Tomorrow's News: Gun Control by Executive Order

Biden expected to announce executive actions on gun control Thursday | Fox News

Mr. Biden is expected to announce some form of gun control via executive action tomorrow (8 April).
What exactly he’s ordering is yet unknown. Something for us to keep an eye on.


Executive actions have no legal standing other than they are Presidential suggestions.


Perhaps @MikeBKY could give a quick weigh-in on Executive Actions, as opposed to Orders.

And if they are not signed by a real president, they further don’t matter. I recall him stating he was campaigning for Senator. I believe that is the office he currently holds. I haven’t seen a pic of him in the Oval Office. I did see him in a basement on a video conference with Pelosi just before the video went dead due to his stating he would now take questions. :rofl:

Executive orders are used to direct the executive branch (DEA, FDA, ATFE, FBI and all the rest of the alphabet) of the government to act or not act. Executive orders set mandatory requirements for the executive branch and they have the force of law. They will lead to a lot of rule making, like ATF classifying certain firearms, magazines and accessories and restricted items under the NFA.


Executive orders direct federal branches / agencies / etc. to act in specific ways, enforce specific rules (or not), prioritize certain functions, interpret laws in specific ways, etc. Like it or not, the President has the legal authority to do so, as the head of the executive branch of government. Yes, they can at times be overturned by the courts (Trump’s bump stock ban was recently put on hold by courts), but it’s dangerous to pretend they have no legal force.

True, the President doesn’t have the legal authority to give orders, to you, Joe Civilian. But a sitting President can do a good deal good or mischief through executive action.

Oops, never mind. @MikeBKY answered faster and better than I did. :flushed:

I guess we will see how far Joe will go with a stroke of a pen. You can bet 80% lowers will be on the chopping block The “fee” for NICS check might get bumped to $1k or something stupid. He cannot tax without congress but he can require “administrative fee’s”. Since AR lowers are not technically " firearms" he could have the ATFE define any sub assembly that houses the trigger group (or operational components) of a complete firearm to be listed under the NFA or GCA. He could require that all ammunition and or ammunition components or gun parts require a NICS check. The what if’s are endless.



1 Like

Executive orders do have force besides them. Executive Actions do not they are more like suggestions. Obama did 16 executive actions in 2016 on Gun control that were merely suggestions but he could claim he has followed through on this agenda vs who knows how many executive orders.

They are 2 entirely separate tools the President can do

Executive Order

A presidential policy directive that implements or interprets a federal statute, a constitutional provision, or a treaty.

Executive Actions Versus Executive Orders

Executive actions are any informal proposals or moves by the president. The term executive action itself is vague and can be used to describe almost anything the president calls on Congress or his administration to do. But many executive actions carry no legal weight. Those that do actually set policy can be invalidated by the courts or undone by legislation passed by Congress.

The terms executive action and executive order are not interchangeable. Executive orders are legally binding and published in the Federal Register, though they also can be reversed by the courts and Congress.

A good way to think of executive actions is a wish list of policies the president would like to see enacted.

The article very specifically referenced ACTION not ORDER


The media doesn’t always note the difference between things. I am interested in seeing what exactly happens. It might be one thing, but have the media refer to it as the other.

I remember reading articles about “flying dinosaurs.” There was no such thing, but the media conflate dinosaurs and pterosaurs frequently, just as an example.

I m just explaining the difference between an Executive order vs an Executive Action. Since the article went to such lengths to say action vs order. An order is the same as law until a court overturns it or Congress does whereas (l am being somewhat facetious) but an Executive Action is more of a of saying what he would like to do.

As @MikeBKY did point out an ABC agency could take it and run with it but its not law until Congress makes it so.


Executive orders can be effective, look at how one shut down the pipeline. But his powers are limited due to the second amendment. He could still do some crazy stuff like everyone has mentioned. The biggest concern to me is his appointment (which hopefully will not get confirmed) of David Chipman.

Chipman was part of the ATF before and now is an adviser to the a gun control organization founded by former Representative Gabrielle Giffords. Now the ATF can make things hard on us gun owners and I do believe they will be the ones to do Bidens dirty work and push the laws to the edge and over.


Here are the six actions, from the White House “fact sheet.”

The Justice Department, within 30 days, will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of “ghost guns.”

The Justice Department, within 60 days, will issue a proposed rule to make clear when a device marketed as a stabilizing brace effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act.

The Justice Department, within 60 days, will publish model “red flag” legislation for states.

The Administration is investing in evidence-based community violence interventions.

The Justice Department will issue an annual report on firearms trafficking.

The President will nominate David Chipman to serve as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.


I think it is a good deal to live in a “Red State” with a governor and state legislature with spines. Any protections the citizen will have would come from such a state.


Outsider looking in, the hardcourt press from the left will likely galvanize the right. A few red states will push back, and that will encourage other red states to do the same. This will infuriate the left, and they’ll push their agenda even harder, which will likely cost them control of Congress in 2022.

I say this because it’s what typically happens when one party is in power. But also because the rhetoric is some of the worst stuff I’ve seen in my lifetime. The bare authoritarianism on display is something I never thought I’d see. So I expect the next couple of years will be rough, from a 2A perspective.


@Ouade5 nice post. We shouldn’t summarily dismiss PeePaw Joe’s executive actions. The Legislative and Judicial branches have been ceding their Constitutional powers to the Executive branch for the past 2 decades. The past 3 presidents have been granted powers never intended by our Founding Fathers. So PeePaw’s actions, even if unconstitutional, will be summarily ignored by the checks and balances of our gubment.

1 Like

Remember this day well, all you people who voted for / assisted with / enabled the fraudulent election of this… person… to the highest office in the land.

I will not forget, and will shop accordingly, and associate accordingly. If you supported this, as a company, I will not shop you unless I have absolutely no alternative.

You people enabled the worse fraud this world has seen since Russia, 1917 and Germany, 1930’s.


“But no amendment to the Constitution is absolute … From the very beginning, you couldn’t own any weapon you wanted to own. From the very beginning the Second Amendment existed, certain people weren’t allowed to have weapons. So the idea is just bizarre to suggest that some of the things we’re recommending are contrary to the Constitution.”

Yes, Mr. President. “Certain people” (i.e. non-whites) had gun restrictions back in the 1790s. We’ve since added the 14th Amendment. Wow.


Biden in his scripted speech said that gun violence was a public health epidemic, well the one word he should have used was criminals, thats who is committing the violence, you think that attacking guns with stabilizing braces, or AR 15’s with a high capacity magazines would have save the people killed last year or this year, that’s crazy, more people are killed in cars, and with knives and other weapons than with guns, what ole Joe should do is have his crack head son aressted, he lied on the ATF form 4473 when purchasing a firearm, if he can’t enforce that, then he doesn’t desreve the right to enforce anything, he is getting pressure from all the anti gunners, so he is saving face by issuing executive actions because he can’t get anything through congress, if he wants to ignore all the crime that has been destroying this country, and what has been done by ANTIFA, BLM, and the Proud Boys, then that’s criminal, and he does not have the right to attck the 2nd amendment or law abiding citizens.


Due strictly to cost, not government restrictions. As, I believe he stated he was in Congress back then, he should recall that the privateers outfitted their ships with cannons and any other suitable armaments. Also, much of the weaponry used by the colonists in the Revolution was privately owned or given to the nascent army by private persons that purchased the arms for the troops.