Possible Executive Order Could Protect ‘Assault Weapons’ From Statewide Bans

NomadacNomadac Senior MemberPosts: 890 Senior Member
Could this stop all of the States from banning AR-15's?

Possible Executive Order Could Protect ‘Assault Weapons’ From Statewide Bans.

http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/possible-executive-order-protect-assault-weapons-statewide-bans/

Replies

  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,789 Senior Member
    Since militias are by nature a thing of the individual states, I can see state's rights rearing its head. 10th Amendment thing. But the idea has merit.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Since militias are by nature a thing of the individual states, I can see state's rights rearing its head. 10th Amendment thing. But the idea has merit.
    My state has a State Defense Force. The majority of it's members are former military. I would love seeing our Governess Kate Lil Sister moonbeam Brown scream until she permanently lost her voice and cry until she shriveled up from dehydration. I have handed the existing federal law to a couple of gun hating scared little bunny liberals and watched them wet their pants. It's fun. You should try it.


    US Code Title 10 Armed Forces Section 311
    (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
    (b) The classes of the militia are—
    (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
    (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

    Section 312 Militia Duty Exemptions:
    (a) The following persons are exempt from militia duty:
    (1)
    The Vice President.
    (2)
    The judicial and executive officers of the United States, the several States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.
    (3)
    Members of the armed forces, except members who are not on active duty.
    (4)
    Customhouse clerks.
    (5)
    Persons employed by the United States in the transmission of mail.
    (6)
    Workmen employed in armories, arsenals, and naval shipyards of the United States.
    (7)
    Pilots on navigable waters.
    (8)
    Mariners in the sea service of a citizen of, or a merchant in, the United States.
    (b)
    A person who claims exemption because of religious belief is exempt from militia duty in a combatant capacity, if the conscientious holding of that belief is established under such regulations as the President may prescribe. However, such a person is not exempt from militia duty that the President determines to be noncombatant.
  • NCFUBARNCFUBAR Senior Member Posts: 4,324 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Since militias are by nature a thing of the individual states, I can see state's rights rearing its head. 10th Amendment thing. But the idea has merit.

    I'm with Mike here on the State's Rights. Also just think about it the opposite way ... an EO that bans "assault weapons" nationally.
    “The further a society drifts from truth ... the more it will hate those who speak it."
    - George Orwell
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,263 Senior Member
    The 2nd. Amendment is all that is needed, or desirable. Any executive action that condones something can be reversed, and this sets a precedent for the next window-licking idiot who doesn't particularly agree with us right-thinking people.
    :jester:
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,053 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    The 2nd. Amendment is all that is needed, or desirable. Any executive action that condones something can be reversed, and this sets a precedent for the next window-licking idiot who doesn't particularly agree with us right-thinking people.
    Yep. That isn't a power I would like to see in the hands of the executive branch that can grant and take away at will.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,057 Senior Member
    I thought the "Heller" decision solved all these anti-gun problems, yet we still have states banning stuff.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,261 Senior Member
    Should be a states rights issue. The less fed the better.
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,051 Senior Member
    I thought the "Heller" decision solved all these anti-gun problems, yet we still have states banning stuff.
    Afraid not, it still left room for "reasonable" legislation, which is determined in part by the courts.

    http://forums.gunsandammo.com/showthread.php?32375-Maryland-gun-owners-hosed-again
    Overkill is underrated.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,651 Senior Member
    Nomadac wrote: »
    Could this stop all of the States from banning AR-15's?

    Possible Executive Order Could Protect ‘Assault Weapons’ From Statewide Bans.

    http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/possible-executive-order-protect-assault-weapons-statewide-bans/

    Bad idea. That opens the door for an executive order banning them.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,789 Senior Member
    sgtrock21 wrote: »
    My state has a State Defense Force. The majority of it's members are former military. I would love seeing our Governess Kate Lil Sister moonbeam Brown scream until she permanently lost her voice and cry until she shriveled up from dehydration. I have handed the existing federal law to a couple of gun hating scared little bunny liberals and watched them wet their pants. It's fun. You should try it.


    US Code Title 10 Armed Forces Section 311

    I've done that to my share of people and given them hell about not being armed for militia duty. They tend to stutter, and then call me names. And I call them names that would blister the torpedo belt on a battleship at 1,000 yards. But it usually shuts down their lame arguments.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,945 Senior Member
    BAMAAK wrote: »
    Should be a states rights issue. The less fed the better.

    Negatory. The whole "of the people shall not be infringed" thing, which of course didn't stop the feds from enacting the Great Anal Probing Experiment of 1934, augmented by the BOHICA Act of 1968, further adjusted by the Hughes Stretch It Out A Little More Amendment of 1986.

    Where this needs to be sorted out is in the courts, AFTER we're back to 5-4 in the SCOTUS. 6-3 would be better still (keep sticking pins in your Ginsberg voodoo dolls everyone). Until such a day comes however, a temporary measure of an EO prohibiting enforcement of gun control measures in favor of going after ACTUAL CRIMES citing Second Amendment grounds would seem to be do-able.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 19,104 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    Bad idea. That opens the door for an executive order banning them.

    Yep - we've had entirely too much abuse of "executive orders" for the last several presidents. It needs to be stopped, we just got rid of one tin pot dictator...
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 19,104 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    ...that would blister the torpedo belt on a battleship at 1,000 yards.
    In sub-zero temperatures...
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    US Code Title 10 Armed Forces Section 311 is federal law and has nothing to do with states rights.

    State defense forces
    Many states have created and maintained a reserve military force known as state defense forces (Some states refer to them as state military reserve, state guard, or foot guard). They were created to assist, support and augment National Guard forces during peacetime conditions. Also during the call up of National Guard forces for wartime deployments, state defense forces can be used to assume the full military responsibilities of the state. Their mission includes the defense of the state and the enforcement of military orders when ordered by their Governor.
    Throughout the 20th century, state defense forces were used in every major war. New York Guard Soldiers patrolled and secured the water aqueduct of New York, mass transit areas, and were even deployed to France to assist in logistical operations in World War I. The Texas State Guard's soldiers suppressed a riot and maintained peace and order in Texas throughout World War II.
    Today state defense forces continue to assist, support and augment the National Guard of the state. They provide logistical, administration, medical, transportation, security, and ceremonial assistance. Some states have provided additional support such as the New York State Defense Force (New York Guard) providing its Soldiers to help support and augment the National Guard CERFP ( The 12 CERFPs are units of 100 or more Guard members who can extract people from confined spaces or collapsed structures, decontaminate victims with assembly-line precision, and triage and stabilize medical casualties). The California State Military Reserve provides the National Guard with Soldiers to assist with military police training and the Alaska State Defense Force constantly provides armed military police troops to assist with the security of Alaska. One of the major roles of the Mississippi State Guard is providing operational support during natural disasters such as hurricanes relief operations. Their Commander in Chief is the state Governor.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,263 Senior Member
    sgtrock21 wrote: »
    One of the major roles of the Mississippi State Guard is providing operational support during natural disasters such as hurricanes relief operations. Their Commander in Chief is the state Governor.

    Example- - - - -Ross Barnett in the 1960's
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.