The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has begun

General silencer discussion. If you want to talk about a specific silenced rifle or pistol, it is best to do that in the rifle or pistol section for that brand.

All NFA laws apply.

Moderators: mpallett, mr fixit, bakerjw, renegade

User avatar
everyusernametaken
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:40 am
Location: Northern VA

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by everyusernametaken »

Fact is, the proposed regulations can still be changed, regardless of POTUS's apparent agenda. Pointing out problems with the new rules is exactly what we should be doing as citizens who will be affected by these changes. Having the attitude that all is lost and there is no recourse does not change this fact. Neither does past experience, even if every prior regulation change was enacted exactly as proposed. And this has absolutely nothing to do with petitions like those jokes on the white house website.

We should at least be pointing out issues such as where the new regs would create a situation where legal compliance is impossible. For instance, if applied retroactively, some of us may be flat out unable to comply with the law because a beneficiary happens to live elsewhere and can't get their CLEO to sign, but we already have NFA items as trust property. They haven't specified how these changes will be implemented so I see this as an important point to clarify.

Simply saying "well they want that to happen so they can take our guns!" is a pretty poor excuse for not wanting to spend a few minutes articulating your thoughts, but nobody's forcing anyone - it's your prerogative.
User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by TROOPER »

everyusernametaken wrote:Fact is, the proposed regulations can still be changed, regardless of POTUS's apparent agenda. Pointing out problems with the new rules is exactly what we should be doing as citizens who will be affected by these changes. Having the attitude that all is lost and there is no recourse does not change this fact. Neither does past experience, even if every prior regulation change was enacted exactly as proposed. And this has absolutely nothing to do with petitions like those jokes on the white house website.

We should at least be pointing out issues such as where the new regs would create a situation where legal compliance is impossible. For instance, if applied retroactively, some of us may be flat out unable to comply with the law because a beneficiary happens to live elsewhere and can't get their CLEO to sign, but we already have NFA items as trust property. They haven't specified how these changes will be implemented so I see this as an important point to clarify.

Simply saying "well they want that to happen so they can take our guns!" is a pretty poor excuse for not wanting to spend a few minutes articulating your thoughts, but nobody's forcing anyone - it's your prerogative.
Insults aside, this is the very crux of the issue - the idea that these proposed regulations can be changed. Yes, they can, by only one person -- the president. That's it. This isn't a "write-your-congressman" scenario because this isn't legislation, it is an executive order. The ONLY reason this is happening as an executive order (EO) is because absolutely no new national-level gun regulation will pass through congress. How can you not understand this?

Serious question: how many signatures do you believe it will take for President Obama to alter his stance? Alternatively, what word or combination of words do you believe could conceivably be said to prevent this from happening? Why do you believe the ATF can be reasoned with on this subject? Or that they even have the ability to be reasoned with? It isn't their decision. Do you not understand that Obama's mind was made up on this before he even became president? Suddenly, in year five, after multiple failures built on the corpses of children and US military members, you're going to put together the right combination of syllables that will 'open his mind' and let him see what the polling data, Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution haven't been able to show him in decades?

"Hope", you say? That is half of what got us into this position.
Fact is, the proposed regulations can still be changed, regardless of POTUS's apparent agenda.
What are you talking about? Who can change this proposed regulation? Do you not understand what an executive order is, and by whom it is issued? Who will you point out the flaws of this idea to?
We should at least be pointing out issues such as where the new regs would create a situation where legal compliance is impossible. For instance, if applied retroactively, some of us may be flat out unable to comply with the law because a beneficiary happens to live elsewhere and can't get their CLEO to sign, but we already have NFA items as trust property. They haven't specified how these changes will be implemented so I see this as an important point to clarify.
It isn't meant to be complied with. In situations where the CLEO refuses to sign, then an effective ban on NFA purchases exists in that jurisdiction. That is an astute observation. Why do you believe that this isn't one of the intended results of this policy? Do you not understand the number of laws that Obama refuses to enforce because he doesn't agree with them? By extension, why do you think he is going to care when you try to contact him with the complaint that someone else is abusing their position to deny activity which is legal?

