Reports Indicate Obama Administration Preparing New Gun Control Regulations

President Obama's got your back. Allegedly. (courtesy

The Hill is reporting that there’s some movement on gun control from the White House. The Obama administration has had terrible results when trying to enact gun control legislation the legal way — through Congress and by passing new laws — so the rumor of the day is that his administration is preparing to use executive powers to change the policies of the government agencies under his control to enact some of those new restrictions anyway. From The Hill:

The Justice Department plans to move forward this year with more than a dozen new gun-related regulations, according to list of rules the agency has proposed to enact before the end of the Obama administration.

The regulations range from new restrictions on high-powered pistols to gun storage requirements. Chief among them is a renewed effort to keep guns out of the hands of people who are mentally unstable or have been convicted of domestic abuse.

Some of these proposals are already out in the light of day.

The rule change for domestic violence is scheduled for a final action in November of 2015, for example, following a comment period that closed in 1998. Exactly what that entails no one really knows, since the only reference to that rule change was in an ATF circular dated from 1998 that no one has really seen since.

The rule change for secure gun storage is also on the register now, but the exact nature of the change is still yet to be revealed. There’s an existing law that requires gun locks to be made available to firearms purchasers, but how far the ATF wants to bend that rule is still unknown. The comment period for that rule is set to open in about a month.

As for the definition of a “pistol,” the proposal for that change has apparently been in the works since 2005 and is just now coming to action. Its extremely murky trying to decipher the specific rule change being made, as once again the only text we have on that is from an obscure ATF circular from 2005. It is entirely possible that this might be an attempt to re-classify AR-15 pistols as something else entirely, so stay tuned.

The question really is one of what we’re not seeing. The broad strokes are pretty well laid out, but the devil is in the details. Some of the proposed rule changes are so old that there’s no documentation on them whatsoever that I can find, which makes it difficult to see what’s going on behind the curtain. And beyond that, figuring out what has yet to be revealed is impossible.

There’s no doubt that legislative action on gun control is pretty much dead in the water for the next few years, so it makes sense that the now extremely lame duck president would want to try and cram as much of his agenda as possible down American’s throats before he leaves. The problem is that this president — who campaigned on a platform of transparency and honesty — is making these policy changes pretty much behind closed doors and without the input of Americans.


  1. avatar Jolly Roger Out says:

    Oh, wonderful. More 15-minute press conference executive orders that will take years to overturn in the courts.

    1. avatar hurr says:

      What do you expect when your government looks like a Democrat-sponsored affirmative-action casting call for a Tarzan movie?

      1. avatar Jolly Roger Out says:

        I expect us opposition voices to critique policy without resorting to racist ad hominem attacks.

        1. avatar hurr says:

          Ohnoes! He called me a racist!

          I better hurry up and cede control of my nation to those who would destroy it before he calls me something worse!

          You are the problem.

          YOU are the enemy.

        2. avatar Geoff PR says:


          The Tranny Sore Ass troll returns…

        3. avatar Bob says:

          Sore ass tranny… are we still talking about Michelle/Michael Obama?

      2. avatar Gatha58 says:

        Because there are 2 or 3 people that are not WASP ? Wow, talk about prejudice revealing itself.

        1. avatar Pg2 says:

          @Gatha, WASPS? Are you kidding? WASPS have been replaced long, long ago as primary power base, either your ignorance or your own racism is showing.

      3. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        The current administration sort of reminds me of the opening scenes of 2001 A Space Odyssey. Intellectually they are on the same level.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Star Wars bar scene set in the Cookoos Nest

      4. avatar God says:

        Thank God the gun crazy movement isn’t full of racists.

        1. avatar GreatPlainsSower says:

          @sexual Tyrex or your new name.

          It is not racism to say instead of our government placing the most qualified individuals in positions that affect the entire nation, those positions are being filled with less qualified applicants based on physical characteristics and party devotion, not moral character. The AG is supposed to represent all the citizens not just the black ones who have ruined their cities willingly. She is just as bad as Holder but she got the position because she was the first black woman, not because of her devotion to fighting for and following the constitution.

          al sharpton as race advisor is all that needs to be said, or Trayvon could be my son, or how all tax payers are being forced to pay for Baltimore’s riots with FEMA, which is a shining example of Democrat Affirmative Action, instead of qualified public officials.

        2. avatar hurr says:


          He’s going to call you racist! Hurry up and give control of your nation to those who would destroy it before he starts an ugly rumor that you’re a – gasp! – a homophobe.

        3. avatar ad-lib says:

          see, it really seems like you COULD criticize this administration without resorting to the lame racism.
          doubling down on it is great as well. keep on making the gun rights crowd look great.

      5. avatar H says:

        What did you say when the President and his advisors were all white? Who did you blame then?
        Didn’t your Momma tell you if you don’t have something nice to say don’t say anything.
        Are you for gun rights or just a racist?
        What difference does anyone’s color make, except yours? 🙂

    2. avatar Kyle says:

      That wont change until a better system put into place for the fast track overturning of illegal dictates from our woundrous leaders in washington.

    3. avatar Rob59 says:

      How true. It is only our money used to tie up the court system with foolish regulations. But when your a lame duck. You have to spend you time aggravating the opposing side.

  2. avatar JohnO says:

    “Change” + “Hope.” = Politics as usual

    1. avatar bob says:

      CLIMATE CHANGE! !!! (pay no attention to what my left hand is doing) .

      1. avatar B says:

        I’m sick of the global warming and droughts in Texas! Also, watch for all AR pistols being designated by the ATF as illegal SBR’s.

  3. avatar Another Robert says:

    Well, he tried some of that crap with immigration and got sued in Texas and placed under an injunction. Maybe it will happen again. most of the executive orders re gun control he has done so far have been pretty weak stuff–like “appoint a deputy director for ATF”. Gotta love seeing that pathological liar Kathleen Sebelius BTW–nice reminder that she is no longer in office.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      The present system is too cumbersome and time consuming. Government can make a thousand cuts and then a thousand more before the individual might, maybe, perhaps, possibly see some ounce of relief. That might help future victims of a specific government crime but the first ones bleed out in the meantime. Ultimately, the circus just begins all over again. Government can be wrong again and again whereas the individual only gets one chance. Our government is no longer properly restrained by the document that created it; the Constitution. The foundations of our nation are incompatible with a strong, overpowering central government.

  4. avatar Chadwick P. says:

    Sure why not? When you are the worst pres in modern history why not go for worst in all U.S. history? Maybe he is going for biggest tyrant also but it’s hard to tell how much conviction he really has when he is so terrible at that too.

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      why not go for worst in all U.S. history? I think he already is there.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        And FDR was a tough contender to beat for the title.

      2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

        Lincoln, Wilson, Truman, Johnson and the idiot Roosevelt cousins are all top contenders for “Worst President in History”. Obama and Bush the Lesser are second tier compared to those evil men.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          the idiot Roosevelt cousins. You really nailed it there. Probably between those two, we saw the most government growth in US history. LBJ gets honorable Order of Lenin medal as well.

        2. avatar Removed_californian says:

          Forgive me for my ignorance, but can you elaborate on what Lincoln did that was so bad? (Not /sarc, serious question.)

        3. avatar Another Robert says:

          Lincoln vastly increased the power of the Presidency, and of the central government, some would say well beyond the Constitution’s constraints, during the Civil War. He suspended habeas corpus, threw dissenting newspaper editors in jail, blockaded the Southern states (which is something that is only done to belligerent nations during wartime) without recognizing the South as a belligerent nation, and other stuff that I can’t think of at the moment. Most folks excuse him due to the nature of the situation he was dealing with.

        4. avatar B says:

          Lincoln was a war criminal on par with Roosevelt. Its funny, I’ve noticed the US has always treated its own citizens worse than those of countries its at war against.

  5. avatar DoomGuy says:

    Commie son of a bitch.

