESSFULLY used for decades to define guns as machineguns (including some guns that NEVER had previously been fully automatic), I could easily see some numbnuts proposing this, and clueless Chicago machine pols (i.e., pretty much the entire White House appointee staff) saying, “Yeah, that’ll work!”

    After all, teh SUCCESSFUL standard ATFE can point to in a precedent includes “no more than eight yours, by a skilled gun smith, in a fully equipped machine shop.”

    (Of course, by THAT standard, anyone with a chain link fence owns dozens or hundreds of “readily restored machinegun receivers”, anyone with a block of aluminum owns a “readily restored M16″, etc. Which is why ATFE careerists in Tech Branch would be screaming “NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!”, lest the entire idea of “readily restoring” anything that had not previously BEEN a bona fide, functional, firearm, be utterly thrown out. Including unfinished recivers for both Title I and II guns. But then, replacing ANY of the Heller Five with an Obama appointee by the time teh appeal gets to SCOTUS might make it fly. . . )

  20. HL Says:

    Yeah Geodkyt, they also call silencers “guns”, and a drop in auto-sear a “machine gun”. It has no barrel, no hammer, no trigger, no receiver, no bolt…but it is called a gun.

  21. Mike Says:

    Bwahahahahahaha!!!!! OF COURSE he can do it. Who the hell is gonna stop him? The Republicans? Those cowards are afraid of their own shadows.

    He told Congress to stuff it on the whole “Mini-DREAM Act” debacle, didn’t he? He said he couldn’t do it legally (in a speech) a few months before he went ahead and did it anyway. I’m still waiting for the Republicans to draw up Articles of Impeachment on what was clearly an illegal EO. All I hear is crickets: no, no, wouldn’t be prudent, wouldn’t be helpful, the Hispanic vote, dontcha know.

    As for people disobeying the law. Well, that remains a theoretical possibility. After the election, I am more convinced that Americans wouldn’t know the difference between freedom and slavery if it came up and bit them in the ass.

  22. G.O.L.D. Says:

    Stirring the ant pile with a stick. I’m sure the self proclaimed Most Powerful Lobbying Organization in the county will step up.

  23. Geodkyt Says:

    Well, to be honest, it wasn’t ATFE who defined silencers and DIAS as Title II “firearms”:

    Those are statutory definitions from Congress. When ATFE says DIAS are “machineguns”, they are merely using the definition EXACTLY AS WRITTEN that the parts that you can drop in an unaltered and legal semiauto and make it go fully auto are “machinegun conversion parts”, and “machinegun conversion parts” are a defined category of “machineguns”. likewise, “silencers” are specifically defined as “firearms” in the law.

    The “readily restored” = “can be converted in a day by an expert” interpretation they USE, on the other hand, is made up out of whole cloth. Just like the CLEO signature requirement on NFA paperwork and the “once a machinegun, always a machinegun” decision (which ATF LOST in court, but refuses to acknowledge the ruling as being precedential).

  24. wildbill Says:

    If it’s called NFA might as well make it NFA. Does anyone have the location dimensions for the M16 auto sear pin hole?

  25. Kristophr Says:

    wildbill:

    Certainly. If you are threatened with a 10 year sentence for not turning in your Semi-auto, you might as well convert it.

    Same penaly, so why the hell not?

    The difference between an AR-15 and an M-16 is the bolt carrier, some internal parts, and the inside of the back of the AR-15 receiver is a bit too narrow for the parts to fit.

    You must, of course, be a SOT paid manufacturer to do this legally.

  26. HL Says:

    Hey Geodkyt,

    I realize that, and I agree with you…but if they can call a silencer a gun, and a sear a machine gun, I don’t feel so confident that they can’t find a way to call a semi-auto a machine gun, probably along the lines you are suggesting.

  27. Geodkyt Says:

    Kristopher –

    Actually, while Colt LOVED to make receivers that were dimensionally inclable of taking full auto gus without milling, and they neutered bolt carriers, actually you CAN use a full auto bolt carrier with no legal problem, and you CAN have a legal semiauto receiver that (aside from the autosear hole) are dimensionally the same.

    Colt (and a few others, IIRC), just wanted to go the extra mile, to try and frustrate people who dared try and Form 1 a Colt sporter into a machinegun, rather than pay Colt directly.

    Basically, if you didn’t have a receiver where the FCG pocket is the same size as full auto, you’d have to mill out room for the DIAS. This is the diffference between “low shelf” (DIAS-capable) and “high shelf” (Colt trying to prevent you from installing a DIAS).

  28. Disavowed With Honor Says:

    If it happens… go to war. If not… make your government fear you anyway by letting them know you are willing and able to go to war.

    I do, however, have the mental image of millions of citizens standing on the White House lawn in possession of simi-autos. They aren’t there to turn them in I might add.

    Disavowed With Honor

  29. tincan Says:

    Conservative gun owners are such suckers.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills


blog advertising is good for you

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives