Trump Administration to change Firearms Export Regime.

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • 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!
  • gforce

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 22, 2018
    477
    If they are doing export changes, why would he not consider the flip side? He's a business guy. He knows there is a buck to be made in either direction.

    Might consider it, doubt he will take action on it. 2a doesn't seem to be high on his priority list. but who knows, we could get lucky
     

    Patattack88

    Active Member
    Jan 9, 2020
    113
    Westminster
    If trump really loved the 2a he would make all “assault weapons” bans illegal and unconstitutional. To me just another political scam to get more votes.
     

    PowPow

    Where's the beef?
    Nov 22, 2012
    4,712
    Howard County
    If trump really loved the 2a he would make all “assault weapons” bans illegal and unconstitutional. To me just another political scam to get more votes.

    The only way he can do that is either to: 1) Nominate SCOTUS/circuit/district judges that will do so, AND/OR 2) Lobby the legislative branch and support candidates for it with that as a focus.

    In my view, he's doing good (not perfect) on both. Then, of course, he says crap like "take the guns first, due process second.". I guess that is what a populist looks like.
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,230
    Montgomery County
    If trump really loved the 2a he would make all “assault weapons” bans illegal and unconstitutional. To me just another political scam to get more votes.

    You’re completely misunderstanding the powers of that office.

    If a previous executive issued a regulatory or similar action that bans something, he can undo that. But if a prior Congress passed a bill, signed into law by a prior executive, only another bill passing the House and the Senate can undo that if it doesn’t have a built in sunset date.

    Nor can the president “make something unconstitutional.” He can, though, if he has a cooperative senate, take advantage of court vacancies to seat new federal judges and justices that can do what we need. But even a constitutionalist court can’t act on their own - they have to have the right cases brought before them. That costs real money and takes time.

    In short: we must keep the senate and re-elect Trump, if for no other reason than to continue his good work of fixing our left-leaning courts.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    You’re completely misunderstanding the powers of that office.

    If a previous executive issued a regulatory or similar action that bans something, he can undo that. But if a prior Congress passed a bill, signed into law by a prior executive, only another bill passing the House and the Senate can undo that if it doesn’t have a built in sunset date.

    Nor can the president “make something unconstitutional.” He can, though, if he has a cooperative senate, take advantage of court vacancies to seat new federal judges and justices that can do what we need. But even a constitutionalist court can’t act on their own - they have to have the right cases brought before them. That costs real money and takes time.

    In short: we must keep the senate and re-elect Trump, if for no other reason than to continue his good work of fixing our left-leaning courts.

    Ed Zack Lee... :thumbsup:
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    it is reasonable for the Department of State to determine that they do not serve an inherently military function, absent specific characteristics that provide military users with significantly enhanced utility, such as automatic weapons, sound suppressors, and high capacity magazines.

    since when do "high capacity magazines" serve an inherently military function? Or sound suppressors? Sound suppressors save our ears! If OSHA got involved, they would be mandatory!


    Comment 2: Many commenters asserted that many semi-automatic rifles are easily converted to fully automatic firearms and for this reason semi- automatic firearms and the parts and components needed to do this should be retained on the USML. BIS response: BIS agrees that certain components may be used to convert a semi-automatic firearm into a fully automatic firearm.

    Later we learn that 60 round drum is inherently military:

    The items that remain on the ITAR include fully automatic and selective fire weapons, weapons for caseless ammunitions, silencers and certain high capacity (50 rounds or greater) magazines, and certain military- specific ammunition such as tracers.

    This is not the 2A directive you may be looking for...
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,444
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom