∞∞∞ wrote:Meh...I might be wrong, but I think I read that most people are OK with tightening the background check processes (or lack thereof), especially at gun shows...which is the primary aim here. It's not like President Obama is taking firearms away.
I personally don't think this is as big of a deal as some are making of it.
Edit: It's there in the article...89% of people support expanded restrictions at gun shows.
The problem is that liberals will never say, "ok, we closed that gunshow loophole; we're done eroding the Second Amendment now." Every time they draw a new line in the sand (aha, an Obamism!), they will step over it and draw a new one.
Here's a get-to-the-nitty-gritty assessment. It's written by a pro-gun guy, but I think it's honest and realistic. I quoted the key passages below. I bolded and enlarged the part that makes it all very disappointing to me and most pro-Constitution people:
The NRA will rightly proclaim that the EO is an egregious infringement on Americans’ right to keep and bear arms. I give it a 40 percent chance that Congress will pass a bill out of the House of Representatives to change things back the way they were, and a 25 percent chance such a bill bill passes the Senate. But that’s where it will end. There’s no chance President Obama will sign such legislation and even less chance that Congress has enough votes for a veto override.
The main problem: the average American doesn’t have a problem with mandating that every firearms transaction involve a federal background check. No matter how hard the NRA presses Congress to change the law it’s not politically viable. For those legislators who need to fight to keep their red seat from turning blue, rolling back Obama’s changes will be branded by the opposition as “re-opening the gun show loophole” and making America less safe.” It’s a rallying cry which pro-gun control pols would use to run roughshod over pro-gun right incumbents.
The best case scenario wouldn’t be a repeal of the executive order. The better option: Congress gets their act together and passes an update to the Gun Control Act of 1968 that allows for individuals to have a Federal Firearms License without being “in the business” of selling guns.
That would re-open the flood gates of private party sales (with background checks!) and enable guns to be shipped directly to the doors of Americans. This would have a similar impact to what Amazon did to the mom and pop stores in cities, leaving only the larger brick and mortar stores to duke it out for the remaining market share. While this would be the best possible outcome from this whole debacle, there’s no more than a 10 percent probability of it ever happening. That’s disappointing, but realistic.
The most likely scenario (and my 90 percent bet) is that nothing happens. Congress fails to act, the SAF lawsuit fails, and the executive orders remain in place. “Gun violence” continues unchecked – because this feel-good measure has nothing whatsoever to do with the real flow of illegal guns. It will only punish America’s law-abiding gun owners. As a result, gun control activists will continue to demand that “something must be done” — again, still. And the window of “acceptable” gun control solutions will creep further and further towards revocation of Americans’ Second Amendment rights, and we play the game again.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/0 ... rediction/
