Read it here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/07/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-initial-actions-to-address-the-gun-violence-public-health-epidemic/

HIGHLIGHTS:
The Justice Department, within 30 days, will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of “ghost guns.”

The Justice Department, within 60 days, will issue a proposed rule to make clear when a device marketed as a stabilizing brace effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act.

The Justice Department, within 60 days, will publish model “red flag” legislation for states.

The Administration is investing in evidence-based community violence interventions.

The Justice Department will issue an annual report on firearms trafficking.

The President will nominate David Chipman to serve as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.

I hope that David Chipman gets stalled or rejected.  I dont think they have the 60 votes needed to confirm.

I will wait to see what they will do to stop "ghost" guns.  The brace thing was a long time coming. Curious if they will do anything retro to the current pistols on market.
Red flag laws are stupid, still need the state to implement though.  Most blue states already have them. 

Countdown till the lawsuits begin to stop all these XO's.

Biden is human garbage, this isnt him talking, Its Obama 'the constitutional professor', also human garbage .


"No amendment to the Constitution is absolute. You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded movie theater and call it freedom of speech. From the beginning, you couldn't own any weapon you wanted to own."

AFT =P nominee was case worker fro WACO, yeah that thing that had women and children burned alive.

Involved with the lost of military grade firearms (Fast and the Furious)

Worked for Giffords upon retirement

Sounds like the perfect guy  to run the AFT.

Biden is human garbage, this isnt him talking, Its Obama 'the constitutional professor', also human garbage .


"No amendment to the Constitution is absolute. You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded movie theater and call it freedom of speech. From the beginning, you couldn't own any weapon you wanted to own."

I like the spirit of your comments, but "human garbage" is too kind a description.

And, really Joe? You moron. Please tell us, "from the beginning", which is when exactly, precisely which weapons were barred from ownership?

AFT =P nominee was case worker fro WACO, yeah that thing that had women and children burned alive.

Involved with the lost of military grade firearms (Fast and the Furious)

Worked for Giffords upon retirement

Sounds like the perfect guy  to run the AFT.

Well, let's be real, he only got the job because Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, and Hitler were unavailable.

If the ban on bump stocks is any indication, every single one of these "rules" being sought will be illegal.

The Executive can't redefine something as a "machine gun" when that definition already exists in law.  So, if a gun doesn't meet the definition of SBR or "ghost gun", they can't magically say the definition now applies to things they do not.

Bump stocks not 'machine guns' and
not subject to ATF ban, federal appeals court rules

A federal appeals court Thursday ruled that a federal regulation barring bump
stocks is likely illegal and was incorrect in claiming that the devices make a
weapon a machine gun.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/25/bump-stocks-not-machine-guns-and-not-subject-atf-b/

So the media keeps using the phrase "executive action", what's the diff between that and an "executive order"?

Irony of The Big Guys statements about the Constitution is they are both verifiably wrong. SCOTUS  overturned the Yell Fire argument. And when the 2A was written you could legally own Machine guns, Warships, Canons and even have your own personal Standing Army. The people who are pulling his strings are morons.

Irony of The Big Guys statements about the Constitution is they are both verifiably wrong. SCOTUS  overturned the Yell Fire argument. And when the 2A was written you could legally own Machine guns, Warships, Canons and even have your own personal Standing Army. The people who are pulling his strings are morons.

They aren't morons, it's the people who believe him are the morons.  They're using those words and phrases because the morons don't know any better and just believe everything that's on the news.  Why do you think "ghost" guns were targeted nationwide the past few years?  Even here, 1 bill passed into law about P80's last year and this year they're removing the retroactive (grandfather) date.  It's a coordinated attack on the 2a.

Dan Bongino had a video about the fire thing.  Long story short, there has to be an immediate action after any phrase that was said.  Which is why when Waters was threatening GOP reps, it was free speech because there were no GOP reps there at her rally that would have gotten assaulted or abused immediately after her statement.

So the media keeps using the phrase "executive action", what's the diff between that and an "executive order"?

From what I've read, Executive Orders are recorded in the Federal Register and carry the weight of law:

https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents/executive-orders

Executive Actions do not have any legal binding upon the people.  They usually define or redefine rules that the executive agencies use to do their jobs.  They can't rewrite existing laws, but they can expound on how those laws are to be enforced.

