stillquietvoice
Contributing Member
thank you for clearing that up.You are wrong. Article 6 does three things:
thank you for clearing that up.You are wrong. Article 6 does three things:
Rulemaking at the Post Office is a bit different than other departments due to having an independent government corporation status. A number of normal guidance laws that apply to other agencies do not apply to the post office for probably political reasons. The 39 CFR 232.1 regulation that deals with firearms at post offices might not be at risk to a presidential executive order ordering a change due to the USPS independent status.good news on itar. i would like to see trump pump up the cmp and open military bases and post offices to ccw permit, both only need executive orders.
Executive Orders should also not be confused with Regulations changes, such as the bump stock ban. Trump's signature appears nowhere on the bump stock ban. He just ordered the ATF (apparently by Twitter) to reverse its previous policy.Executive orders are inferior to laws passed by Congress and constitutional provisions and are not "laws" in the normal sense of the word--merely a way to implement pre-existing presidential powers granted either by statute or constitution.
Executive Orders should also not be confused with Regulations changes, such as the bump stock ban. Trump's signature appears nowhere on the bump stock ban. He just ordered the ATF (apparently by Twitter) to reverse its previous policy.
How do you know that? I haven't seen any decisions coming out of the SC regarding gun control. Have you?
The SC is there to uphold the constitution. They are not there to uphold what you believe to be to the benefit of gun owners. Some very conservative justices have kicked 2A to the curb. Scalia was one of them.
Trump is helping American businesses, exports help American companies working in America, imports not so much. While imports may have better results for the average gun owner, and surplus would be nice, it actually runs counter to encouraging purchase of domestic firearms.
So while I would like it, it is obvious to me why this was the action prioritized.
Anyone have any feel for what the global demand is like? Would easing export restrictions result in a lot of exports, which in turn would drive up firearm prices in the US civilian market? Or would it just be a bit of extra revenue for manufacturers?
I know that Kavanaugh stated that the Patriot Act was basically "constitutional" in a drafted statement during the GWB administration, that is very concerning to me and should be to any freedom loving individual.When SCOTUS refused to hear a challenge on California's CCW ban last year, Thomas wrote a "dissent from the denial of review." Gorsuch joined Thomas. A good sign, at least.
Kavanaugh said during his hearings that he didn't see any difference between a pistol or an "assault rifle" insofar as the second amendment is concerned. Another good sign.
I think both men will rule correctly when the time comes.
If they uphold the constitution as written, instead of trying to rewrite it for the warm fuzzy feel good agenda, it will most definitely benefit gun ownership