Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Executive Orders fire the first shot in the Federal War on Open Carry?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Columbia, in the Peoples Republic of Murderland

    Executive Orders fire the first shot in the Federal War on Open Carry?

    Point five of President Obama's Executive orders read as such:

    5. "Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun."
    Go back and read that again, and think about what that REALLY means...

    That means that if your firearm is seized during an "investigative stop" because you are OCing and someone called in a MWAG call, they could KEEP your firearm until they run a full background check on you--including a full medical and mental health check (per other provisions in this EO) and a complete NICS check (and State background check if applicable).

    In other words, you migh tnot get your gun back for days or even weeks. And if you've EVER taken any sort of prescription drug for depression, anxiety, or depression, or sought the services of a psychiatrist or psychologist or therapist you might NEVER get it back.

    Read the fine print on this one, folks--The current administration is starting to take the gloves off in their war on the 2A, but they are doing it in a very sneaky, duplicitous way.

    You have to understand how a criminal, sociopathic oligarch thinks to understand their methods and tactics. We are perilously close to a "reset button moment", people, and to be honest, I'm getting worried...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 01-16-2013 at 09:15 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Exactly my thoughts. Remove your firearm for "officer safety" and lose it for an extended period of time or even forever.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    That was how I took it as well. And while I don't want to be the person to have to go to court over it, that would be a perfect example (imo) of a violation of the fourth amendment. Would probably be best on a case where the gun wasn't returned for days/weeks/indef though as opposed to it simply taking 20-30minutes (still unreasonable, but a longer time would most likely be better for the court case).

  4. #4
    Regular Member Batousaii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    I firmly believe that the federal government is intentionally steering us toward crisis in an attempt to suspend the constitution through the emergency powers.
    - Every step they take will be in support of this goal.
    Last edited by Batousaii; 01-16-2013 at 11:19 PM.
    ~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
    The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!
    * " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Fairfax Co., VA
    I kinda doubt this one will go very far. They're talking about an lot firearms, potentially. Think of all the guns seized for officer safety during traffic stops.* And, the original GFSZ law was shot down by SCOTUS partly because it compelled local law enforcement to enforce federal criminal law.

    But, lets say this rule did become operative.

    I would predict that within ten years, maybe sooner, people would be getting pre-emptive backround checks so they could get their gun back right away if they were ever traffic-stopped. Remember when the airport gropers' agency offered a program for frequent passengers whereby they could bypass some of the gate rape procedures if they got on a list of pre-vetted people.

    Also, think about where CCW permits plays into this. Many--maybe all--CCW permitees are backround-checked. Is government going to pass up the chance to insist that all states standardize their CCW requirements as part of being able to use your CCW to get your gun back at the end of the stop? No. Of course, not. And, who will write those standards? Yep, the fedgov. Wanta place any bets on how onerous the training and competence standards will become? And, you can forget about getting constitutional carry anywhere it does not already exist if such a federal regulation goes into practice.

    And, as others have mentioned, all this backround-checking, however arrived at, results in defacto gun registration.

    So, even though I don't think it will go very far, I thinks its worth putting up a mighty fight against it anyway just to make sure.

    *Worse, think of the additional incentive cops will have to seize guns. On the one hand, a mini-backround check is already being performed whenever a cop runs your identity--he's looking for outstanding warrants. And, perhaps whether your a felon in possession of a firearm. So, maybe there isn't so much reason to keep the gun. On the other hand, I don't wanta find out what incentive cops will cook up for themselves to start seizing all guns during traffic stops.
    Last edited by Citizen; 01-16-2013 at 11:27 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts