Reply to Thread

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chuckie" data-source="post: 4050424" data-attributes="member: 42584">- Again, the President has very limited powers himself. The best he can do are 'Executive Orders' which are not laws and are, at best, temporary in nature (almost always rescinded/cancelled by the next President).  At the Federal level the ONLY ones that can pass laws are Congress.  The ONLY ones that can change our Constitution is Congress. The ONLY ones that can ban assault rifles nation-wide is Congress.- The President calling for assault weapon bans has about the same effective as YOU calling for assault weapon bans - absolutely none.- People have much more to fear from State legislated weapon/weapon accessory bans which DO become laws (in that State). But if you are not a resident of that state where the laws apply, then it has no affect on you.- As far as the ATF goes: " The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) was established as a separate component within the Department of Justice pursuant to Title XI of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, on January 17, 2003." approved by Congress, so the ATF does have authority granted by Congress to enforce establish rules and regulations concerning firearms.  Bump-stocks (for example) were a 'technically illegal' work-a-round to enable fully automatic rifle operation out of semi-automatic rifles, therefore, the ATF ban on Bump-stocks was nothing more than an enforcement of regulations that already existed, the regulations that banned unregulated/unregistered machine guns.  Still, if a Bump-stock hadn't played a role in the Las Vegas concert 'mass shooting', then the ATF would have probably continued to just ignore their existence - no harm, no foul!</blockquote>

Verification