Executive orders are published in the Federal Register and are legally binding.
They give presidents the power to create unilateral directives, though they can
be overturned if a court rules they’re unconstitutional. Executive orders remain
in place until rescinded or modified by a president, reversed by a court or nullified
by legislation.

Executive actions, by contrast, bear little weight. They’re not published in the
Federal Register and aren’t subject to legal review.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/executive-action-vs-executive-order-whats-the-difference/ar-BB1fqBtN

They aren't morons, it's the people who believe him are the morons.  They're using those words and phrases because the morons don't know any better and just believe everything that's on the news.  Why do you think "ghost" guns were targeted nationwide the past few years?  Even here, 1 bill passed into law about P80's last year and this year they're removing the retroactive (grandfather) date.  It's a coordinated attack on the 2a.

Dan Bongino had a video about the fire thing.  Long story short, there has to be an immediate action after any phrase that was said.  Which is why when Waters was threatening GOP reps, it was free speech because there were no GOP reps there at her rally that would have gotten assaulted or abused immediately after her statement.

I don't think the proximity to speaker at that time is a factor.  A nut job can go shoot up a GOP baseball practice, and if he says the DNC leaders words drove him to do the crime, then that's evidence that they were directly complicit in the act of violence -- even if it was 6 months later.

There's no magic formula for determining whether or not someone was incited by someone's words.  Motive is often difficult to nail down, but if the perp said it was Maxine telling him to "push back" that made him buy a gun and use it, we kind of have to take his word for it -- especially if he's a Bernie Bro who follows the Dem whackos on all the Social Media sites.

I don't think the proximity to speaker at that time is a factor.  A nut job can go shoot up a GOP baseball practice, and if he says the DNC leaders words drove him to do the crime, then that's evidence that they were directly complicit in the act of violence -- even if it was 6 months later.

There's no magic formula for determining whether or not someone was incited by someone's words.  Motive is often difficult to nail down, but if the perp said it was Maxine telling him to "push back" that made him buy a gun and use it, we kind of have to take his word for it -- especially if he's a Bernie Bro who follows the Dem whackos on all the Social Media sites.

Proving that would be difficult/impossible.  There needs to be an immediate action, to insinuation relation.  Just like no one can commit a crime, then blame Trump or any other person whos words they heard.  By that time they have heard many other opinions and directives. They also had time to internalize their actions and plan new actions not based on the original words.  Imagine if someone killed a Mexican and blamed trump saying that Mexicans were threats.

Freedom of speech should take priority for most situations.

They aren't morons, it's the people who believe him are the morons. 

Adam Carrola says that a lot. 'The liars dont scare me, I expect Politicians to say stupid things to keep themselves in office. What scares me is how many folks buy into all of it now'.

Proving that would be difficult/impossible.  There needs to be an immediate action, to insinuation relation.  Just like no one can commit a crime, then blame Trump or any other person whos words they heard.  By that time they have heard many other opinions and directives. They also had time to internalize their actions and plan new actions not based on the original words.  Imagine if someone killed a Mexican and blamed trump saying that Mexicans were threats.

Freedom of speech should take priority for most situations.

What's the magic number of hours, days or weeks that must lapse after someone has given a speech before he can breath a sigh of relief knowing that anyone feeling his words were a call to violence no longer apply?

What's the magic number of hours, days or weeks that must lapse after someone has given a speech before he can breath a sigh of relief knowing that anyone feeling his words were a call to violence no longer apply?

I don't think it's something that can be quantified.  But it would be measured in hours not days. 

I don't think it's something that can be quantified.  But it would be measured in hours not days.

If it can't be quantified, then how do you know what the cut-off is?

Do you have any cases that back up your conjecture?

If it's in "hours, not days", would 23 hours be applicable?  26 hours (more than 1 day)?  36 hours (3 days)?

Saying hours implies you know for a fact that no one who spoke hateful, violence-inciting words could be held liable for anyone else's violent actions if the acts occurred more than 24 hours after the speech.  I'm simply asking what facts support that cut-off standard.

The one that interests me is this one.
"The Justice Department will issue an annual report on firearms trafficking."

That is the business I expect to go into when Hawaii bans guns and ammo.
I note that absent cooperative people like people who register their guns,
when the government tells them to do so,
they have no idea who has guns in say, Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, et al.