    1. avatar Governmentknowsbest says:


  6. avatar stateisevil says:

    Can someone explain to me how the evil George H Bush’s 1990 gun ban EO is still active?

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      If you’re referring to the George H. W. Bush (Bush 41, not Bush 43) 1989 import EO, which was then added to by Bill “Blue Dress” Clinton in 1998, they’re still around because no Pres. since has had the [email protected] to rescind them.

      1. avatar Virginia Gunner says:

        I’ll bet Rand Paul has the balls. Just sayin.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Breitbart wrote in its report (my bold):
          Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)—an opponent of the secretive Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) that would fast-track the Pacific Rim trade deal Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)—went inside the secret room inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday morning to read the TPP text and told Breitbart News exclusively afterwards that he believes President Barack Obama should make it public now.

          The deal’s text is kept in a room behind double doors that each have signs: “No Public Or Media Beyond This Point.”

          So what did Rand do Thursday? He voted “yea’ on the key legislation that will allow TPP, TTIP, and TISA — to become law.

        2. avatar LarryinTx says:

          I think my vote would be decided if someone from either party vowed to repeal ALL executive orders on day one. And then make none.

        3. avatar Virginia Gunner says:

          John, compromise is often necessity to get anything done as a legislator, but less so as the President with Executive orders. I’ll bet that were he put in that position, Rand Paul would prove to be better than his predecessors by reversing questionable orders from that lot. He is not my ideal candidate, but then again nobody is.

        4. avatar neiowa says:

          It took some hard work, but in the last couple weeks Rand has locked up the “Crazier than his Daddy” award.

        5. avatar int19h says:

          There’s nothing wrong with executive orders in principle – they’re supposed to be the way that the president, as the head of the executive, issues orders to his subordinates (i.e. various organizations that are all under the executive fold) on how to run matters – hence the name. Most of EOs are actually of that nature. The problematic ones are the ones where the president is effectively reinterpreting the law to say what he wants it to say, as opposed to what it actually says. The first such non-constitutional EO was actually the Emancipation Proclamation, and it remained the only one for a while, until FDR made it his favorite club.

  7. avatar foxmuldar says:

    Im for gun control. The gun thats pointing towards Obama. I want it fully controlled so it hits its target. So who says all gun control nuts are liberals? Obama has violated his oath to uphold our Constitution. If he were a White Republican, you can bet impeachment proceedings would have started long ago. So where are those brave Republicans with a pair of balls to start the process. Since taking office Obama has issued over 1000 executive orders. Many in violation of the Constitution.

    1. avatar Joel from PA says:

      You’ll be getting a visit shortly….no knock probably…. Good luck…

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        ^ This!

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        There was no threat. Although, this corrupt government doesn’t seem to need actual probable cause.

        1. avatar Joel from PA says:

          Doesn’t mean they won’t visit and ask some questions…. Just saying….

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Sadly true, Joel from PA.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          It’ll actually be Secret Service. And yes, if you make death threats to POTUS, even if they don’t sound particularly credible, and are clearly just angry ranting of some crazy dude on the Internet, they’re duty bound to investigate.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      Since taking office Obama has issued over 1000 executive orders.

      I don’t have the 2015 numbers, but as of the end of 2014 Obama had issued 214 EOs.

      It’s not the number that’s important, it’s the content.

      1. avatar LarryinTx says:

        Thousands and thousands. But they’re secret. We are watching you!

        1. avatar int19h says:

          If they’re secret, how do you know about them?

      2. avatar utdmatt says:

        He’s been using executive memos instead of EOs ralph. Same force but different name so that he can spin the press.

    3. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      ” If he were a White Republican, you can bet impeachment proceedings would have started long ago.”

      Doubtful. Obama the Pretender is just a continuation of Bush the Lesser’s reign. If a criminal like Bush couldn’t get impeached, they won’t do it to anyone.

    4. avatar H says:

      Really smart. Plays into “their” hands.
      This is a system that needs massive reform.
      Threatening anyone with assassination shows you aren’t ready to participate in mature society and is a good reason for them to remove your guns.
      Control your emotions.
      We are all in this together. This is a game we lose until we realize we aren’t blue/red etc. This is our lives, our world. It’s not this team vs that team. As long as it stays that way neither gets what they need. The Reps & Dems throw scraps while the machine marches on.

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    He let us know it was coming. He has a phone and he has a pen, remember? I’d like to tell him where to shove both.

  9. avatar John in Ohio says:

    So, are we enjoying our fascism?

    the state owns what we think we own because it controls all that we have.

    What we are living in, economically speaking, is fascism where property is held privately in name only, but controlled by an army of bureaucrats from the central government.

    I think it goes deeper than just economics. Bureaucrats control aspects of how we are to keep and bear arms. They even tell us that which we cannot keep. Is this what our nation was to be? Why do we suffer this train wreck any longer? The train isn’t going to stop itself. The task, as it always has been, is up to the People. Until enough are willing to stop it, the disaster goes on until nobody can stop it.

  10. avatar Gatha58 says:

    IF this happens and is not just a rumor it will be great ammo for the upcoming election. Increases the chances that his party will not be elected again. If I were him I would tread lightly. And if I were Hillary and Dem Party chiefs I would be telling him “hands off”. That is, if they have any brains at all. We just need to keep pushing for laws by election and NOT by executive order or bureaucrats. And fight anything that he does manage to put in place with all that we can muster.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Gun control and the AWB is an important part of the Democrat Party platform and has been so for a long time. The Dems can’t run away from it because it’s the heart and soul of Progressivism. They will campaign on it, not against it.

      1. avatar LarryinTx says:

        Well, they’re not *quite* that stupid. They will campaign on past gun control, and deny violently that any more is planned. “We’ve protected the children at last!” Until 17.3 seconds after inauguration.

    2. avatar John Dalton says:

      Great for the 2016 election? That would be true if ALL gun owners would actually vote!

      There is a significant cohort of voters: white, middle-income, middle-class, primarily blue-collar MALES who simply do not bother to go to the polls! This has been a trend and has become more pronounced since 2000.

      When I discovered this trend, I did a non-scientific survey with about 50 individuals that I know or with whom I come in contact (phone repairman, etc). Forty-nine of 50 owned guns. Twelve of 50 TOLD ME that they voted in 2014. I would characterize all 50 as conservative patriots, based upon my observations and knowledge of them. All 50 were displeased with the direction of that the country is taking.

      So, it seems to me that VOTING is critical issue. IF ALL gun owners vote (remember there are 100 MILLION of us), then we would get the government that we deserve………and would have NONE of the phone-baloney gun grabs.

      Since WE don’t vote………seems like we ARE getting the government that we deserve.

      1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

        So, who should we have voted for in 2012? The big government loving, socialized medicine promoting, anti gun bill signing progressive or Obama?

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          I figured Indiana was going for Mittens, so I voted Libertarian.

        2. avatar PhilWilson says:

          I hear you, believe me. But if you don’t think Mittens would have been 1000X better than Obama, I just don’t know what to say. No, he wouldn’t have been the solution we needed, but he would have slowed the bleeding considerably. Now, it may be that Obama is exactly what the nation needed to understand what the Progs are and the existential threat they pose to Western society. However, if Obama really lets loose, best case scenario is that the damage Obama and the Progs do on their way out will make the lesson a very, very costly one.

        3. avatar John in Ohio says:

          I abhor politics so I won’t engage in a long discussion of it…

          Perhaps slowing the bleed isn’t what America needs. I wouldn’t intentionally vote for the likes of King Hussein but his reign has opened many eyes and ears, IMHO. If those in control of the heat turn it up too quickly, the froggie will hopefully jump out of the pot. If we keep getting politicians that merely slow and hide the rot, most people won’t see the foundational damage and one day the whole structure will violently and suddenly collapse. In some ways, I think that trying to save the American people from themselves has great potential to destroy the nation in the long term. Are we enabling the American people to grow yet another selfish, lazy, self-entitled generation of sheep? Let the ugly face of our government’s fascism show. The People need to see it, unvarnished and bearing its teeth.

