TexasCHLforum.com

Post from the Whitehouse:

President Trump Signed an EO to Protect 2A Rights

Orders DOJ to review '21-'25 actions that may infringe on 2A rights
Directs a plan to safeguard lawful gun ownership
Investigates agency overreach, firearm rules & enforcement policies

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/1888004106931028038

Full text of the EO:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... nt-rights/

It will be interesting to see what developments and outcomes are generated by his EO. Interestingly I received both a phone call and email from BATFE reiterating the classification as machine guns and illegality of "switches" (MCD's). I assumed it was some anti-gun, anti-Trump bureaucrat's attempt to assert their power. I thought it was odd that the notification was a previously communicated regulation and the timing was curious, but seeing Trump's EO it may have been done in anticipation.

Didn't Trump have some infringing 2A Executive Orders during his first term?

Grayling813 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2025 12:34 pm Didn't Trump have some infringing 2A Executive Orders during his first term?

The bumpstock debacle occurred during his first term.

I WISH ...
DISBAND BATFE
SEND ALL BATFE DEPARTMENTAL WEAPONS TO BORDER PATROL
RELOCATE TAX COLLECTING PERSONNEL (ON ALCOHOL TOBACCO) TO IRS
ELIMINATE ALL TAXES ON AMMO FIREARMS ETC AS AN INFRINGEMENT ON 2A

WOULD BE GREAT IF HE HAD POWER TO REVOKE ALL BATFE "REGULATIONS" (WE DIDN'T VOTE FOR) TOO

The federal firearms act in its entirety.
The only constitutional part is probably the restriction against ownership by convicted felons, and states can legislate that on their own.

Boxerrider wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2025 5:50 pm The federal firearms act in its entirety.
The only constitutional part is probably the restriction against ownership by convicted felons, and states can legislate that on their own.

I disagree that the restricted person ban is constitutional either, especially not for non-felons.

But the part that is clearly constitutional is requiring the licensing of gun manufacturers, importers, and dealers. That comes under the regulation of interstate commerce, which is specifically allowed to Congress.

srothstein wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2025 9:38 pm

Boxerrider wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2025 5:50 pm The federal firearms act in its entirety.
The only constitutional part is probably the restriction against ownership by convicted felons, and states can legislate that on their own.

I disagree that the restricted person ban is constitutional either, especially not for non-felons.

But the part that is clearly constitutional is requiring the licensing of gun manufacturers, importers, and dealers. That comes under the regulation of interstate commerce, which is specifically allowed to Congress.

Agreed, and this is academic from my perspective. When it comes to business law I am out of my depth. With no FFA, wouldn't that licensing and taxation fall under other existing legislation involving commerce? A law or tax concerning firearms simply because they are firearms would be an infringement.

Good, maybe I can get back my FRT.
Judge already said so, but until it happens, I'm not believing it.