Well, /k/?

https://reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0UI1UQ20160105

>forgot link

cuck mods are going to delete your thread and ban you because they want gun control.

This topic isnt related to guns or firearms, OP!
Stop posting it in /k/!

>>28436602
That's not the order, it's more that if you act like a business dealer, as in sell a lot of guns, flip them relatively quickly, have separate accounts for your transactions etc... you need to do the background check.

>the republican congress has already said they will draft a bill to stop the order anyway.

>if they can't repeal it the next republican president will

>>28436616
>board about discussing weapons
>implement mods who despise weapons
But why

File: 7D2BEB76-CD50-46B6-92A7-B2405F43F1BE.jpg (90KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 960x720px

>>28436616
Better bump while I can

>>28436633
That's already a thing, though.

>>28436628
Shut up you dildo!

>>28436613
>untrusted connection
But for real, is there any thing we can do to stop this?

>>28436628
I like your bait, can I copy it and use it elsewhere? ;)

>>28436638
Strictly speaking it's a clarification of the rules for gun sellers.

>>28436664
Just checking
>>28436666

File: vote_no_i594.jpg (489KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 1500x1500px

>>28436602
thats what you faggots get for not supporting WA. now its a federal law

>>28436659
You can't post NSFW content on a blue board, friendo.

>>28436686
Statist bootlicker detected.

>>28436686
I don't see you doing anything about it, pal.

>>28436686
I see no penis. Just tits.

And we post tits all the time.

Observe, SVT with side of boob, no vagoo.

File: 1451964932501.gif (75KB, 180x180px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 180x180px

>>28436686
Get fucked sperglord

>>28436633

>Republicans making good on their word

>>28436689
I like the taste of rubber.

>>28436698
Well, you wouldn't.

>>28436715
First of all, saved. Secondly , I can totally see her vagoo.

>>28436715
That's a famas idiot

>>28436715
>tits are SFW
Don't be daft.

>>28436602
Can someone please tell me how bad this actually is?

I have yet to see a convincing argument as to why this is a bad idea

>>28436754
Infringes on personal freedom to do business between law abiding citizens without daddy's permission.

>>28436750
As bad as you going to jail for selling/trading more than 2 weapons in a year.

>>28436602
Everyone should just ignore this, and take all legal action to overturn it.

This is doable.

File: file.jpg (172KB, 1224x816px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1224x816px

>>28436729
Bullshit. Prove it.

>>28436730
...FUCK, I knew I missed something

>>28436736
Here, happy now? It's like you hate freedoms.

>>28436659
You uh, got any source?

>>28436689
>Voluntarily using a privately owned image board with it's own rules
>statist

>>28436633
>>28436666
>>28436750
>>28436764
Freebeacon.com/issues/obama-executive-order-may-require-those-selling-even-a-single-firearm-become-licensed-dealers/

File: 1466315_614605528598592_1883345926_n.jpg (86KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 720x960px

>>28436775
Where can I get one?

>>28436635
>4chan run by SJWs
>sold to a gook who has said SJWs admin the board for him

>>28436786
fug
>>28436774

>>28436729
I see no injection port.

>>28436804
Then make one

>>28436770
THIS.

File: IMG_20151212_161609.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>28436797
Where can you get one what? Girl?
I found mine at a live music venue on accident. I am quite glad she likes both guns and classy, racy pics of nearly/completely nude women.

File: 1449964073534.jpg (868KB, 1500x1972px) Image search: [Google]

868KB, 1500x1972px

You'll vote for trump because he supports guns, right /k/?

>>28436659
Reported for nsfw content on a blue board

>>28436689
>voluntarily complying with the rules of a private establishment
>statism
For fucks sake /pol/ you're embarrassing yourself, do you not know what property rights are?

You can run a diner and have an explicit rule against feminist harpies loudly shouting about their agenda in your diner under the same logic, yet you would welcome the ability to have those rules for your privately owned establishment.

>>28436764
not really, this is actually pretty tame

>The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives now will require that people who sell guns at stores, at gun shows or over the Internet be licensed and conduct checks, officials said. The ATF was finalizing a rule requiring background checks for buyers of dangerous weapons from a trust, corporation or other legal entity as well

>>28436783
>be an individual
>want to sell a gun I never use anymore
>see that it will be much easier to simply sell my gun illegally
>criminals get guns

you're so smart Obama, maybe you check your (executive) privilege

>>28436892
>this is actually pretty tame
And it's just .22lr, why not get shot with it?

>>28436783
>even the title is a lie
kek, they specifically say hobbyists and collectors are exempt as usual

>>28436916
so edgy, so cool bro

>>28436616
This. Every other board is allowed to talk about the industry and regulations of their board topic, but fuck no you can't talk about WEAPON regulations and laws on the WEAPON board.

>>28436931
You are literally retarded.

>>28436935
>I'm not intelligent enough to come up with a more convincing argument than 'muh freedoms' so I'll just insult the other anon's intelligence

>>28436916
I think what he's saying is that it obviously isn't nice, it really could have been unbelievably worse.

>>28436951
>infringement of personal rights bogged down in government control and red tape isn't a valid argument
k

>>28436892
Wait, isn't that the exact same shit that we already have?

>online
Well, if you're selling online, chances are you are a box store with an online counterpart, and you have an ffl. If you're on armslist, you didn't sell the gun online....technically, you just said "who wants this overpriced piece of shit?" and someone said "I'll take it for $xxx." And then you made a deal in person.

>at stores
....you already need a fucking ffl and 4473 to pass if you're in a gun store SELLING a gun. Next.

>at gun shows
Is this an attempt to close a gun show loophole? If you're a retailer and selling guns at shows, you already need to have a stack of 4473s ready to fill out. If you're Joe Schmoe, you make a friend and come to an agreement on how much a gun is worth. This might be the only thing this shit alters.

>buyers of dangerous weapons from trusts, corporate, or legal entities
Well no shit, Dick Tracy. If I can find a fucking dangerous weapon, I'd want to prove I'm capable of handling that bitch in a safe manner, too. Pity, all the weapons I know of on trusts (or in accessible hands of corporate or other legal entities) aren't dangerous, merely fun.

>>28436956
And I'm pointing out the defeatism and minimizing he's doing against clear cut overreach.

Yes, it could have been worse.
But that does not give it a free pass.

>>28436892
Fuck you. No it isn't.
I shouldn't have to be entered into a government database to buy a Ruger or nugget. This illegal "rule" means any gun purchase anywhere requires background checks and entry into a government database.

>>28436958
>criminals should be able to acquire firearms by buying them without background checks

>>28436965
>a criminal might use this, better take it out of the hands of law abiding citizens
>nothing to hide, nothing to fear!

>>28436602
So gun show sellers need an FFL or an equivalent, or anybody turning over a decent amount of firearm sales needs an FFL or equivalent.

So private 1-1 sales don't require it.

Honestly, I'm not bothered. It seems legit. As long as it continues to remain for high turnover sellers, gun shows etc only, I don't think it's a real problem. The problem is when this does nothing to stop crime rates, and another mass shooting happens even if it's something as small as a group of gangbangers getting blown away by other gangbangers, the media will leap with full fury saying that obviously background checks aren't enough and stricter gun control is needed.

The implementation here isn't BAD, the problem is the "give an inch take a mile" approach US
legislators and media have on gun rights.

>>28436825
Reported for reporting a report.

>>28436965
>cars might be used by an angry black woman to run over 40 people in Las Vegas
>better ban cars for everyone!

>>28436933
Not every board, no.
Also, I think this goes back to this topic attracting a lot of stormcucks who aren't actually interested in a practical solution, and want to talk about how this is the hebrew's fault.

It's just not always constructive.

>>28436964
>implying the ATF is allowed to keep a national firearms registry
>implying that if they don't already have one, it makes sense for them to start working on one now when there are already 300,000,000 firearms in circulation in the country

>>28436969
>So private 1-1 sales don't require it.
But online sales do, which is the majority of private sales.

Are you really going to hop into your car and drive across six states to buy something and avoid this gayness?

>>28436965
>criminals buy legal guns through legal channels for legal purposes
You're being silly.

>>28436977
>the ATF doesn't have one
>but they probably do
>and if they don't they should
Nigger what are you even typing

This is why these types of threads get deleted, they get shitposted into oblivion.

>>28436654
MOOOOOM, FLANNEL CALLED ME A DILDO

>>28436980
>implying online sales across state lines don't require transfer via an FFL

>>28436980
>drive 6 states away
>pick up wonderful Beretta 93r
>was done 1-1
>no background check needed!

Won't lie, sounds good to me, regardless of driving distance.

>>28436984
Libtards want to pretend this will stop "terrorism", even though a federal background check was done on the San Bernadino shooters and they passed.

Screening out bad people isn't the goal. Building a database for later confiscation, is.

>>28436985
I'm saying they're not allowed to have one. People are arguing that federal background checks will mark the creation of a national registry. I'm arguing that it doesn't make sense for them to make one NOW that there are already over 300 million firearms in circulation that will never be entered into a database

>>28436992
>I want new rules and regulations and inconvenience and spending to accomplish something I can already do before, for free
Pass a law where the government has to pay for my gas, food, and car maintenance every single time I have to drive across state lines to purchase a gun, and I'll consider your viewpoint.

>>28436995
Let's not forget about all the build-a-gun workshops, groups, etc.

>be convicted felon
>go to gun show
>buy gun, directly, in person

you think this should be allowed?

Have they presented a clear definition of what "engaged is business" means?
Is a guy selling his 10/22 to his buddy exempt? What about two guys that met on Armslist? They brokered the deal online sure, but the transaction was in person.
I suck at legalese.

>>28437002
That's already illegal you dildo.

>>28437002
How many bolt-action rifles do liberals really think are used in crimes?

>>28437006
>Have they presented a clear definition of what "engaged is business" means?
Anyone who sells any gun, at any time, period.

People keep trying to find the silver lining, but there is NO set minimum for this to take effect. If you sell a rifle to your dad, you need an FFL and a background check.

>>28436998
Maybe I misspelled "full auto M9" because I'm a faggot and can't recall shit right now. But that's what I was going for. Or that other CZ autopistol with the magazine acting as a foregrip.
I'm not driving 1,000+ miles for a fucking $500 gun, fuck that.

>>28437002
Knowingly selling to a felon is one thing. A felon being sneaky and posing as a legitimate buyer is something different. Falsifying information, illegal weapon purchase/possession, etc.

>>28436792
Will I get banned for saying Nigger?

>>28437018
That's why you "Gift" it to someone and they "Gift" you some cash sometime later :^)

Gee this sounds familiar

>>28437030
Do they write "glock gift" in the check memo ?

>>28437002
that was already illegal.

>>28437006
it's already been well defined by the ATF. I sent them an email a while back asking for clarification since I wanted to build AKs from parts kits and sell them (low volumes, like 1 a month)

"engaged in the business" essentially means you are manufacturing, buying, or selling firearms for profit.

you are not engaged in the business if you buy a 10/22 for $200 one year and sell it to your friend a year later for $250, even if you gain profit. If you buy ten 10/22s and turn around and immediately sell them for profit, then you are engaged in the business.

see the difference? it's OK to sell guns from your private collection, as long as you don't buy/manufacture with the primary intent of reselling for a profit

>>28437018
this is simply not true.

"engaged in the business" means you are buying/manufacturing firearms with the primary purpose of selling them for a profit

>>28437009
>>28437010
>>28437020
>>28437034
of course it's illegal, but there's nothing to stop it from happening and no way for them to get caught

>>28437052
Here's the exact words:

A person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms regardless of the location in which firearm transactions are conducted. For example, a person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms even if the person only conducts firearm transactions at gun shows or through the Internet. Those engaged in the business of dealing in firearms who utilize the Internet or other technologies must obtain a license, just as a dealer whose business is run out of a traditional brick-and-mortar store.

Quantity and frequency of sales are relevant indicators. There is no specific threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensure requirement. But it is important to note that even a few transactions, when combined with other evidence, can be sufficient to establish that a person is “engaged in the business.” For example, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors also were present.

>There is no specific threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensure requirement.
>There is no specific threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensure requirement.
>There is no specific threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensure requirement.

>>28436633
the descriptive wording of the law is not it's legal interpretation. the description is intentionally worded to misrepresent the law, so that people who are ignorant of the law will defend it.

>>28436602
to be honest I approve of this move. I know it's outside of /k/'s hivemind but I am with the vast majority of Americans on this as well as the majority of gun owners. this does not affect anyone of us who are law abiding gun owners.

>>28437061
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/30/the-gun-show-loophole-myth/
>A 2001 Justice Department survey found 0.7 percent of state and federal prison inmates bought their weapons at a gun show.
Good thing it almost never happens.

You cannot go to a gun show and get an AR or pistol without a background check.

>>28437071
it's true that there is no specific threshold number of firearms. this does not mean that you need an FFL to sell one gun.

the difference is whether or not you are buying and selling specifically for profit

>>28436659
ENJOY THE BAN

>>28436729
>rubber
your cops have shit boots
you should vote to increase their budget so that they can get genuine Corcoran jump boots
they taste the best

>>28437061
so what's to stop these people selling guns at gun shows from not filling out the proper paperwork IF this law passes?
the sellers were already breaking the law, why would they have a change of heart?

>>28436616
>wanting to invite the unwanted opinions of eurotrash, noguns and other assorted foreigners even more than usual

>>28437077

except it does, I checked myself into a mental ward once for suicidal depression and that doesn't look good on a background check

>>28437110
Why not pass a law requiring a 4473 to be filled out and cleared before you even enter a gun show? We're all law abiding citizens anyway.

>>28437118
this executive order doesn't open up private medical records to background checks. it increases funding for mental health treatment, however

>>28437122
or how about having to pass a background check in order to enter the show?

of course you won't stop stuff like straw purchases but it closes off one avenue for felons to obtain firearms directly

>>28437088
I absolutely guarantee you it will be interpreted that way.

I'm getting a migraine here. If there's anything certain with government, especially with this administration, it's that if you give an inch they'll take a mile. You can look forward to court cases in six months where someone gets put in jail because they sold a single bolt-action rifle or a shotgun to another person for cash. I promise you it's going to happen. And then /k/ will be super pissed with 300+ reply threads wondering how the hell it happened. As per usual.

>>28436998
you already cannot sell handguns across state lines, and even long guns need to ship to an FFL

>>28437122
>We're all law abiding citizens anyway.
i took the bait. :^(

>>28437118
>I checked myself into a mental ward once for suicidal depression and that doesn't look good on a background check
Listen Anon, if you haven't read, or if you don't understand, the executive order be careful where you get an explanation from.

damn

>>28437153
Didn't we find out that we already can buy across state lines, but need to transfer to an ffl of the purchaser's state of residence?

>>28437141
>I absolutely guarantee you it will be interpreted that way
the ATF doesn't have the money to chase down everyone who sells a gun on armslist
they barely have the personnel to approve NFA stamps

Gun owners, generally speaking, look to be so incredibly fearful. the sky is not falling people.

>>28437135
actually wouldn't be a bad idea if it was a problem in the first place

>>28437141
it hasn't ever been interpreted that way, as long as people aren't retarded about it. people have sold their entire gun collections without needing an FFL. because they didn't buy them with the intention of reselling for profit.

the executive order has nothing to do with this

>>28437164
yes, that's what I meant, cannot do private transfers across state lines
you can buy long guns under certain circumstances I think, it might be only adjacent states or something, I don't remember
but handguns are no go for sure

buy through an FFL/transfer it to an FFL in home state

>>28437192
this

I moved to WA for a few months last summer and bought a shotgun from a shop in PA. I had to have it shipped to an FFL in WA to do the transfer for me. This is federal law.

this is honestly fine. everyone relax...we dont even know what the exemptions will be...or the loopholes..be cool.

>>28437176
can you really blame them? its been years of constant threats of gun control.

a lot of states have passed strict laws too. youre just not paying attention.

i'm actually pretty fine with this, private sellers should be performing background checks anyway.

>>28437223
this executive order is a means of gun control that makes sense and really doesn't affect anyone who is law abiding and stable. the constant threats of falling skies is coming from paranoid gun owners and politicians with unrelated agendas

>>28436602
I dont get it /k/. Do people just forget how to read shit when it comes to this.

>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
This is a statement, the reason for the rule.

>The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This is the rule.

Im not even Americans and I get this.

>>28436628
>MFW threads about Clone armies, laser swords, robots and space ships are ok; but mention weapon control laws (laws that influence if you can or can't purchase a WEAPON) on a weapon forum are not ok.

Yeah I really want to go to /pol/ and look through 50 comments on how this is the Jews fault before I get to a comment I want to respond to only to have the thread get 404'd because everyone is bumping cuck threads vs have a more or less intelligent discussion on /k/.

>>28436974
Actually, in order to sell more than 5 cars a year, more states require you have a dealers license.

>>28436783
>shill tier source
>may
Duely ignored

>>28437185
this

people are overfocusing on a remark that as few as 1 or 2 guns CAN be engaged in a business without and understanding of how the courts interpret this

EOs don't create new law, they direct the executive branch (read law enforcement) how to interpret and enforce the law, but the courts interpretation is still the best

another example of this is when Obama signed EOs directing the DEA and other agencies to not pursue investigations of marijuana sellers licensed by their states'it didn't make it federally legal to sell cannabis, the DEA or local fuzz can still arrest you for slangin' on the corner
if you were already in prison, you don't get out
etc

these EOs are not designed to actually do anything, because EOs can't
they're designed to appease the Dem's liberal base and scare gun owners into using FFLs
the courts will interpret the law as they always have
as before, you can't buy guns with the intent to resell, but you can resell if it turns out you don't like the gun or whatever
don't get too hung up on the "as few as 1 or 2" because that doesn't mean "anyone who sells one or two"
the situation they're talking about is suppose I sell Rooski milsurp as my business, and I travel to gun shows as part of that business
while at that gunshow, I see a Imperial marked hand nugget priced like a regular hand nugget and decide that I could sell that through my business for profit
I buy that gun with my business account and then sell it through my business and deposit the profit in my business account
I just broke the law and engaged in the business of selling firearms, but the ATF still has to find out and prove it beyond reasonable doubt

if I, Joe Schmoe the neckbeard see the same Imperial hand nugget and buy it, and, after I get out to the range decide I hate it because my groups are bigger than my gut, and list it on armslist for Imperial hand nugget prices and even make a tidy profit, I, Joe Schmoe the neckbeard broke no law and am legally fine

>>28437207
>>28437207
well, I've purchased not 1 but 2 10/22s from Scheels in WI as an IL resident
I still had to do the IL 24 hour wait, but I did it

from the ATF:
https://www.atf.gov/questions-and-answers/qa/may-unlicensed-person-acquire-firearm-under-gca-any-state

Generally, a person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State. Exceptions include the acquisition pursuant to a lawful bequest, or an over–the–counter acquisition of a rifle or shotgun from a licensee where the transaction is allowed by the purchaser’s State of residence and the licensee’s State of business. A person may borrow or rent a firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C 922(a)(3); 27 CFR 478.29]

>>28437236
>gun control that makes sense
Where have I heard that before?

So I bought a gun privately online and it was shipped to my FFL to complete the transfer. I'm not sure this would have changed anything, besides the ATF going to the other dudes house to shoot his dog for being engaged in the business because now they can cherry pick 'evidence' to support a claim of 'being engaged in the business'

>>28436980
Any sale that involved shipping already required an ffl. This doesn't effect armslist because people there just arrange 1-1 sales.

File: nien.jpg (51KB, 526x637px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 526x637px

>TFW I live in California and this changes almost nothing for me.

>>28437110
The EO only applies if you are inside the gunshow, paid for a booth, accept credit cards, or have a business card mentioning guns

>don't buy booth
>sell as many as you want out of the back of your truck in the parking lot
>EO can't do shit

Not to say it isn't already toothless, because he tacked on a spending bill to it which is going to cause congress to btfo him

>>28437018
This has already been defined. The ATF has been nailing unlicensed gun dealers for years.

>>28437274
that's fine, there's nothing keeping you from buying in WI if you are an IL resident. buying long guns in other states is generally not restricted.

If you bought those guns from WI over the internet and wanted them shipped to you in IL, then they would have to go through an FFL. that was my case. I could have bought it from a shop in WA and wouldn't have to go through an FFL

>>28437309
sorry, meant to say i could have bought it from a private seller in WA and wouldn't have to go through an FFL

>>28437071
THIS WAS ALWAYS TRUE, YOU WERE NEVER ALLOWED TO BUY GUNS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SELLING THEM FOR PROFIT WITHOUT AN FFL. NOTHING AT ALL CHANGED.

>>28437118
Was it court ordered? If not, you are wrong

I am all for the development of technology such as micro stamping and other means of identifying guns that will aid in tracking down straw purchasers.

make this happen now please

Worst thread of the year, 2016.

>>28436633
This.

It's an executive order "clarifying" the law, since Obama can't actually make or change laws himself. It just clarifies that if you sell a lot of guns privately to make a profit, you're considered a dealer and need to get a license.

>>28436602
I love how the strawmen are always portrayed as obese. Big is beautiful and all that nonsense except when it's a white male with differing views.

File: image.jpg (483KB, 1050x1080px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 1050x1080px

>>28436602
UH OH ITS NOT /k/ RELATED, WATCH OUT FOR THE FAGGOT MOD HE GON DELETE IT!!!!

Bigger question is going to be for the NFA fags as far as having a 'responsible person' or multiple people on your trust

I like the part where we voted on this.

>>28437293
It changes nothing for anybody, he just restated a law that already exists and is almost impossible to enforce because it hinges entirely on intent.

>>28437401
Mods need to delete this thread because OP is retarded and is posting disinfo, not because its off topic

Don't Executive Orders only apply to Federal Agencies? And the President cannot regulate commerce (That's taking a job of the Legislative Branch).
Unconstitutional, and unenforceable, and should be disregarded as such.

File: 1450051832424.gif (2MB, 360x203px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x203px

>>28436970
Reported for reporting a reporting of a report
:^)

>>28437448
These orders are just recommendations and orders to fed agencies on how to run their shit. OP is a lying faggot.

tl;dr

>clarifies that people who frequently buy/sell guns for a profit are considered unlicensed dealers
>orders NICS staff to be increased by 50% to speed up background checks

Nothing has really changed except NICS will be faster and open 24/7, and those faggots hoarding ARs for resale during the next scare will be hounded by ATF

>>28437401
OP is retarded and making shit up. At least he's not blaming Heebrews

>>28436783
so I can sell 1 gun a year and Ill legally be allowed to have an FFL?

HELLO NFA DEALER SAMPLES!!!

>>28437489
>all FFLs include SOT status
Fraid not, sparky.

is king nigger speaking yet?

>>28437524
He's speaking now, so far it's all been "Muh feelings" and him acting like the gun show "loophole" is actually a problem.

Holy fuck, I hope you guys got an AR15 already if you wanted one.

>>28437112

> Eurotrash

They are your white brothers and sisters. Why do you disparage them? We need to stay united as a race.

>>28437504
currently to hold an FFL you actually have to be in the business of selling guns.

if you get an FFL specifically to get an SOT and obtain NFA stuff the ATF will revoke your FFL if they audit you and find you're not actually conducting any business.

defining the amount of guns you have to sell to require an FFL down to one gun a year makes it feasible to aquire an FFL just to pay the SOT and get the stamp so you can purchase dealer samples at dealer sample cost, without having to run an actual business

>>28437002
Yes.
Not all felonies are violent.

>>28437559
Unless you're actually in business selling posts to LEO, you ain't getting one.

>>28437118
>>28437126
>>28437156

politico.com/story/2016/01/obama-gun-control-rule-mental-illness-217340

>>28437559
for the last fucking time, this does not define the number of guns sold to need an FFL as 1
fuck

>>28436965
>what criminals do
>somehow only matters when discussing gun laws

>>28437171
Yeah, because they have always been about staffing well the positions that let people get silencers, sawed off shotguns, and machine guns.

There will be a lot more sting posts on armslist from and agents, have fun.

>>28436821
What? The only thing Trump supports is sucking corporate dick.

Y'all niggaz need to stop supporting republicanh hillary

>>28437077
>>28437176
>>28437236
>>28437209
>>28437234
Either oblivious or subversive.

>>28437557
Most of their good genetic stock died out in two World Wars.

Who. Listening to press conference here

>>28437585
>finances his own campaign
>durr he sucks corporate dick
???????????????????????

>>28437565
It's like no one fucking reads the news.

>>28437171
You do understand this is the kind of logic that says "sure they can come after me, but they probably won't so I'm good", yes?

Low probability is not a risk management strategy.

File: 1451192701062.jpg (496KB, 1200x891px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 1200x891px

R A N D P A U L
A
N
D

P
A
U
L

>>28437596
risk is probability * exposure.

Reducing probability is a very effective risk management strategy.

>>28437566
im not saying that it does, im saying that if it did then the bright spot would be easier access to post samples.

>>28437563
touchy touchy.

if it defined the number of guns sold per year requiring an FFL to 1, all you would need is to sell 1 post sample per year.

you could do that at a loss, faggot

>>28437596
I should have clarified
the ATF (nor the courts) will not interpret it such that anyone selling any gun requires an FFL, NOR could they enforce it if they did interpret it that way

>>28437613
>FREE POST SAMPLE AR15 LOWER TO A GOOD HOME
>costs you $100
I can dig it.

>>28437585
found the bernietard

File: image.gif (1MB, 604x370px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 604x370px

>EVEN THE ENN ARRRE AAYYY SUPPORTED THIS BILL

>>28437610
>Reducing probability is a very effective risk management strategy.

so you support racial profiling and ejecting all the muslims from the US then, right?

>>28437022
Well lets see if you do

>>28437637
Of course.

>>28437637
>racial profiling
Yes

>and ejecting all the muslims
No

Get back to me when Muslims start killing as many Americans as 15-25 year old black males

>>28437643
well, ok then.

People tolerated the completely fucking retarded assault weapons ban. I don't really see why people are getting so up in arms about this legislation which is infinitely less moronic.

>>28436986
Because everyone knows it will get deleted so everyone just shit posts

>>28437658
they usually get deleted when pro-guns start to get BTFO by anti's.

>200 more ATF agents
hide your dogs

>>28437680
bait

>>28437680
>this is what fag liberals actually believe

>>28437654
>people tolerated bullshit then, why dont they tolerate billshit now?

1) internet, better informed
2) momentum, pendulum is swinging our way right now

Obama just said we need "update gun technology", he mentioned adding finger print for the gun to fite and GPS location of the gun. WHAT THE FUCK!

>>28437680
Bull shit

File: youbitch.jpg (154KB, 948x1179px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 948x1179px

https://www.whitehouse.gov/live

anyone else watching this right now?

>no more private sales?
>lets put tracking tech on all gats
>fingerprint detectors
>encourage private retailers to not sell ass-salt guns

anyone know if any of this has any real effect?

>>28437075
Can you expound upon this?

>>28437717
>Fingerprint guns


This nigga is literally trying to make a database of all gun owners

>>28437717
Yeah, it's bull shit. He's either misinformed and honestly thinks that adding "technology" to a gun is a good idea /OR/ he's setting it up so the government can track the guns later or disable the firearm remotely

He's also crying like a bitch

>says gun control is a long fight
It's never ending

>>28437742
>COMPARES GUN CONTROL TO FUCKING SLAVERY AND WOMEN"S RIGHT TO VOTE WHAT THE FUCK AM I LISTENING TO

Will this mandate cover boating accidents and one-in-a-million riverbed finds?

>>28437742
HAPPENING WIN?!?!?!?!?

>>28437717
>anyone know if any of this has any real effect?

No, it's just recommendations. He can't legislate.

>>28437407
Winner winner chicken dinner

Trump's first executive order: "Any person or persons attempting in anyway to infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens to own guns shall be considered a traitor to the nation and to the constitution, and will be executed without due process."

Is the stream over?

>>28437717
What I want to know are the specifics of private sales. He seemed to be talking about people who sell large stocks at gun shows being required to get an FFL (to be allowed at the gun show as a seller perhaps?), but will I have to drive several miles with my friend to the nearest FFL to buy a Nugget off him for $120?

What does this mean for C&R/FFL03 people? Will "online sales" end entirely or will they just have to do a NICS check beforehand or will nothing change because it's a FFL to FFL transfer?

I don't sell I just buy, btw.

>>28437810
>will I have to drive several miles with my friend to the nearest FFL to buy a Nugget off him for $120?
frankly that is how it should be.

>>28437792
Lol, k

Trumps actual first order:
Trump enterprises now pays 6% less in taxes

>>28437717
>lets put tracking tech on all gats
4th amendment anyone?

>>28437654
Less fudds. People that buy guns these days aren't only interested in going hunting anymore.

>>28437806
Starts again in 8 minutes.

>>28437845
>>28437806
Nevermind. It's over.

>>28437402
This, are the existing trusts going to have to comply with the changes (fingerprints, photographs, etc.) or will they be grandfathered in?

>>28437827
Or they could, you know, just open up NICS to be used by everybody so I don't have to pay a middleman to make private a transaction.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/01/05/obama-embraces-smart-guns-thrilling-proponents-of-the-controversial-technology/

>hey guys what we need is smarter guns

>>28437771
He's just talking about adding it, saying its a great idea

But dont worry anon, even if they do add it, just open up your rifle and rip out the small board or you could just get a car battery and fry the chip so if theres a law on keeping the chip in your gun, just say it shorted itself out and you didn't know

>>28437859

Reading your emails and texts isn't enough. We need to be able to know exactly where all your guns are located and be able to turn them off if you resist the FEMA camps!

Dead nigger king when?

>>28436602
>Well, / /?

Literally a samefag in every other board spamming questions in the same format for weeks now.

>>28436715
>deleted
Kekd

File: smarder guns guise.jpg (15KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 480x360px

This is our future

How long until the anti-gunners start asking for more gun control?

>>28437810
>He seemed to be talking about people who sell large stocks at gun shows being required to get an FFL
That's what he means. Some cocksucker here where I live lost his FFL after "losing" 300 guns. The feds let him transfer the store's inventory to his private collection, then sell all 2000 guns privately with no FFL and no background checks.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole (stated) purpose of FFLs to control the distribution of guns and make sure background checks are performed? If someone is found to have sold 300 guns without checks, and that is grounds to terminate their FFL, why let them then sell their remaining 2000 guns privately without checks? If this government wants to fuck us with "it's about safety" bullshit can't they at least be consistent?

>but will I have to drive several miles with my friend to the nearest FFL to buy a Nugget off him for $120?
No. That would require a federal universal background check law being passed, and every one that has come up in congress has been shot down. The president can't issue executive orders to get around proper legislation.

Basically these "orders" change nothing, but are just feel-good measures to make antis feel as if they won.

The funny thing about antis being made to "feel safe" when bullshit laws (like an AWB) are passed, is that they also "feel safe" when you say something is changed and it actually isn't. The feeling of safety and "making a difference" is wholly disconnected from reality and measurable change.

>>28437904
>Basically these "orders" change nothing, but are just feel-good measures to make antis feel as if they won.
>The funny thing about antis being made to "feel safe" when bullshit laws (like an AWB) are passed, is that they also "feel safe" when you say something is changed and it actually isn't. The feeling of safety and "making a difference" is wholly disconnected from reality and measurable change.

this guy gets it

>>28437898
Whenever Feinstein puts her face on and is ready for the day.
The new AWB is still on the floor and her pet project of the no fly ban is always on a back burner.

>>28437896
Johnson, the crime coefficient of that steel plate is through the roof!

>>28436602
Anyone have the actual text of the executive order so we can actually see what's affected instead of just blindly panicking? If not then the mods should delete this thread.

>>28437904
>purpose of FFLs to control the distribution of guns and make sure
>control the distribution of guns
>control guns
>gun control
I found the secret liberal arguing for gun control guise

>>28437939
>but isn't the whole (stated) purpose of FFLs
>(stated) purpose

found the internet demagogue cherry-picking quotes out of context to create something he can disagree with

>>28437171
Good thing they just got their funding and staffing ramped up :D

>>28437470
Those hoarding faggots were already criminals, though maybe a step up in enforcement will put the kybosch on all of the prospecting.

File: robot cars.gif (483KB, 500x268px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 500x268px

>>28437927
>will need approval of the Sybil System to go plinking

>>28436602
In Michigan you already get backround checked so it doesn't really impact me. Shit takes 2 seconds if you're not an idiot felon, or from another state.

>>28436992
was done over state lines, so background check is needed

File: 10399433_10153888066913593_2784457966075809092_n.jpg (85KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 720x960px

Took my gf shooting for the first time. She loved it and can't wait to go back.

I'm doing my part to counter Obama's culture war against guns. Are you?

>>28436992
You broke federal law. Interstate private sales of handguns are illegal

>Most young people avoid guns
most young people are faggots

>so do most women
why would they need a gun to do kitchen work?

>democrats
>montel williams
kek

>>28437002
That's already illegal

>>28438028
Who fucking cares.

>>28438013
Jesus, how tall is she? That 44in rifle is almost as big as she is.

>>28438059

She's a shawty. 5'1. I'm a 5'10" manlet so it works out.

>>28437975
just paint a negro on your target

>>28438036
The comic lies.
Women are a fast growing demographic for gun ownership.

Also
>Cooking in kitchen
>Some junkie kicks in the door to rape and pillage
>Woman kills junkie and finishes dinner

>>28437557
lmao, yuropoors are so noguns it's not even funny anymore.

Basically the modern day weapon cucks.

>>28438078
>Women are a fast growing demographic for gun ownership.
jesus christ Anon, this does not mean that most women avoid guns.

at least you don't need a decent IQ to own a firearm amiright?

So what exactly does he plan on doing about mental health? I heard what he said about throwing money at it but does he want all mental health records to become accessible to the federal government? This worries me because I have mental health issues but I'm not violent or a harm to anyone nor am I a criminal but because I have depression and shit does that mean I'll be turned down when I go to the gun store?

If it is an executive order, does that mean it can be stopped by the Supreme Court or Congress?

I don't know a lot about US political structure.

>>28437077
>>28437122
>>28437135
>>28437156
>>28437176
>>28437209
>>28437234
>>28437271


Where were you guys when /k/ literally became statist fucking shills?

>>28438078
>being a poor provider forcing your wife to live in a crackhead infested ghetto
>having doors that don't require explosives to breach

you done goofed

>>28437061
>nothing to stop it from happening

>Background check
If that fails anon, it's the FBI's fault, not the sellers.

>>28436602
burger posters on suicide watch

>>28438114
Basically, yes.

>Thanks Obama!

>>28438114

Doubtful but in the event they try that and you get denied an FFL transfer I would sue under the due process clause.

At present moment because of due process you have to be declared a harm to yourself or others by court order if the state can prove you are a danger to yourself or others and in such a hearing the state would of course need probable cause and you'd be entitled to an attorney.

>>28438078
More than that, the FPS generation has more media exposure to guns than than any of the last few generations and the number of certified licensed hunters has remained stable in the 14,500,000-15,000,000 range (the same level of the late 60s) since the mid 90s after the 70s-80s spike leveled out. And there are more general tags, licenses, permits and stamps than there ever have been.

>>28436635
Where do I sign up to be a mod

>>28438114
were you committed because of it? if so, maybe. if not, you should be good.

>>28438118
People become complacent. Cue Bezmenov video etc.

>>28437933
This, is there any place to read the actual executive order?

>>28436750
I read the text of the EO, there's nothing there that didn't already exist. What it boils down to is, he couldn't do a damn thing without getting bumperjacked by congress. So, he decided to tell ATF/DOJ to be more proactive in enforcing existing laws, and promised more funding for extra bodies to do it with. He also told a bunch of agencies, including DOD, to do more research on gun safety technology.

If you drill down through all of the bullshit and doublespeak, it's nothing. He got some agencies to promise to look into changing their rulemaking procedures so that mentally ill people can be added to the prohibited list. That's not gonna happen unless some laws change, which requires congress. This whole thing is just his way of saying he can't do anything. His powerbase is dumber than squirrels, so they think he said something meaningful.

File: troll.png (458KB, 3508x2480px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 3508x2480px

>>28437960

>>28438249
This is the only thing I've seen, white house """fact sheet"""
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/04/fact-sheet-new-executive-actions-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our

I don't understand how any of this works, however, since executive orders are ostensibly only supposed to apply to members of the executive branch. They're not meant to be laws or give the president the ability to circumvent congress.

>>28437724
Calling semi automatic rifles assault weapons

>>28438294
it really says alot about our education system that both sides think this actual means something,

>>28438152
Thank you for clarifying

>>28438196
No, I've never been to any mental institution or anything like that, I stopped going to my therapist about 8 months ago because I didn't have the time for it but I was about to receive treatment for my problems and recently I was making plans to start going back but with this shit I don't want to especially if it could keep me from owning firearms

>>28438294
I hope you're right. That's a refreshing opinion on it.

>>28438116

The order itself can't be, but Congress could elect to deny necessary funding for components of the order, such as the hiring of new ATF agents.

Or they could go nuclear and impeach the president, but that's obviously not going to happen.

>>28438118

Yes, I'm sure none of the posts were made by shitposting crossborders who wanted to piss off /k/ in the aftermath of an enormously publicized and very predictable announcement related to gun control.

>>28438345
you're good to get your treatment, so long as you aren't a danger to yourself or others.

>>28438345
it wont impact you Anon. Go and get the help you need senpai, you not only will still be able to keep and acquire firearms but you will have the added benefit of enjoying them even more.

>>28438294
Do you have a link to the EO? It's not listed on the whitehouse.gov site under Executive Orders.
They only have the memorandum and fact sheet.

>>28438294

Yeah, and I don't know why the fuck he went to all the trouble even. Unless he thinks the vague symbolic value of the move will serve as a rallying cry for stronger gun control efforts down the road.

As it is, he's risking burning bridges that he might need in a few months for objectives of far greater import, such as ratifying the TPP.

>>28436602
>Now any private gun sale must go through a FFL.

Incorrect.

Stop spreading blatant propaganda.

>>28438118
/k/ has always been a bunch of statist shills longing for the day they get to be the ones in the jackboot. Have you never seen the "/k/ makes a country" threads?

>>28436965
Yes. I for one fully support firearm rights for literally anyone not incarcerated or otherwise in the custody of the state such as those inmates in a halfway house.

If they shouldn't have a gun, they should be dead or in prison/jail/supervised.

>>28436673
It's not you idiots, a bunch of dumb hillbillies will be posting that private sales are illegal now for weeks to come.

File: incorrect.gif (890KB, 228x246px) Image search: [Google]

890KB, 228x246px

>>28436633
>if they can't repeal it the next republican president will
Uh huh. Sure.

>tfw you used to work for an FFL and he could probably make a killing off of this

Should I text him and see if he's hiring?

>>28436975
We post gun control threads here in order to AVOID all of the Hebrew talk.

>>28438317
>They're not meant to be laws or give the president the ability to circumvent congress.
No, they just affect how the laws are enforced. I'm wondering if this background checks at gun shows thing is somehow twisting the wording of the law to apply it in ways it wasn't originally intended, or just finally enforcing the law about how you have to have an FFL to be in the business of selling guns on the people who have been blatantly breaking the law for years.

>>28436977
>Implying the ATF is even allowed to run guns into Mexico for the cartels.

>Implying they would even try after fortyish years of drug warring.

>2009

>>28438013
She looks kinda jewish.

>>28438386
>>28438396
Thank you guys again for clarifying that for me

>>28438446
It would seem to me to be the former, since in my State, the legislature went so far as to close the "loophole" of private sales by requiring all private sales to go through an FFL.

If it were all ready illegal, it wouldn't really qualify as a loophole, but a lack of enforcement. Similar to how claims are made that multinat corporations "evade taxes" where in fact they are following the letter of the law and taking advantage of it where it did not apply.

You can guess the State.

>>28436633
This, he really didn't do much of anything.

>>28436975

The problem that attracted moderation in the first place was the shitposting floods that ensued after mass shooting incidents. Fair enough, I don't want to see the board inundated with that crap either. But because the mods are lazy, they weren't bothered to distinguish between those sorts of threads and legitimate /k/-related policy discussion.

>>28436975
>>28438436
Have you two been in 4chan /pol/ or 8ch.an /pol/?

Because what you're talking about sounds like 8ch.an's /pol/.

>>28438486
>If it were all ready illegal, it wouldn't really qualify as a loophole
These are people who don't even understand what they are trying to legislate about, do you think they care about making such a distinction?

File: biig booty vikings.jpg (184KB, 945x968px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 945x968px

>>28438491

I'll probably get shit for this, but we should do it like /r/guns does it. Have one stickied containment thread to discuss gun politics issues. This solution makes everyone happy, we get to talk about guns in the news without wading into the cesspool that is /pol/ and the shitposters still get their low effort threads pruned.

>in b4 gb2reddit

>NICS open 24/7
>literally zero requests between 9pm and 9am ever

>>28438545

>He doesn't go to 24 hour gun stores

What a pleb.

>>28438518
As long as mods regularly check over the thread and delete all the /pol/ shit about niggers and Jews to keep the thread on topic (considering it's stickied).

>>28436673
executive orders are not law, the only thing obama ordered that wil actually happen is more money for the ATF and funding for mental health research/smart gun research. he can tell fed departments what to do but can't make laws.

File: DDD.jpg (56KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 413x395px

>>28438518
It seems like right now
>official policy of no political discussion
>selectively ignore political threads when they're going well
seems to be a good policy.

You don't want this board fucked with more generals or plagued by rampant shitposting.
I see /k/ommandos complain about /k/ sometimes but it's a god damned on-topic paradise, relatively.

>>28438548
top fucking kek

>>28438545
>not knowing the US has numerous timezones
>not knowing its five a clock somewhere

>Samoa Time Zone
>UTC-11:00

>Hawaii-Aleutian Time Zone
>UTC-10:00

>Alaska Time Zone
>UTC-09:00

>Pacific Time Zone
>UTC-08:00

>Mountain Time Zone
>UTC-07:00

>Central Time Zone
>UTC-06:00

>Eastern Time Zone
>UTC-05:00

>Atlantic Time Zone
>UTC-04:00

>Chamorro Time Zone
>UTC+10:00

I thought it was going to be much, MUCH worse, but this is almost nothing compared to what I expected.

however, it's still not a good thing mind you.

>>28438013
>dating a chubby jew

You aight anon

>>28437271
What you're saying has some merit, but I think you're too dismissive on the leeway that federal agencies have when interpreting how to enforce the law. A good example of this is that a rider was thrown onto a congressional spending bill that was meant to say that the federal government can not undermine state law on medical marijuana. The DEA has essentially decided that prosecuting people and seizing their shit who are following state laws and regulations on med marijuana somehow does not undermine the purpose of those laws, and they continue to do it. Even though it's painfully clear that the people who wrote it obviously meant to stop raids on dispensaries.

>>28438677
no, its largely impoten, and slightly inconvenient to NFA owners with trusts

>>28438386
>so long as you aren't a danger to yourself
I hate this. With this they can justify doing whatever the hell they want to you because you are truthful about having maybe thought about killing yourself once when you felt like shit a long time ago. You shouldn't have to lie to preserve your rights if you're not committing any crime.

>>28437271
>another example of this is when Obama signed EOs directing the DEA and other agencies to not pursue investigations
I had thought the president was required to enforce the law as it is written, though? That selective enforcement wasn't legal? Or am I misunderstanding that.

>>28436993
This guy gets it. More about making the lists than using current ones.

Am I the only one who thinks this change is overall pretty great?

Sure, Obama gutted gun trusts and I expect that this will apply to existing gun trusts as well, but the whole point of getting a gun trust was to bypass the CLEO signature, which was just axed. Now, new NFA owners can just apply as individuals and not have to worry about their CLEO rejecting their applications arbitrarily.

If you believe that the law should be applied uniformly to everyone, then all that has changed is that now it will be. Maybe now, all the people who feel wronged that they now have to submit photos, fingerprints and a background check will feel how unjust the law actually is, and instead of being complacent, they will push back with a lawsuit similar to Hollis v. Holder and get rid of the NFA entirely, which should have happened 30 years ago, back in 1985.

>>28437753
He wasn't elected in a year ending with a 0. He won't be assassinated. Upon winning the 2020 election, trump will be in grave danger though.

Fuck off, he made good points even if he was cheesy with his Sandy hook bullshit.

>>28438836
>he made good points
Sure, Skylar.

>>28438386
Really only involuntary commitment matters.

It's presented as an ultimatum. Here's how:

>attempt suicide
>onemorethingyousuckat.png
>go inna hospital
>they treat your retarded ass
>doctor offers either for you to commit yourself or he commits you
>warns if he commits you, you'll be in psych ward longer
>really just more reporting paperwork for him an possible future legal challenges
>you unwittingly preserve your 2nd amendment rights with a 3am decision due to everyone's laziness
>voluntarily committed
>#worstvacationever #noshoestrings
>years later buy all the guns, truthfully check no on involuntary commitment question

Source: my actual experiences

I get a lot of junk email concerning guns because of my interest in them.

Anyone get these utterly laughable "Obama is coming for your guns!", "assault on the 2nd amendment!" type spam email's? I think that is why we see all these overly paranoid /k/ friends.

>>28436959
>And then you made a deal in person.
Was about to post this. I've never received money online. Simply agreed to meet a person. Anything beyond that is my own private and personal business.

It's literally nothing except fags who buy shit for the sole purpose of flipping it / scalping are now going to be under more scrutiny, even though that was already illegal unless they manned up and got their FFL

if president nigger is saying that the ATF ruling will prevent people from trusts buying guns and 'avoiding' a background check, what the fuck is the ATF doing with my paperwork for 3 months?

>>28438868
>or he commits you
I'm pretty sure you have to actually go to court to lose your gun rights. You don't lose rights at the stroke of a doctor's pen.

>>28438868
Can confirm, also personal experience.

>>28437323
This guy has been reading his ATF handbook!

You niggers need to stop freaking out. This has always been a law.

>>28436602
>Now any private gun sale must go through a FFL.
False statement. Joe blow selling his neighbor a pistol one time won't need an FFL. Joe blow selling his "collection" of 347 identical Glocks at a gun show will have to be an FFL.

>>28438949
That's adjudificated mentally deficiency, pretty sure this is closer to a record you need expunged thing... Might have been an empty threat, but this was in jersey...

>>28438994
The threat would have been: "I will testify against you in court to get you adjudicated mentally deficient." If I'm understanding the law correctly.

>>28438971

this was the board where people fetishized Mosin Nagants, of course posters here are dumb niggers

>>28438374
>The order itself can't be, but Congress could elect to deny necessary funding for components of the order, such as the hiring of new ATF agents.

That's terrifying. So potentially Sanders/Clinton (i.e. Clinton) could get in and just write in any law they like, with no fear of it getting stopped?

File: 4473 11.f.png (109KB, 1006x585px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1006x585px

>>28438994
>>28439013

If it's due to a doctor's decision alone, it's for observation.

>>28439025
>being this much of a debbie downer

>>28439013
The question on the 4473 covers both adjudicated mental deficiency and involuntary commitment, which they can only do if you are a threat to yourself or others. Guess what they know if they've been treating you for poisoning or slit wrists for half a week...

>>28439063
>what they know
Are you implying that you cannot be poisoned or cut by other people?

>>28439049

The president can not make law.

>>28437603
I don't even know who Ben Garrison is anymore. I mean, I actually see something I might agree with in a comic of his for once.

