Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Bidens 6 anti gun executive actions...Here they are.

The last thing the democrats want is for the Supreme Court to take up a gun control case and uphold the Second Ammendment. I know it is a crap shoot but if it happens they will lose bigly. They are trying to push this crap as far as they can without bringing it to a head. They will pack the court first, then start trying to confiscate firearms.

It’ll fool their idiots.

Meaningless and ineffective political posturing. Nothing more, nothing less.

Speaking as an AR owner, I've always found the whole AR pistol "brace" a goofy bit of loophole engineering anyway. Who the hell are we trying to fool anyway?

I won't lose a minute of sleep over these EO's.

Watch him ban this by EO and the left celebrate in the streets LOL

Surest way to lose elections is to PO the voters. I suspect the Democrats are gonna wait and see if the Mid Terms go their way.

If they do and they get wider majorities in the Senate and Congress, then the gloves will come off and the full-on assault on the 2nd will happen.

But they keep taken guns away inch by inch. This must stop.

All of this stuff is bad. Don't go to sleep. Realistically, the first two are "legit" EO's in that they are the stuff of EO's. IMO they are Unconstitutional and also things that shouldn't be EO'd. They have consequences. The rest of them are things that are in essence, silly. Biden would present guidance on passing Red Flag Laws anyway. It might precipitate some in states that eventually would pass them anyway, without guidance and certainly without an EO. It won't do anything positive for the anti's in solid Red States and in fact, may precipitate pro-gun laws against Red Flags.

The Justice Dept. already issues reports. So f u c king what. Slow Mo Joe was already going to nominate an anti-gunner for AG. Big deal. How is that EO material? The gov already uses our own tax monies against us for propaganda purposes. So what?

So two EO's that shouldn't be EO's and that have some affect. Here's the Fudd part. I was alive when the GCA was passed and enacted and for a long time, stuff like ultra short barreled AR's were deemed illegal anyway. Then they came out with AR pistols and then people put stocks on them. They were deemed illegal and then people started calling them braces. Voila! Legal. I have no personal use for them myself, but if people want them, I am all for it. The GCA is an infringement anyway and if you read it that braces are illegal due to the GCA then it's all unconstitutional anyway. Ghost guns didn't exist when I was younger. I don't see how they're legal under the GCA which is itself illegal as hell IMO. Bottom line is, both these EO's should be resisted to the fullest extant possible both in Federal and State legislative arenas and also in the courts. I don't see a ghost gun in my future, but so what? If somebody wants one, I'm all for it. Resist, obstruct, object. Isn't that what the commies said when Trump went in?

What's being called a ghost gun is just a gun someone made in their shop. An industry has risen up providing frames that are just shy of being classifiable as guns, and folks are finishing them, but those frames aren't ghost guns. The ghost guns are the finished product, after the frame has been worked up in a home shop to where it would be classified as a gun. The ghost aspect is that it doesn't have any official existence on any registry anywhere, and no serial number. That's been legal since before the founding of our nation till today. We wouldn't have a John Browning, for example, if it weren't legal for folks to make their own guns in their own shops absent all sorts of red tape.