Obama's going for the EO

[GhostTX]

The White House is finalizing a new executive action that would expand background checks on gun purchases, according to one of President Obama’s top aides.

Senior adviser Valerie Jarrett said Wednesday the president has asked his team to send him a completed plan “in short order,” according to The Associated Press. She spoke at a vigil for victims of the 2012 shooting in Newtown, Conn., that left 28 dead.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest on Thursday refused to elaborate on the timeline to issue the unilateral proposals.

“At this point, I still don’t have an update on the progress the administration is making on scrubbing the rules," Earnest told reporters at his daily press briefing.

ADVERTISEMENT
Still, Jarrett’s comments are an indication that Obama could soon roll out a proposal that would set up a major battle with Republicans in Congress and gun rights groups.

Stymied by Congress on new gun control measures, Obama has been weighing a number of executive actions on guns following an October mass shooting at an Oregon community college.

The effort took on even more urgency after last month’s attack in San Bernardino, Calif., which left 14 dead.

Obama has been holding meetings with gun control advocates to gauge their support and solicit ideas. He met last Friday with former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who survived a gunshot to the head during a 2011 mass shooting in Tucson.

A proposal Obama is reportedly considering would classify more sellers as high-volume dealers, which would close a legal loophole that allows many sales conducted online or at gun shows to skirt existing background check provisions.

But such a measure would surely prompt a legal challenge from gun rights groups, which say Obama lacks the authority to tighten background checks alone. The National Rifle Association and GOP lawmakers have blasted the idea as executive overreach.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/262796-white-house-finalizing-executive-action-on-guns

[Darren M]

Jeez.....

[juiceweezl]

Not trying to stir the pot here, but what if gun show sales required a background check? It could be done the same as at Cabela's or anywhere else. The cost could be built into the purchase price and in fact, someone could probably make a business out of running them for people at a gun show. What would the reality behind than bring? I see the problem with someone being able to walk into a gun show and hand over a wad of cash, walking away with a firearm, and not being able to pass a background check. I also see that requiring them is an infringement on a seller's rights and a possible first step to a larger grab by the left. I just wonder how it would be viewed if the right gave in on that compromise only and took something else in return. Thoughts?

[Strychnine]

I just wonder how it would be viewed if the right gave in on that compromise only and took something else in return. Thoughts?

You'll never get anything in return.

[Baron Von Crowder]

Not trying to stir the pot here, but what if gun show sales required a background check? It could be done the same as at Cabela's or anywhere else. The cost could be built into the purchase price and in fact, someone could probably make a business out of running them for people at a gun show. What would the reality behind than bring? I see the problem with someone being able to walk into a gun show and hand over a wad of cash, walking away with a firearm, and not being able to pass a background check. I also see that requiring them is an infringement on a seller's rights and a possible first step to a larger grab by the left. I just wonder how it would be viewed if the right gave in on that compromise only and took something else in return. Thoughts?

never been to a gun show?

[BP]

Dealers already do background checks at gun shows. Obama and the left seem to think it's like walking into a flea market where it's completely unregulated and you can buy anything you want without any kind of a record.

Sure legally you can walk in and lay down a wad of cash and buy a weapon from a private party at a gun show. However you'll be doing so in the presence of 10-20 uniformed peace officers plus several dozen more out of uniform shopping for themselves. That and there is a very good chance whoever you deal with is former police or military and likely a patriot that isn't going to sell a weapon to someone that's remotely suspicious.

[Gaber]

The Muslim wants confiscation. But they want to dig into medical history, personal medication taken, if you've seen a psychiatrist, etc. Not gonna happen, his time is up. Gtfo

[Gtracer]

Dealers already do background checks at gun shows.

You know, I don't think that is their problem. It's more of the ability to sell any firearm to anyone without a check...at least, that's the feeling I get.

Make ALL transactions require a 4473 or a ffl who can provide the service is the idea I think.

[Craizie]

You know, I don't think that is their problem. It's more of the ability to sell any firearm to anyone without a check...at least, that's the feeling I get.

Make ALL transactions require a 4473 or a ffl who can provide the service is the idea I think.

Would this have stopped any of the recent " mass " murders?

[aggie97]

Would this have stopped any of the recent " mass " murders?

Nope. People who are obtaining guns illegally now, will continue to do so later. Any belief otherwise is either extreme stupidity or an effort to rule me.....they can GFO.

[Gtracer]

Would this have stopped any of the recent " mass " murders?

