“If Biden becomes president, he will confiscate your guns via executive order, and no one (not the USSC, Congress, militias, etc) will stop him.” (From the first post):

This is actually not true; and spreading false information like this is troubling.

He proposes to do a lot of things we may not be in favor of; like renewing the assault weapons ban, requiring their registration (which we already have to do in Hawaii) and doing buy back programs for large capacity mags and assault rifles. Also, proposes to ban internet sales of guns and ammo.   You can read it all here:

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

The TOPIC TITLE is about a Biden Assault Weapons Ban.  The comment that he will confiscate your guns is accurate in that context.  Taken out of context, you might think he meant ALL guns, not just Assault Weapons.

I think Joe will overstep the Constitution, just like Obama taught him-- immediate results in the face of constitutional challenges later.  Obamacare was unconstitutional as passed by Congress until they changed the mandatory ":fee" to a "tax".

“If Biden becomes president, he will confiscate your guns via executive order, and no one (not the USSC, Congress, militias, etc) will stop him.” (From the first post):

This is actually not true; and spreading false information like this is troubling.

He proposes to do a lot of things we may not be in favor of; like renewing the assault weapons ban, requiring their registration (which we already have to do in Hawaii) and doing buy back programs for large capacity mags and assault rifles. Also, proposes to ban internet sales of guns and ammo.   You can read it all here:

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

It was always a tax. Just because they didn't call it a tax didn't mean it wasn't a tax. They claimed it wasn't a tax because they knew it was hard to sell new taxes to people.

Biden wouldn't be able to overstep the constitution and ban assault rifles. That type of power does not exist within the powers of the president. You keep avoiding that fact.

Yes, he is ignorant -- or willfully blind.

It was always a tax. Just because they didn't call it a tax didn't mean it wasn't a tax. They claimed it wasn't a tax because they knew it was hard to sell new taxes to people.

Biden wouldn't be able to overstep the constitution and ban assault rifles. That type of power does not exist within the powers of the president. You keep avoiding that fact.

It was pushed through by the Democrat controlled Congress without the tax being called a tax, just to avoid Democrats voting against THE LARGEST SINGLE NEW TAX IN US HISTORY. 

They literally lied about the penalty being a "fee" to pass it.  Then when challenged, they changed the wording.

Bait and switch?  Absolutely.  The law should have been repealed in it's first year as being a fabricated system of fees.

Oh?  You sure about that EEF?  Look up Executive Order 9066.  Seems A LOT of the Constitution was trampled in that one.

You are right, they lied to the people but that never changed what it was the whole time. No one changed it into a tax, it was always a tax. I could see that without SCOTUS having to rule on it, it was obvious.

Executive order 9066 was subsequently backed up by Public Law 503 which passed through congress. That is what gave it the force of law. Biden would still have to have congress pass a law to enforce an executive order confiscating assault rifles.

“If Biden becomes president, he will confiscate your guns via executive order, and no one (not the USSC, Congress, militias, etc) will stop him.” (From the first post):
This is actually not true; and spreading false information like this is troubling.
He proposes to do a lot of things we may not be in favor of; like renewing the assault weapons ban, requiring their registration (which we already have to do in Hawaii) and doing buy back programs for large capacity mags and assault rifles. Also, proposes to ban internet sales of guns and ammo.   You can read it all here:
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
[/quote]
"definitions of assault weapons include: Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine"
 So you'll get to keep your revolver,  your break barrels and any long gun with a built in magazine (mostly 5 rounds) or tube (maybe 15 rounds).
You good with that ?
And BTW, that would be a "MANDATORY BUY BACK" which they did not sell to me. 

Good for you, but you having an opinion in no way changes what happened.

FDR and Congress faced intense political pressure from western states to deal with the “Japanese problem”.  EO 9066 was the result. 77-503 is widely regarded as political cover and a “rubber stamp” to give the illusion of constitutionality.