      2. avatar MDC says:

        ‘If voting made a difference they wouldn’t let us do it.” Samuel Clemens

        voting for career politicians will get you no where, that is unless you like wasting time. You want to end this train wreck? Push for term limits on every motherfucking office. Even the SCOTUS.

    3. avatar Pascal says:

      BS — many gun owners will vote against the 2nd amendment. Even RF voted for Obama. The Democratic platform has been for a long time for gun control and a AWB but that has not stopped many a gun owner from voting for people they know will take away their rights.

      Having been involved in the politics of my own town, I have seen parents throw the interest of their own kids under the bus for the sake of voting the party line.

      Politics is a religion to many people and few would give up their dogma of choice even if it meant a better future.

      1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        BS — many gun owners will vote against the 2nd amendment. As long as it is not their type of guns that are being outlawed. FUDDS are about as bad as the gun grabbers.

  11. avatar foxmuldar says:

    A Muslim suicide jihadist would have done good work had he gotten close to that group in the photo above. We can keep on hoping considering this traitor has another year and a half left to do his best to destroy whats left of a once great country.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Why would they eliminate their best operatives? This country was toast long before King Barry was groomed for the job. Most of the People no longer have a desire to be free.

      1. avatar LarryinTx says:

        Then, regretfully, we are going to be forced, someday, to enslave them. For the children.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          They’ve enslaved themselves. What is really going to have to happen is that a relatively small subset of the whole will have to drag them, kicking and screaming, towards Liberty again. That’s how this country started; a minority initially fought for freedom and brought the rest along for the ride.

      2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

        There is more evidence that Obama is an operative of Tel Aviv than there is that he supports Muslim terrorists.

    2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      A Muslim suicide jihadist would have done good work had he gotten close to that group in the photo above. Why would a Muslim Jihadist want to blow up the group in question? They are the best group to enable people like ISIS to realize and obtain their goals.

      1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

        Since ISIS is a creation of the US, Turkey, Saudi and Israel, their goals are the same as the goals of the US government.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          I am not so sure ISIS was their intent, but the Frankenstein Monster sure left the laboratory that way.

  12. avatar M9A1MAN says:

    This is no surprise right? I mean, we all saw it coming. I sure did. If people didn’t think this wasn’t bound to happen, then they need to get out from under the rock they’ve been living in.

  13. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

    Obama = best thing for gun sales since…. ????

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Obama = best thing for gun sales since crime.

      But that’s redundant, isn’t it?

  14. avatar Ted Canuck says:

    Buy stock in the phrase “common sense”; it is going to be getting a lot of use in the near future.

  15. avatar Mark Lloyd says:

    And I voted for him the first time! Damned ashamed to say that also.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      No shame attaches — you live and learn.

      Now, if you’d voted for him the second time, that would be a whole different kettle of fish.

      1. avatar HustleHard says:

        I voted for him too the first time but saw the writing on the wall going into the 2nd election.

    2. avatar LarryinTx says:

      Well, I didn’t vote for him, but I was very interested after his address to the DNC in what, 1994? But none of us should blame ourselves, he has been consistently and convincingly lying to everyone for 30 years. He’s an idiot doper who has never completed any educational courses, or been required to.

  16. avatar HEGEMON says:

    High-powered pistols, WTF? Even the language is absurd…

    1. avatar AW1Ed says:

      I believe they’re referring to AR-15 pistols, which have been used in criminal acts exactly never.

      1. avatar Jim R says:

        I”m sure they’ll find some way to ban AR/AK pistols. Probably call anything firing a rifle caliber a rifle, then define rifle caliber as any caliber that can be fired out of a rifle..which will catch almost every handgun on the market, because there’s a pistol-caliber carbine for nearly every caliber…

        Of course they’ll “correct” the regulation…years later…maybe…

    2. avatar Virginia Gunner says:

      Obviously they are talking about Military Style Assault Death Pistols…or something.

