Additional Evidence of Dictatorship
The Obama administration announced during a conference call with reporters Monday evening that the president’s upcoming executive order may require somebody selling even a single firearm to obtain a Federal Firearms License.
During the call White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest, White House Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch explained the details of the order, which will be announced publicly by President Obama Tuesday at 11:40 a.m. The action, officials explained, would include guidance on how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives will now determine who is “engaged in the business†of selling firearms under federal law and, therefore, who is required to obtain a license to sell firearms.
Complete article here.
This is a good example of a “law” (dictate) that everyone should simply ignore. This kind of bullying only works when we willingly submit.
Troy
I’m in California right now for a while. Before I left Arizona I bought several guns to bring with me knowing the level of restrictions in California. Anyone who says the rules will not significantly restrict the right of “responsible” gun owners is flat out wrong. If they also think that folks in AZ or other area’s in flyover country will abide by the background checks when selling to the neighbor or family is ignorant of reality.
Agreed! Just one more to throw on the pile of laws, rules, and regulations that don’t apply to this disobedient civilian. 🙂 â—„Daveâ–º
I’m not a gun owner but totally a 2A supporter and concur with this post. The bigger problem, as I see it, is with the Declaration from Himself re: all things ‘mental health’. Get the gov’t involved! What could go wrong!?!
Passively ignoring stupid dicta is one thing. Actively defending oneself against charges of instability is like proving a negative.
“Just to be on the safe side…”
“It’s for the children…”
“It’s for your own good…”
Mark my words. This will NOT end well. The Revolution is now one step closer.
Well said, Mary.
“…it is their duty…” â—„Daveâ–º
Interestingly, I just did a search and that is the only place in our founding documents, where the term ‘duty’ is used in the sense of a moral obligation. There are three occurrences in Article I of the Constitution, where it is used in the sense of a tax. â—„Daveâ–º
Because they are documents of liberty not mandate.
I am, at the same time, hopeful and fearful that you are correct.
We now enter what is legally the last year of the Obamanation’s reign. This means that, in the next few months, we will get a clearer picture what the Obamanation is really all about.
Will he go away peacefully and make his millions selling books that are actually written by someone else and which contain not a shred of truth?
Or, might my earlier suspicion prove true that he will seek a viable excuse for a declaration of martial law which will then lead to the cancellation of the election farce and an outright declaration of dictatorship? Note that I say “viable excuse” because the pretext must be one that at least 50% of the sheeple support to some degree.
As Hillary continues to fall from grace and the likelihood of an indictment grows, the real powers behind the throne must be growing desperate. The dems have no second string to turn to and the establishment dare not allow Trump to assume the presidency. Ergo, an Obama dictatorship might be the only option left to preserve their power.
Add to the domestic mess the indications that the world in general seems hell-bent on starting WW III.
It promises to be an interesting and dangerous year.
Troy
A large portion of it is illegal. The mental health portions are against the HIPA law protecting patient privacy. Of course now that we’re very close to single payer govt. health care they aren’t worth the paper they are on anyway.