I don't belive so, people are gonna kill when they feel like killin


However, as I was attempting to point out, I do not think their main focus are the gun shows...it's the private market

[likeitfast55]

They want to go after idiots like this, no FFL and actively building and selling AR's to who-ever has the $$. Granted it is done almost every day by thousands, but to openly advertise on the internet is just stupid. Then bring 50 AR's to a gun show and sell with no 4473. While I know we have the right to sell our guns to whoever is legal to own, this however is beyond that. This is "In the business".

[LANTIRN]

They are after private sales, which, by the way, is totally unenforceable unless they require national registration so time to put on the tin foil hats, gentlemen.

[juiceweezl]

You'll never get anything in return.

This is why I won't ever vote for someone in favor of restrictions. There is no concept of reason in a lib's concept of compromise.

never been to a gun show?

Several although none recently, but that has nothing to do with the key point.

Dealers already do background checks at gun shows. Obama and the left seem to think it's like walking into a flea market where it's completely unregulated and you can buy anything you want without any kind of a record.

Sure legally you can walk in and lay down a wad of cash and buy a weapon from a private party at a gun show. However you'll be doing so in the presence of 10-20 uniformed peace officers plus several dozen more out of uniform shopping for themselves. That and there is a very good chance whoever you deal with is former police or military and likely a patriot that isn't going to sell a weapon to someone that's remotely suspicious.

This is exactly the point - because legally you can. Many people wouldn't sell to a suspicious person, but many would. Money has a way of making people do strange things.

The Muslim wants confiscation. But they want to dig into medical history, personal medication taken, if you've seen a psychiatrist, etc. Not gonna happen, his time is up. Gtfo

Agree. They have no business there.

You know, I don't think that is their problem. It's more of the ability to sell any firearm to anyone without a check...at least, that's the feeling I get.

Make ALL transactions require a 4473 or a ffl who can provide the service is the idea I think.

This.

Would this have stopped any of the recent " mass " murders?

Possibly. Criminals going to crime, but it may make it more difficult. Maybe the extra step would be a deterrent. It's not likely though. I'm more in favor of holding those who sold the weapon responsible much like I am for holding parents responsible for action of their children. Obviously a background check would relieve you of responsibility.

Nope. People who are obtaining guns illegally now, will continue to do so later. Any belief otherwise is either extreme stupidity or an effort to rule me.....they can GFO.

This.

They are after private sales, which, by the way, is totally unenforceable unless they require national registration so time to put on the tin foil hats, gentlemen.

Completely unenforceable but legislation could potentially deter sales if they hold the seller responsible too. Even then, highly unlikely to deter illegal sales.

Thanks for the civil discussion and opinions. I am no in favor of any legislation, but i's nice to hear everyone's thoughts. FWIW, I'm clearly on the right side as I've added 4 firearms and 5 lowers to my 'investments' this holiday season. Carry on my armed brethren.

[LANTIRN]

This is why I won't ever vote for someone in favor of restrictions. There is no concept of reason in a lib's concept of compromise.

Several although none recently, but that has nothing to do with the key point.

This is exactly the point - because legally you can. Many people wouldn't sell to a suspicious person, but many would. Money has a way of making people do strange things.

Agree. They have no business there.

This.

Possibly. Criminals going to crime, but it may make it more difficult. Maybe the extra step would be a deterrent. It's not likely though. I'm more in favor of holding those who sold the weapon responsible much like I am for holding parents responsible for action of their children. Obviously a background check would relieve you of responsibility.

This.

Completely unenforceable but legislation could potentially deter sales if they hold the seller responsible too. Even then, highly unlikely to deter illegal sales.

Thanks for the civil discussion and opinions. I am no in favor of any legislation, but i's nice to hear everyone's thoughts. FWIW, I'm clearly on the right side as I've added 4 firearms and 5 lowers to my 'investments' this holiday season. Carry on my armed brethren.

I will say I am 100% against all sales for individuals requiring a 4473. #1, as stated above I am tired of compromises that are all lies and really just a way to confiscate rights. Fuck you (gun control advocates) for even bringing it up again. #2, as I said already the only way to enforce it is 100% registration at the federal level and I sure as fuck don't trust them as I believe that is their goal and what they will suggest to make it work. And #3, I shouldn't be held responsible if I sell someone an item and they are a criminal, or I should just be held responsible for their actions. Shouldn't apply if I sell someone a car they use to get a dui and kill someone while drunk, shouldn't apply if I sell someone a burger and they have a heart attack, and it damned sure shouldn't apply if I don't know tbey are a felon and I sell them a gun. I am so fucking tired of this liberal bullshit and their lies. Fuck them.