ARs are flying off the shelf

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • 88GT

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 29, 2010
    16,643
    83
    Familyfriendlyville
    They can't create new law with an executive order. Let's say that Congress passed a law against all rifles with a pistol grip, but didn't define what a pistol grip actually is. An executive order could clarify that. So without specific guidelines, they could define a pistol grip by executive order to include for instance thumbhole grips, and declare that those are now illegal.

    They're not supposed to, but what if they did?

    What's keeping them from doing it?
     

    dross

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    8,699
    48
    Monument, CO
    They're not supposed to, but what if they did?

    What's keeping them from doing it?

    Good point. Only a court ruling. This administration might be brazen enough to try to ban something administratively. I do expect every ATF approved function to slow down or stop.
     

    ZX-14R

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Oct 7, 2012
    414
    16
    It wouldn't be an ex post facto law. An ex post facto law would be if they made the weapons illegal dating back to 2009 and then prosecuted everyone who possessed one after that date. They could pass a law that said all semi auto rifles are illegal starting next week and that wouldn't be ex post facto.

    I am not sure that your description of an EPF law is accurate. Now I am no expert or lawyer, but an ex post facto law is a law that provides for punishment for an act that was committed when the act was not illegal. By that definition, wouldn't (for example) having an AR-15 purchased legally on a Monday, could not be made illegal to own by passing a law on Tuesday. If its based on when the "act" was committed, essentially when you purchased it. If you purchased before the law was passed, you can't be punished for it. The law would place a restriction on an already-completed legal transaction. Correct me if I am wrong, but all of the research I have supports that. If the "Act" was including possession, that is essentially full confiscation and mandatory forfeiture to the government.

    The ONLY thing I have a hard time believing that this government could/would pass is one that overnight turns millions of law abiding gun owners into felons with the stroke of a pen.
     
    Last edited:

    JoshuaW

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jun 18, 2010
    2,266
    38
    South Bend, IN
    Good point. Only a court ruling. This administration might be brazen enough to try to ban something administratively. I do expect every ATF approved function to slow down or stop.

    I dont think they are. If they did, it would be addressed quickly, and I would hope Congress would move to impeach. Not to mention the number of people who would show up in protest, and the reasonably large group of people people who would disregard the law and begin committing acts of violence against the federal government. Im fairly confident that even they would keep all of that in mind.
     
    Top Bottom