What Gun related laws/Executive Actions will President Trump sign first?

[Aim1]

As the title states, what gun related laws/executive actuons/bills will President Trump sign first?

 

[kozak6]

I don't see much happening.

Trump isn't really into the Second Amendment unless it's politically convenient.

Unless Don Jr. really loves 7N6, I don't really see The Donald taking any particular initiative.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I am guessing it won't be an executive order, but the HPA.

 

[AZAndy]

If I take the attitude of "ain't nothin' good gonna happen," I'm rarely disappointed.

 

[Tirod]

The question assumes the Presidents executive orders and actions have any influence to begin with.

What did Obama do? About zilch. Presidents don't ban guns or anoint them by their signature, they aren't omnipotent oligarchs who dispense with the law on their whim, despite some people trying to paint them so.

Congress passing law is where the power is - the '34 NFA, '68 GCA, Hatch amendment. LIttle baby steps of having the ATF state a particular bullet is "armor piercing" or taking trade sanctions against another nation don't actually do much. Which is why it's a good thing the President doesn't have that power.

Trump doesn't need it either. We live in a representative republic, not a democracy or dictatorship, which is the dual alternative constantly being pushed by our enemies.

 

[Dog Soldier]

The NRA has a seat at the table. The change in the Crime Bills pushed through by the Liberals since 1960s will be addressed. A "Slash and Burn", regarding gun laws is not the answer.
We want new "Boiler Plate" added to the 2nd Amendment. Executive Orders are only ornaments. We need modern laws protecting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

The new Sec of State is supposedly a gun guy, so there may be some things there which are positive. I think many of the import bans/embargoes come through them along with the ITAR regs hurting gunsmiths. State could turn several of those things around quickly if they chose to do so.

 

[P5 Guy]

Reopen the lead ore refinery 0bama had the EPA shutdown,

 

[danez71]

See my sig.

The complete text is below.

With the exception of the 2A comment, Its worded in a way that is like the other party wrote it.

Is it a hint that along with appointing pro 2A judges, pro 2A laws will be attached to crime bill type legislation to get bi-partisan support?

I can see it now 'The police need more officer on the street... but they cant do it alone. They cant be everywhere all of the time. Every American can help LE by being able to defend themselves and their family.

Standing Up For Our Law Enforcement Community
One of the fundamental rights of every American is to live in a safe community. A Trump Administration will empower our law enforcement officers to do their jobs and keep our streets free of crime and violence. The Trump Administration will be a law and order administration. President Trump will honor our men and women in uniform and will support their mission of protecting the public. The dangerous anti-police atmosphere in America is wrong. The Trump Administration will end it.

The Trump Administration is committed to reducing violent crime. In 2015, homicides increased by 17% in America’s fifty largest cities. That’s the largest increase in 25 years. In our nation’s capital, killings have risen by 50 percent. There were thousands of shootings in Chicago last year alone.

Our country needs more law enforcement, more community engagement, and more effective policing.

Our job is not to make life more comfortable for the rioter, the looter, or the violent disrupter. Our job is to make life more comfortable for parents who want their kids to be able to walk the streets safely. Or the senior citizen waiting for a bus. Or the young child walking home from school.

Supporting law enforcement means supporting our citizens’ ability to protect themselves. We will uphold Americans’ Second Amendment rights at every level of our judicial system.

President Trump is committed to building a border wall to stop illegal immigration, to stop the gangs and the violence, and to stop the drugs from pouring into our communities. He is dedicated to enforcing our border laws, ending sanctuary cities, and stemming the tide of lawlessness associated with illegal immigration.

Supporting law enforcement also means deporting illegal aliens with violent criminal records who have remained within our borders.

It is the first duty of government to keep the innocent safe, and President Donald Trump will fight for the safety of every American, and especially those Americans who have not known safe neighborhoods for a very long time.

 

[Jason_W]

I'm not confident we'll get any help.

Never trust an authoritarian or a collectivist.

 

[barnbwt]

I would welcome a reprieve from the pathetic example set by so many during the last regime, where the expectation was a Lord would bequeath or deny privileges to his vassals at will.

I wish Trump's first action would be to disband petitions.org

 

[double bogey]

A presidents power is more effective directing the alphabet agency's, BATFE, EPA, etcetera, than writing executive orders, seems to me.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

Based on what I've seen from him over the last 30 years I expect pretty much nothing from him but a lot of hot air. That leaves me in a position to be pleasantly surprised if he does something useful.

 

[NeuseRvrRat]

Funny to me how executive actions by a Democrat are "executive overreach", but are encouraged when a Republican is in office.

I don't want to see executive actions from anybody. The less the govt does, the better, in my opinion.

 

[hdwhit]

Aim1 wrote:
...what gun related laws/executive actuons/bills will President Trump sign first?

Well, President Trump signed a sheaf of executive orders on Friday, but none had anything to do with guns. Until the President can quit obsessing about things like how many people attended his innauguration, I don't expect him to be able to focus on anything that will benefit gun owners.

 

[jeff-10]

I would imagine we are more likely to see him sign some pro-2A laws sometime in early to mid 2020.

 

[Coyote3855]

I agree with those posters who believe firearms and Second Amendment are not on Trump's radar. His court appointments, including the Supreme Court, are IMHO the action most likely action to impact gun owners in the long run.

 

[jrmiddleton425]

I hate to burst anyone's bubble...but, I feel that an appointment to the Supreme Court that isn't overtly anti-2A is as good as we're going to get for the next three years.

He is a businessman; negotiating deals is what he has done for a living for 30+ years. There's also the problem that as far as we have seen publicly, The Donald's world revolves around The Donald.

What I'm getting at here, is DON'T GET TOO EXCITED JUST BECAUSE WE BEAT HILLARY FOR NOW. If the Democrats put in front of him, a piece of anti-firearms legislation, in exchange for an agreement to confirm his Cabinet appointments, (or anything else they're holding up) don't be terribly surprised if he signs it.

 

[Ttexastom]

The NRA has a seat at the table. The change in the Crime Bills pushed through by the Liberals since 1960s will be addressed. A "Slash and Burn", regarding gun laws is not the answer.
We want new "Boiler Plate" added to the 2nd Amendment. Executive Orders are only ornaments. We need modern laws protecting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

100 modern laws in order,. Executive orders not so sound. Laws to protect gun owners. Agree highly on this

 

[barnbwt]

Based on what I've seen from him over the last 30 years I expect pretty much nothing from him but a lot of hot air. That leaves me in a position to be pleasantly surprised if he does something useful.

I will give the man credit; he's been remarkably ambitious even this early into his tenure when it comes to exerting executive authority in areas he is giving his attention. In only a couple days, he is giving previously untouchable agencies with tremendous political pull genuine pause, if not outright concern for the future of their previous policy goals.

To the man's discredit; so far he has not turned his attention toward any kind of gun policy, even despite some rather egregious slights by the Obama administration on his way out, and the fact he has essentially unfettered authority to undo a lot of the encroachment of the last 20-30 years of gun control. Broadening 'sporting purposes' with a pen stroke would nullify the vast majority of federal laws we have daily exposure to.

But the government is a big place (at least, it is now, *sigh*) so I will try to temper my impatience with the fact he is showing signs of earnest effort in other areas he gave big promises. I'm giving him about a month to overturn O's midnight lead-ammo ban before I start complaining again.

TCB

 

[AlexanderA]

He could try to declare a machine gun amnesty. I say "try" because although such an amnesty is authorized by the GCA '68, the FOPA '86 (Hughes Amendment) contains a flat prohibition on guns that were not "lawfully possessed" on May 19, 1986. It would be interesting the see the legal workaround for that contradiction.

On the other hand, the mere threat of such an amnesty, and the chaotic situation it would entail, might be enough to spur Congress into finally doing something about the Hughes Amendment, and NFA reform generally. Open the registry to new machine guns, and deregulate suppressors and SBR's/SBS's entirely.

 

[barnbwt]

...more like spur them to float the tax fee with inflation. I really don't trust congress to do anything close to "the right thing" as it concerns machine guns or DDs at this point (or the courts, or the white house, for that matter). They are still at the pre-Heller phase, where a very calculated and skillful approach is needed to make sure there is no option but for a favorable outcome (Hollis v Holder/Lynch was on the right track, but was trying to get too many good questions answered too quickly, e.g. subpoena discovery on the NRFTR registry, ability of the ATF/gov officials to exempt entries from the ban, ability of the ATF to rescind approvals, right of an individual to build a machinegun, definition on whether legal entity trusts were subject to the Hughes ban as 'persons.'

Much better they focus on silencers and short barrel weapons (SBR, SBS, AOW) since those aspects of the NFA make the least sense in the presence of our pistol regs and safety-conscious modern society, also since they are the most easily understood by laymen (the fact that machine guns are so mechanically similar to semi-autos that it produces a ton of confusion and contradiction where compliance is concerned is simply too much for legislators or judges that don't even know what a sear is)

TCB