THAT BEING SAID, it is still WAY too simplied and glossed over for even political cartoon standards. At best, he is making it very clear "I don't like thing" for very vague or general reason, like he always did.

>>28438374
>shitposting crossborders who wanted to piss off /k/

Do people really give that much of a shit about this website? Or any website, for that matter.

>>28439058

oh exciuuuuuuuuuuse me for defusing the panic train

File: 1446990605957.jpg (67KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 640x480px

>>28439049
Are you really trying to tell us that you don't know how checks and balances work?

>>28439025
The easiest way to spot someone that come post-Sandy Hook is if they take the "nugget is best rifle ever!!" meme seriously to any degree.

It's always been a joke, and it's always been treated as a joke. It wasn't until the flood of new users that people started to genuinely believe /k/ thought Mosins were the best firearms in existence.

>>28439074
Ok, I used the wrong terminology, but what is the point of writing an executive order, then? It's not going to be "I'm the president and it would be nice if this happened", surely?

>>28439104
I don't know what those checks and balances are. I'm not from the US and I don't get how an executive order is different to a law.

>>28439104
are you ready to tell us how checks and balances how checks and balances have stopped anything?

>>28438110
You're an idiot.

>>28439127
oh m8, maybe take a break from the thread

>>28439120
>but what is the point of writing an executive order, then?
They are orders for members of the executive branch (those who enforce the law and are functionaries (paper-pushing assholes)).
They only affect procedure, policy or the manner in which law is enforced.
That's the purpose of the executive branch. Legislative is the only one that can make laws. Judicial is the only one that can interpret law and make judgment as to when law applies.
The president belongs to the executive branch.
>not from the US
Say that first ffs you will give people a thrombosis.

>>28436666
Nice Satan quads. Even if you might be wrong.

>>28439120
>I'm not from the US and I don't get how an executive order is different to a law.
All an EO is, is a directive for how the executive branch of government should operate. Ideally, they should be reserved for national disasters and emergencies as a way to act quickly in the middle of the night before Congress may have a chance to meet. Since the ATF is a law enforcement agency, it falls under the executive branch of government, which the President is at the top of. Being their boss, he can tell them how to operate, including how to fill out their paperwork and to hire 200 more employees. Serious EOs, like Obama's recent EO to grant amnesty to a bunch of illegal immigrants, can and do get struck down by the courts for the simple reason that the President lacks the power to create law. That one actually was struck down for that exact reason.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order

>>28439140
good to see that you can't actually provide evidence of checks and balances working.

>>28439177

he isn't

>>28439192

>>28439190
>Serious EOs, like Obama's recent EO to grant amnesty to a bunch of illegal immigrants, can and do get struck down by the courts for the simple reason that the President lacks the power to create law. That one actually was struck down for that exact reason.

>>28436980
>But online sales do, which is the majority of private sales.

Online sales that cross state lines already go through a FFL you stupid nigger

>>28436977
>federal agencies
>giving a flying fuck whether they're allowed to do something

>>28439074
He isn't, dumb fuck

>>28439160
Ah, I see. So how will these background checks be enforced? Will policemen be required to arrest people going against the executive order? I can't see people in the police force getting away with mass disobedience for a long while.

>>Say that first ffs you will give people a thrombosis.
Kek, I did say it way up the comment chain but desu it probably got lost among the crossboard shitposters

>>28439190
Ah, I see. So this will only apply to those within the executive branch - does that mean that policemen can arrest people who go against this gun control EO? Or are there other agents who would be responsible for this?

>>illegal immigrants
So that EO was struck down because the law (written by congress) would have disputed the EO, and as such the EO cannot be allowed?

>>28439256
The ATF is the "police force" in charge of enforcing federal gun laws. Local police work with them, but not directly for them. The only new background checks involved in these recent EOs is the new requirement for trusts, and that would be enforced directly by the ATF, since they process NFA paperwork.

File: 1435512184652.jpg (35KB, 696x785px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 696x785px

>>28439255

>>28438868

iirc a doctor can only "commit" someone for up to 72 hours for observation.

People who are committed against their will, regardless if they are insane or not, are entitled to legal representation and due process; see O'Connor v. Donaldson.

So is anyone who sells even one gun privately "engaged in the business of selling firearms" and now must get a license and conduct background checks?

How are they going to set the criteria for this? You can only sell a certain amount of guns per year?
Because you know, anyone who sells privately is obviously only selling to criminals who kill babies.

>>28439359
>So is anyone who sells even one gun privately "engaged in the business of selling firearms" and now must get a license and conduct background checks?
No.

>>28439376
So again, what's going to be the criteria for that?

Or have they not bothered to figure that part out yet?

>>28437176

The thing is, when people stop overreacting measures like this become accepted and normalized, which can lead to more drastic measures being seen as acceptable.

Is this individual piece of legislation some dramatic federal gun grab? No, absolutely not. However, "overreacting" to relatively innocuous legislation serves the purpose of preventing the Overton window on gun control from moving towards more stringent measures.

>>28439387
Obama didn't change the law whatsoever. It already was like this. What's the criteria? You tell me. When was the last time you sold one gun and were arrested?

It seems to me that they only say "sell one gun" in the legal description because it would be possible to set up your own retail gun store with the intention of selling without a license, and only sell one gun to an ATF agent, and this way you can't get off by claiming that you hadn't sold many guns yet. The way the law has always been applied has been pretty clear-cut. If you intend to buy and sell guns for a profit, then you need a license. If you're just selling your privately owned guns because you don't like them anymore or need the money, then you don't need a license.

>>28439420
you're being paranoid

>>28439425
>>If you're just selling your privately owned guns because you don't like them anymore or need the money, then you don't need a license.

Will people be punished for doing this now?

>>28439083
Don't worry, /pol/acks will be along shortly to shop le happy merchant into it and replace some of the words with cuck.

>>28439505
Once they start arresting people for it, it will go to court and be decided there what being a gun seller actually is.

>>28439505
>Will people be punished for doing this now?
No, because nothing has been changed.

>>28439420
>"overreacting"

an inappropriate reaction only serves to undermine your cause by removing integrity.

you clearly didn't read, or didn't quite understand the moral of The Boy Who Cried Wolf

>>28439586
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/01/robert-farago/question-of-the-day-are-you-a-gun-dealer/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-moves-to-close-gun-show-loophole-for-background-checks/

>the new guidance does not include a specific number of guns that must be sold to qualify as a dealer, since existing law does not specify a number.
>However, court rulings have set a precedent that says a person could sell as few as one or two guns and still be considered a dealer, depending on the circumstances.
>For instance, Lynch explained, if an individual sells a gun clearly for profit, or if they buy and sell a gun kept in its original packaging, they may be considered a dealer.

>>28439681
I keep original packaging for all my guns..

>>28438368
Here's another analysis that I just found. Breaks it down with considerably more detail than I did, and I don't agree with all of the conclusions, but it's another viewpoint to look at.

http://bearingarms.com/sound-fury-signifying-nothing-rundown-obamas-executive-orders/