the EOs are not a big deal.

Bernie gets it, commonsense measures supported by the majority of our citizens- we call that Democratic Socialism, or Democracy , don't you know? It ain't politics, it is standing up for democracy. Bernie did not have to check some poll to know what he believes. Go Bernie!

I saw on CNN something about redefining what a gun 'dealer' is. How many guns will a person have to sell to be defined as a gun dealer under this EO?

As I understand it, the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act took away specific. numbers about a private citizen selling a few firearms. Can a president issue an EO that is in direct conflict with a law passed by congress?

It will be interesting what they come up with.

However, a UBC law needs to allow for short term transfers without a background check, or sales between family members.

I received a Ruger MkII as a birthday present. My brother bought me a shotgun on sale from a gun dealer (I paid him.) I bought a handgun from another brother. It is already illegal for these purchases if I was prohibited from owning/possessing firearms.

It seems that this EO might be a backdoor way of requiring background checks. Again, I am not opposed to background checks, but I wonder how this proposed EO will be enforced, assuming it survives any court decisions.

Although Dems applauding this shouldn't complain when a future republican president enacts EOs, but setting that aside a lot of my conservative co-workers/friends are already yelling about President Obama "violating the Second Amendment" or "coming to take your guns" and those are the misrepresentations that Republicans are going to use against Hillary and congressional candidates during the general election here in Virginia and in states like North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Colorado and Oregon. I'm concerned that the EOs will have next to no impact on gun violence and will ultimately damage the party this November.

Then, IMHO when nothing changes, they can demand more gun control of a harsher nature. 'To "just save one life". Then we can work on reducing the Interstate speed limit to 5 mph "just to save one life".

My challenge is, can anyone demanding UBCs cite an example of a crime/mass shooting etc. in the last 10 years where they didn't already pass a NICS background check? Or where a BG check might have stopped the crime?

Last edited Mon Jan 4, 2016, 08:31 PM - Edit history (1)

will not have much impact on reducing crime, but it could likely have an impact on elections.

You couldn't ask for a better example of style over substance.

Unless there's something hidden between the lines in the press release, I don't see how this will have any impact on crime, criminals or any one with mental issues that might do a mass shooting.

But I guarantee that we'll all be hearing about this well into November at the national, state and even local level.