Ammo For Sale

« « Plan accordingly | Home | Sandy Hook Parent’s lawsuit against Remington dismissed » »

Hillary’s emails on gun control

She said she wants to close the nonexistent gun show loophole via executive order.

7 Responses to “Hillary’s emails on gun control”

  1. Ron W Says:

    She wants to act criminally. Executive orders are not law.

  2. JTC Says:

    “Executive orders are not law.”

    But they do -lawfully- alter and direct the definition, interpretation and enforcement of law. Notably BO’s to the ATF as to what constitutes a “dealer”, historical standards notwithstanding. That is the first salvo if you will, at gunshows and UBC’s.

    No need to dig into the emails for surreptitious intent though, she came right out and said it at the end of the debate “ending the gun show loophole”.

    And nobody challenged her on her to define that term. As that quote of Glenn’s over there said so accurately if obviously, “Just think of the MSM as Democratic operatives with a byline”. And an agenda.

  3. Ron W Says:

    @JTC, so what “lawfully” defines a dealer now according to Obama’s EO? One place I read some commentary on Obama’s executive order which supposed that selling as few as one or two guns would make one a “dealer”. As Bill Clinton said, “don’t ask, don’t tell”.

  4. Lyle Says:

    That would certainly inspire more states to enact laws rejecting federal interference.

    Ideally of course, all we’d have to do is enforce the second amendment, and the other articles of the Bill of Rights, and therefore no new laws would be necessary, the bitch goes to prison along with hundreds of other political class criminals, and everyone is more free.

  5. Jonathan Says:

    It would seem as though she has just as much understanding about executive orders as she does firearm laws.

  6. JTC Says:

    Ron W, your question illustrates the point and the danger of the expanded use of EO’s to twist definitions and interpretations of existing law to whatever suits the narrative and agenda of the executive at the time.

    As to lawful, this is wiki so not perfect but:

    “United States presidents issues executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law when they take authority from a legislative power which grants its power directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made pursuant to Acts of Congress that explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).[1] Like both legislative statutes and regulations promulgated by government agencies, executive orders are subject to judicial review, and may be struck down if deemed by the courts to be unsupported by statute or the Constitution. Major policy initiatives require approval by the legislative branch, but executive orders have significant influence over the internal affairs of government, deciding how and to what degree legislation will be enforced, dealing with emergencies, waging wars, and in general fine-tuning policy choices in the implementation of broad statutes.”

    But I know you understand the legality and flexibility of EO to make you a felon by unilateral fiat is separate from enforcement, which is itself flexible. You then become at the total mercy of the same unilateral fiat. Progressively, as it were, from enforcing UBC and the use of those records to show possession to…well we all know the plan, it’s just that their newly discovered ability to twist and misuse EO gives them a path to enact it.

    BO has scratched the surface. HC has promised to use EO to incriminate you in order to disarm you. And to stack the court to allow it. And to open the gates to replacement voters and street enforcers to continue the reign.

  7. JTC Says:

    So she skated again. Clearly said early in the debate that “we’re going to end the internet and gun show loopholes”. And old Donald was too caught up in his own bluster to just stop and ask her to define those terms.

    Another huge missed opportunity that could have made that dumb bitch look even more like a dumb bitch and also educate the public to the non-existence of their cornerstone gun control catch phrase. Or if we were really lucky she would just come right out and say that what she really wants is to eliminate private party transfers, and will expand EO definition and enforcement directives to do just that.

    And then she could follow up with swearing again how pro-Second Amendment she really is.