Biden announces limited gun restrictions as pressure rises following mass shootings

[brooklynite]

Source: CNN

Facing pressure to act after a recent spate of high-profile mass shootings, President Joe Biden unveiled a package of moves Thursday that seek to address a scourge of gun violence he deemed a "blemish on the nation."

"Gun violence in this country is an epidemic," Biden said in the Rose Garden to an audience of lawmakers and Americans touched by gun violence. "And it's an international embarrassment."

The executive actions -- which Biden repeatedly argued did nothing to impinge on the Second Amendment right to bear arms -- include efforts to restrict weapons known as "ghost guns" that can be built using parts and instructions purchased online.

The moves are limited in scope and fall short of the steps Biden has vowed to pressure Congress to take. Still, they fulfilled his pledge last month to take "common-sense" steps on his own, and one move -- more heavily regulating arm braces used to make firing a pistol more accurate -- directly relates to the March shooting in Boulder, Colorado, where such a device was used.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/08/politics/gun-actions-joe-biden/index.html

[Tndem615]

1. All talk

Nothing substantive. So banning a “arm brace” whatever that is, won’t do anything. Not even bringing back the old assault gun ban.

[Dial H For Hero]

2. I'm skeptical that redefining arm braces as NFA items and requiring the estimated 10 to 40 million

of them out there to retroactively require a $200 tax stamp will survive the inevitable court challenge. As for a new assault weapons ban, the votes aren't there.

[brooklynite]

3. Isn't it a shame that Presidents can't do whatever they want without Congressional approval?

[Martin68]

13. Isn't it a shame that the Republican majority Congress did whatever Trump wanted them to do?

[brooklynite]

14. So we should be an unconstitutional as the Republicans?

[Martin68]

18. That's a leap. That's not what I wrote. I mean literally what I wrote, if you can wrap your head

sound that. Do you always jump to conclusions like that?

[brooklynite]

22. I was responding to someone who felt President Biden should do everything on his own...

...despite his Constritutional limitations. You chose to disagree.

[Martin68]

23. Please tell me where I disagreed with anything. You are reading words and meaning

into my comment that just aren't there. I made a direct statement that is critical of the Republican Congress that failed at every turn to prevent Trump's excesses and immoral policies.

[AZLD4Candidate]

24. An EO is similar to a memo to employees. He is NOT changing law

You are making a logical leap and NRA talking points are not welcome here, last time I checked.

[brooklynite]

25. Your definition of an EO is correct...and has nothing to do with his constitutional limits

An assault weapons ban requires Congressional approval, as it did last time. Biden can't just sign an EO.

[AZLD4Candidate]

34. If he is clarification enforcement of a law, yes he can. Again, he is using the EO

to explain how to enforce already passed law.

Please stop with NRA talking points.

[brooklynite]

37. So, you're saying that President Biden CAN ban assault weapons and therefore chose NOT to?

[AZLD4Candidate]

40. No, I don't believe I said that

But you can infer anything you wish.

[brooklynite]

42. Well, either he CAN'T (my opinion) or he CAN (your opinion)

If he CAN, and he DIDN'T, what can we determine from that?

[Demsrule86]

47. The GOP didn't get much of anything through legislatively.

[Beastly Boy]

27. It is a shame. Let's elect a Congress that will do whatever Biden wants to do. But this sentiment is

beyond the scope of discussing the limits of executive orders in general and the subject of this thread in particular.

[Demsrule86]

46. No they didn't. The ACA would be gone if they had. In fact, except for tax cuts Trump got nothing

much done legislatively...might want to consider that.

[maxsolomon]

38. Anything "substantive" requires Congressional action.

Maybe you haven't noticed that Congress, and specifically the Senate, is broken?

Even symbolic actions will be greeted with slippery-slope fallacies and rending of garments by the Gunners.

"Welcome to DU" is what I'm supposed to write now. Enjoy your stay.

[pandr32]

4. I sure hope this isn't all he will do.

[Dial H For Hero]

5. I'm surprised he didn't announce restrictions on imports of "assault weapons".

That's something that's actually within his authority to enact through an EO. As for other actions...what did you expect him to do?

[pandr32]

11. Good question

Reinstating something like the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act would have been nice.

[Dial H For Hero]

17. Which is just another name for the Assault Weapons Ban, which would require legislation.

Somehow, I suspect you knew that already.

[pandr32]

36. Actually I wasn't sure

I had hoped that some version of it could be enacted with EO. Thanks for prompting me to take a moment and look it up to find that we need Congress to act on this.

[Dial H For Hero]

41. It's easy to assume people are being snarky on the internet when such is not the case. I apologize

for assuming that you were, when in fact you were not. In any case, I'm happy to have been the catalyst for better information.

[pandr32]

50. You're happy, I'm happy

[NickB79]

32. We export weapons

All AR's in the US are made here. Even AK's are being made here now.

[Dial H For Hero]

33. Oh, granted...an import ban would have zero impact on AR's, but it would impact AK's and other

rifles. A lot of AK parts kits, magazines, etc. are being imported right now.

[Martin68]

6. I'm very disappointed after all the hype.

[Dial H For Hero]

7. What were you hoping for?

[Martin68]

8. Universal background checks required, assault rifles and super-sized clips banned, open carry banned

in urban areas. Otherwise, what's the point?

[Dial H For Hero]

10. Every one of those would require legislation, not executive orders.

[Martin68]

12. Then why make a big deal about a gun regulation announcement? What was the point?

[Dial H For Hero]

19. He was under pressure to "do something". This is pretty much the limit of what he can do on his own.

[Martin68]

21. Total waste of time and political capital, in my opinion.

[Dial H For Hero]

29. It takes the heat off of him to act on the issue.

Now, when the next high profile mass shooting occurs (as it surely will), he can say "I've done everything I can".

[AZLD4Candidate]

35. He's selling the sizzle, not the steak

What he did was a safe position to take? Making it safer would be to say "if Congress passes a comprehensive bill, I will sign it. But until then, this is all I am legally and constitutionally allowed to do to help stem this epidemic."

Of course, there will be people on both side that scream it's too much/not enough, but politicians don't really listen to that. Unless they are the Republicans who have been take over by them.

[Tndem615]

9. More

Restrict possession of assault guns and large capacity handguns by executive order. Ban sales of guns over the Internet. Mandate registration and training of all gun owners.

[Dial H For Hero]

16. Those would require legislation, not executive orders.

Ban sales of guns over the Internet.

I've purchased five firearms over the internet in the last week. Every one of them is being shipped to a local dealer, and a background check will be performed for each one. Granted, a private sale in which the seller is in one's own state doesn't require such a check in most states, but the vast majority of internet sales go through an FFL.

[sarisataka]

15. He's doing what he can

Which isn't much.

EO's have been hyped so much that people think they are a way to institute laws without legislation. They are simply directives on existing laws; they can't create anything that isn't already there.

[Dial H For Hero]

20. Thank you. Many people greatly overestimate the scope of EO's.

[Maxheader]

26. Common joe..get all the info on assault weapons..

from all the wild bill outdoorsy type places..names, addresses..

and start picking them up. Of course you need to pass a law

like before..banning these types of weapons. Least I believe

they used to be illegal....

[Dial H For Hero]

28. Actually, many people misunderstand the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 - 2004.

While it outlawed manufacture and (civilian) possession of assault weapons and high capacity magazines manufactured during that period, the sale and possesion of those manufactured previous to 1994 (known then as "pre-ban" guns and magazines) was perfectly legal.

In 1999, one could buy a pre-ban AR-15 and a 100 round magazine, albeit at inflated prices. Assualt weapons and high capacity magazines have never been illegal to own at the national level.

[getagrip_already]

30. I see this differently than most....

As much as I'd like to see easy access to guns knocked back to the stone age, gun rights remain the third rail of right wing politics. Any changes will be fought tooth and nail, no matter how minor.

And the faux outrage does get people to the polls, and raises money for the gop.

So by starting with the easy pieces, which most of the public will be able to understand, we are forcing the windbags to use their ammo (so to speak) early.

By the time more significant proposals come around, the public will be used to them.

So what are "ghost guns"? They come in 2 main categories; so-called 80% gun kits and unregistered components which can be added to 3d printed parts to produce working firearms (or to turn semi-automatics into automatics).

80% kits are just mostly finished, but non-firing parts kits that can be finished with simple workshop tools. Anyone with a tool-guy workshop can finish them.

They allow legal, yet untraceable, parts to be quickly turned into working firearms.

The other mods just let you take a semiautomatic gun and make it act more like an automatic with accuracy and ease of handling.

Gun owners themselves aren't in love with these issues, and know they can still legally buy pretty much whatever they want.

Start small, get public support, and move larger. Besides, there is a limit to what you can do through exec orders. They aren't actual legislation.

So I'm not terribly dissapointed with these limited steps. The real work is in congress, and with even bernie resisting gun laws, we have to work on our own as well.

[Dial H For Hero]

31. I think going after pistol braces is a miscalculation. Unlike bump stocks, these are *very* popular,

with an estimated 10 to 40 million of them out there. Telling tens of millions of guns owners that they have to register their chunk of plastic with the FBI, get fingerprinted, and shell out a couple of hundred bucks for the privilege will mobilize a lot more of them.

Presuming it survives a court challenge, which I think is unlikely.

[maxsolomon]

39. Yeah, they're already mobilized.

And kept in a constant state of rage by the Gun Lobby and it's politicians.

What are they going to do, start parading through state capitols open-carrying MSSAs?

[Dial H For Hero]

43. Many are. Many are not.

What are they going to do, start parading through state capitols open-carrying MSSAs?

As I pointed out, the EO on braces has the potential to impaact tens of millions of gun owners. Not all of those are currrently policially active by any means.

[maxsolomon]

44. OK, guess we should have avoided that 3rd rail then.

Is there any measure Biden could take as an EO that wouldn't mobilize more previously unmobilized gun owners?

These 2% slopes are so slippery...

[Dial H For Hero]

48. With the exception of braces and "ghost guns", I don't think any of the other EO's he announced

would draw the ire of any but a handful of gun owners.

[NickB79]

45. Pistol braces never should have been legalized to begin with

I've been going back and forth over whether to build a Ruger Charger with an arm brace for a lightweight plinker and small game gun, and I kept going back to the "this will be banned eventually" line of thought to not do it. It's just a workaround to getting a SBR without the $200 tax stamp.

No one uses an arm brace as an arm brace. Since the moment they came out they've been used as stocks. And the ATF really screwed up when they issued a ruling saying they're legal even if shouldered.

[Dial H For Hero]

49. I don't think SBR's should even be regulated by the NFA, myself.

Anyone with the desire to commit a massacre with one can simply buy an AR pistol without a brace and add the collapsable stock from a standard AR-15 to it.

[Aerator]

51. The shootings just keep going on

Right now there is a active shooting going on in Brazos county Texas with multiple people down several critical at a factory. It sounds like a chase is going on with one officer down.

[Manifest Desmond]

52. At Least He's Trying

There is, after all, a limited amount of action a President can take, especially with so many wingnuts and cowards in Washington