[More]
It'll never be enough.
What did I tell you? Specifically?
I won't be surprised if this ends up showing the futility of "universal background checks," but is then turned around and used as the executive order "justification" for a "terror watch list" gun ban.Hell, "Republicans" Peter King and Mark Kirk would be so excited to support that they'd pee themselves.
Come to think of it, what with this being an election year, Obama being a lame duck with nothing to lose, the Republicans in general being gutless frauds, and the federal courts being ruled by appointed-for-a-reason Nazgûl, how long would it take to unwind an executive order forbidding FBI employees from completing NICS reports involving "assault weapons"?
Timothy McVeigh, no guns, 168 dead
ReplyDelete" an executive order forbidding FBI employees from completing NICS reports involving "assault weapons"?
ReplyDeleteExcept that on the 4473 there is only Handgun, Long gun and Other. They would have to have a whole new category for "assault weapons". Of course changing the 4473 isn't a problem for them. They do it on a regular basis it seems.
Section D?
ReplyDeleteSection D, Question 29 only mentions "pistols, revolvers, shotguns, rifles, frame, receiver...".
ReplyDeleteThey could change the form, but they will have to define "assault rifle". Would a current model Browning BAR hunting rifle be included? How about a Remington Woodmaster?
David,
ReplyDeleteI assume you know you're probably on that list. Those that are not, are not doing enough for the cause.
None of the info in section D is given to the feds during a NICS check. The only question is in section B, handgun long gun or other. They would not only have to change the form, they would have to have a definitive list of "assault weapons", but they would also have to get the NICS law changed to include the info in section D.
ReplyDeleteI dunno-- seems he does what he wants without the law and they know which models have the characteristics they don't like, so a list wouldn't be too hard to compile, would it? Question: It couldn't be an order to FFLs that any transfers involving such firearms ID'd in Sec. D will not be submitted and if they are and ATF finds out, they'll be penalized? I guess I keep coming back to all the creative ways these bastards ignore "shall not be infringed," and it seems if they can do that, they can do practically anything, and the only way to stop that won't come from a gutless Congress or co-conspirator courts. Just asking here.
ReplyDeleteAll that really comes to mind is...
ReplyDelete"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
With the ATF having the power over our licences, I guess they could issue such a order. We would either have to comply or forfeit our licence. With loosing our licence, all of those 4473's and A&D book would get sent to the licencing center in Atlanta where a squad of agents could start going through them. You can bet that they are busily entering all of that info into a data base. The law says they can't make a database from NICS info, but I bet it doesn't cover the paperwork FFL's that are quitting the business send in. Maybe a loophole big enough to drag all gun owners through?
ReplyDelete