These are all of the things I should've said immediately, but I just didn't "show-my-work", to use a mathematical analogy. The astonishing number of illogical assumptions you make require an abject lack of knowledge, or an appalling serving of naivety, or a staggering level of denial. Any one of those three in the previously demonstrated portions does make you a rightful candidate for insult.
telero
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:05 pm

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by telero »

TROOPER wrote: Insults aside, this is the very crux of the issue - the idea that these proposed regulations can be changed. Yes, they can, by only one person -- the president. That's it. This isn't a "write-your-congressman" scenario because this isn't legislation, it is an executive order.
So how about making it a write-your-congressman scenario? The way I understand it is that the CFRs that the EO will be changing are based on the USC. Change the USC via Congress so that the CFRs would not be legal.
User avatar
everyusernametaken
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:40 am
Location: Northern VA

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by everyusernametaken »

TROOPER wrote:
everyusernametaken wrote:Fact is, the proposed regulations can still be changed, regardless of POTUS's apparent agenda. Pointing out problems with the new rules is exactly what we should be doing as citizens who will be affected by these changes. Having the attitude that all is lost and there is no recourse does not change this fact. Neither does past experience, even if every prior regulation change was enacted exactly as proposed. And this has absolutely nothing to do with petitions like those jokes on the white house website.

We should at least be pointing out issues such as where the new regs would create a situation where legal compliance is impossible. For instance, if applied retroactively, some of us may be flat out unable to comply with the law because a beneficiary happens to live elsewhere and can't get their CLEO to sign, but we already have NFA items as trust property. They haven't specified how these changes will be implemented so I see this as an important point to clarify.

Simply saying "well they want that to happen so they can take our guns!" is a pretty poor excuse for not wanting to spend a few minutes articulating your thoughts, but nobody's forcing anyone - it's your prerogative.
Insults aside, this is the very crux of the issue - the idea that these proposed regulations can be changed. Yes, they can, by only one person -- the president. That's it. This isn't a "write-your-congressman" scenario because this isn't legislation, it is an executive order. The ONLY reason this is happening as an executive order (EO) is because absolutely no new national-level gun regulation will pass through congress. How can you not understand this?

Serious question: how many signatures do you believe it will take for President Obama to alter his stance? Alternatively, what word or combination of words do you believe could conceivably be said to prevent this from happening? Why do you believe the ATF can be reasoned with on this subject? Or that they even have the ability to be reasoned with? It isn't their decision. Do you not understand that Obama's mind was made up on this before he even became president? Suddenly, in year five, after multiple failures built on the corpses of children and US military members, you're going to put together the right combination of syllables that will 'open his mind' and let him see what the polling data, Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution haven't been able to show him in decades?

"Hope", you say? That is half of what got us into this position.
Fact is, the proposed regulations can still be changed, regardless of POTUS's apparent agenda.
What are you talking about? Who can change this proposed regulation? Do you not understand what an executive order is, and by whom it is issued? Who will you point out the flaws of this idea to?
We should at least be pointing out issues such as where the new regs would create a situation where legal compliance is impossible. For instance, if applied retroactively, some of us may be flat out unable to comply with the law because a beneficiary happens to live elsewhere and can't get their CLEO to sign, but we already have NFA items as trust property. They haven't specified how these changes will be implemented so I see this as an important point to clarify.
It isn't meant to be complied with. In situations where the CLEO refuses to sign, then an effective ban on NFA purchases exists in that jurisdiction. That is an astute observation. Why do you believe that this isn't one of the intended results of this policy? Do you not understand the number of laws that Obama refuses to enforce because he doesn't agree with them? By extension, why do you think he is going to care when you try to contact him with the complaint that someone else is abusing their position to deny activity which is legal?

These are all of the things I should've said immediately, but I just didn't "show-my-work", to use a mathematical analogy. The astonishing number of illogical assumptions you make require an abject lack of knowledge, or an appalling serving of naivety, or a staggering level of denial. Any one of those three in the previously demonstrated portions does make you a rightful candidate for insult.

What we have now is a proposed rule change from the DOJ, the impetus for which was an executive action from the president. POTUS can basically force a Final Rule into effect, barring an act of Congress, but there is no final rule yet. It's still in the hands of the agency until the comment period is over, another 30 days passes, and a final rule is complete. They can still change it, and public comments are the ONLY mechanism by which we may influence this process. Whether it's worth your time and energy is up to you. Judging from that angry rant, it sounds like the value of your time is on the level of convincing everyone else on the internet not to bother.

I "hope" as many people as possible still bother to submit comments on this. :lol:
User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by TROOPER »

In order to effectively argue the points presented to me, I'd have to educate my debate opponents. Given your current beliefs and stances despite the avalanche of evidence contrary to you, I don't know that you can be educated.

You win. I don't know what you won, but you won it.

---

I can't tell if I'm amused or saddened to imagine the warm self-righteousness my admission of defeat brings you.
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by doubloon »

everyusernametaken wrote:... Maybe you're the one showing your ignorance?
Definitely not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by doubloon »

Capt. Link. wrote:Even if we are not listened to our opinions should be in print for posterity. ...
This is the only valid reason to pursue the protest endeavor.

It reminds me of a crawfish on a train track.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by doubloon »

telero wrote:...
So you're saying you'd like no record of anybody objecting at all? ...
He's saying there is plenty of recorded objection to any infringement of 2A already as has been reflected in the reluctance of the majority of congress critters and barely over half of SCOTUS to side with anyone who is actively attacking 2A which is why the POTUS is making this lame duck lunge at a target not covered directly under 2A to put a thorn in the side of 2A supporters as he gets a boot in the ass on the way down the white house steps.

He's saying the majority of the representation already knows we don't want it and the POTUS knows they won't support it so he's issuing an EO to get around the representation who is listening because he knows they are listening and he has no intention of listening.

He's saying you are simultaneously preaching to the choir and talking to a stone wall.

Still waiting on the answer to his question a few posts back. I'm intrigued from a medical science point of view.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
User avatar
everyusernametaken
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:40 am
Location: Northern VA

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by everyusernametaken »

TROOPER wrote:In order to effectively argue the points presented to me, I'd have to educate my debate opponents. Given your current beliefs and stances despite the avalanche of evidence contrary to you, I don't know that you can be educated.

You win. I don't know what you won, but you won it.

---

I can't tell if I'm amused or saddened to imagine the warm self-righteousness my admission of defeat brings you.
You assume I give a s--t about winning some petty argument on an internet forum? I don't care what you think about me, all I care about is that others who may take action for our cause at some point, whatever that may be, aren't discouraged from doing so by small-minded bullying from people like you. It's rather sad that some people with valuable knowledge and experience let their ego cloud an objective view.
User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by TROOPER »

everyusernametaken wrote:You assume I give a s--t about winning some petty argument on an internet forum? I don't care what you think about me, all I care about is that others who may take action for our cause at some point, whatever that may be, aren't discouraged from doing so by small-minded bullying from people like you. It's rather sad that some people with valuable knowledge and experience let their ego cloud an objective view.
You won, dude. You won. You always win. I always lose. You are smart, I am not. You are very handsome, I am not attractive. Women find you irresistible, women don't find me at all. You are completely victorious, I am utterly defeated. You are the rock, I am the scissors (alternatively, you are the scissors and I am the paper (alternatively, alternatively, you are the paper and I am the rock (alternatively, alternatively, alternatively, I am the Spock, you are the lizard (etc.)))).
BearTHIS
Silent Operator
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 1:43 pm

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by BearTHIS »

TROOPER wrote:
everyusernametaken wrote:You assume I give a s--t about winning some petty argument on an internet forum? I don't care what you think about me, all I care about is that others who may take action for our cause at some point, whatever that may be, aren't discouraged from doing so by small-minded bullying from people like you. It's rather sad that some people with valuable knowledge and experience let their ego cloud an objective view.
You won, dude. You won. You always win. I always lose. You are smart, I am not. You are very handsome, I am not attractive. Women find you irresistible, women don't find me at all. You are completely victorious, I am utterly defeated. You are the rock, I am the scissors (alternatively, you are the scissors and I am the paper (alternatively, alternatively, you are the paper and I am the rock (alternatively, alternatively, alternatively, I am the Spock, you are the lizard (etc.)))).

People must love hanging out with you. All the furious typing over this, I imagine you could have spent the time writing & submitting a comment.

If ever there comes a day when the govt says "no more guns/2A.. Period!". I guess we'll know where you stand. " it's over! It's all over! They made up their minds! It's all over!"
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by doubloon »

It's really kind of a sad thing to watch sometimes when enthusiasm outpaces comprehension.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
wacki
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 913
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by wacki »

TROOPER wrote:You are smart, I am not. .
You actually said something I agree with. Given that he is an engineer.....and you are spending more time fighting gun owners than gun grabbers.


Can we stop the troll fest now? We are supposed to be on the same team.
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by doubloon »

I have not witnessed any trolling in this thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
Tony M.
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:42 pm
Location: FL

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by Tony M. »

As futile as making comments on a EO is, I decided to have my say nevertheless.

I was rewarded with a nice email from the whitehouse that ensured me that "most americans believe that 'common sense' measures would prevent future tragedies" and essentially insulting me and anyone else who would believe anything to the contrary.
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Re: The comment period for HObamas attack on the NFA has beg

Post by doubloon »

Tony M. wrote:... "most americans believe that 'common sense' measures would prevent future tragedies" ...
There is no spoon.

And I stand corrected, the stone wall is smarter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
Post Reply