  17. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    Time for congress to start cutting funding. And while we’re at it, let’s get rid of the BATF. Who needs it?

    1. avatar Virginia Gunner says:

      About 4900 bureaucrats need it for their government paycheck.

      Imagine that 1.15 billion dollar budget, or even a hundredth of it, going to the Civilian Markmanship Program instead. That probably would do far more to promote gun safety and reduce crime rates than the BATF ever did.

  18. avatar Adrik says:

    Sounds like there may have been some validity to the rumor the ATF is looking to reclassify AR pistols as DD’s. That is about all the ATF can do really as far as regulating “high powered pistols”. Maybe they could declare 5.7MM pistols DD’s too the antis seem to have the Five Seven.

    1. avatar AW1Ed says:

      What is a “DD” classification? Like a Class III?

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Destructive Device?

        1. avatar Adrik says:


          That is the only way the ATF could really :”regulate” AR pistols. Only other even remote possibility would be to classify ALL AR lowers as rifle lowers. I dont even know of they have the power to do the latter though.

        2. avatar LarryinTx says:

          Remind me, why would they care if they have the power?

    2. avatar Ross says:

      All I will say to that is good luck getting compliance.

      1. avatar LarryinTx says:

        That would be where we find out if there are federal registries being kept despite their definition by actual congress and presidential signature as a freaking FELONY! I say that as soon as it is “needed”, we’ll discover that registries have been kept illegally since the first moment it was technologically possible. And, BTW, that is the logical point for 10 million gun owners to head to Washington, armed. It would be the federal government clearly violating federal law, with impunity, who is going to call them to task?

  19. avatar Virginia Gunner says:

    There could be a silver lining to this. If the latest Pew polls on gun control are an accurate indication of a trend towards pro-gun attitudes (maybe due to more women gunning up), then anything Obama tries on this front could be a liability for Democrats in the next election.

    According to Pew, “For the first time in more than two decades, there is more support for gun rights than gun control. Currently, 52% say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, while 46% say it is more important to control gun ownership.”

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      That would only matter if gun rights were THE overriding issue in the 2016 elections.

      It won’t be. The economy will be.

  20. avatar HustleHard says:

    This is a transparent administration. Transparently criminal..

  21. avatar Roy says:

    I just found .22lr in a big box store for the first time in years. Guess that won’t be happening again anytime soon since every dumbass redneck is going to freak out and start hoarding again. Thanks, Obama.

    1. avatar John Dalton says:

      Remarkable how we “dumbass rednecks” can read the handwriting on the wall, isn’t it?

      1. avatar LarryinTx says:

        Hey, Roy, why can’t *you* figure that out?

  22. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Scribble away.
    Its called a little civil disobediences on our part where necessary.

  23. avatar Accur81 says:

    At this point I’d rather have Obama spend time on the golf course then continue to degrade the strength and freedom of our nation.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      How about a Putt-Putt course in the prison yard? 🙂

    2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Obozo is one of those Presidents that you want vacationing a lot. Golf, surfing, flying, college commencements, junkets, anything. The Conservative press is upset because the President vacations and plays too much. I think his vacations are great for this country.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        The conservative MSM works it to their own advantage regardless of what might be best for the nation. 😉

  24. avatar BS says:

    How many armed citizens do you think it will take to storm the white house and arrest all those treasonous bastards?

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Probably more than can be mustered.

    2. avatar LarryinTx says:

      I don’t believe it could be more than 10 million, suspect 5 million would do. The more mustered, the fewer deaths would be required. Because that is what you are discussing, don’t pretend those in power would give up that power without attempting to kill you.

      1. avatar BS says:

        IMO, this country is getting close to armed resistance time.

    3. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Maybe we just need people with gyrocopters?

  25. A ban on all semi-automatic pistols: including
    any weapon disguised to look like an
    item other than a firearm or any gun that
    fires more than one shot without
    manual reloading by a single function of
    the trigger, are not pistols and are
    classified as ‘‘any other weapon’’ under
    the NFA.

  26. avatar Bob says:

    It was funny to watch my lefty atheist friend act like Obama was the messiah during his first election. Total blind faith.

  27. avatar ihatetrees says:

    If rules prohibiting firearms from certain classes of people – those who have seen a shrink/counselor or those with restraining orders /DV convictions – are enacted, the political fallout will be interesting. Especially if those rules include, as they always do, police exemptions.

    Police carve-outs may have reached a tipping point of unpopularity within both parties. Also, the mental health community, which is not gun friendly, has issues with mandatory reporting. Note that the current (Obama) Veterans Administration will NOT have its counselors comply with NY’s Safe Act.

    Although, that may be a rule change they cram down the VA.

  28. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Cold dead hands…

    1. avatar Ross says:

      Unfortunately its going to come to that in the not to distant future.

  29. avatar BeetleDude says:

    executive orders in the thousands. God bless Hope and Change. Hopefully our next president will aim for the stars and hit 5 figures. Like all sheep, I pray for a swift and painless end.

  30. avatar Glenn says:

    Is this change going to redefine an AR-15 pistol as another NFA item like an SBR?

    After the AR-15 pistol has been perfectly legal for so many years that it is now going to be illegal with the stroke of a pen?
    I don’t think that change would carry any legal weight.

    AR-15 pistols are funky and clunky compared to an SBR with a fully adjustable stock.

    If the AR-15 pistol is going to require an NFA stamp, they why would I want an AR-15 pistol over an SBR?

  31. avatar cbunix23 says:

    I suspect this means handgun importation criteria will be changed to disallow additional types
    of handguns. For example, handguns that accept detachable magazines holding more than 10
    rounds, or handguns that shoot “rifle cartridges” such as 7.62×39, 5.45×39, 5.56×45, and so on.

  32. avatar tommy says:

    The second amendment is the head of the spear for your constitution and all of the amendments. Take the second amendment away and eventually the constitution will collapse, it that simple.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I agree but I believe that the tip of the spear has been so chipped that it is no longer sharp enough and we are seeing the collapse of constitutional protections already as a result. Generations are seeing the number of people “allowed” to keep and bear arms, proper and needful armament, diminished while agents of government and former agents of government get carve outs. Genuine constitutional protections for the individual right to keep and bear arms aren’t anything like what we have today. A diluted protection results in severe reduction of the deterrent value. IMHO, that’s precisely what we’ve seen happening for a long time.

  33. avatar tommy says:

    Obama has been a very good lesson for this Country. Progressiveness from this administration has given all of us a look at what would be coming next. First and most scary his attempt at regulating the internet. The President states, it’s liken to regulating a utility. Too you Mr. President, no it is not even similar in regards to a regulatory entity such as an electrical or gas utility. The internet and Obama’s regulatory proposals are freedom of speech issues period. Take control of what you can and can’t see, and you get only one side of an issue. Just graduated a few years ago from College and I can tell you on campus there is usually only one side of the issue being touted by the alleged educators in charge. Trust me on this one, anyone in disagreement is brow beaten all semester and could suffer a poor grade in the process. Controlling the narrative by one political group is tyrannical and dangerous.

    1. avatar Rob D says:

      From white hats to black hats just like the common criminal. If that’s is the way it is to be done now .So be it.

  34. avatar Jane says:

    I’m a female who is 5′-6″ and carry a gun. Last year I was attacked by the usual and during the incident an older man who had a concealed to carry license shot my attacker. A few day later the assailant died of his wounds. The gentlemen and I became very good friends and he convinced me to learn proper firearm use. I took his advise and I’m very confident and well trained to protect myself presently. This gun issue is really a women’s right to protect herself from violent criminals. Criminals have a lack of fear of being punished for their crimes and are being let out of jail sooner than later. This administration has embolden the criminal to the point of making this country unsafe.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email