Rumor on executive orders and imports

Just so.

The reason that no executive orders regarding gun control have appeared on the White House site or in the Federal Register is that the President hasn't issued any. According to this article in New York Magazine, he has issued the 23 orders as "executive actions" or "presidential memoranda;" it seems that the administration considers these to be less likely to be seen as "going around Congress," presumably in part because executive actions don't have to be published in the Federal Register. (Three of the 23 were issued in the form of presidential memoranda; these are published in the Federal Register under the heading "Presidential Documents.")

Striking another blow for transparency in government... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
And how does this interact with, as Chief Executive, promulgating more/different regulations and standards through the BATFE, as an executive department, with powers delegated by Congress? (Honestly asking where, if at all those would show up from the President's Desk)
 
And how does this interact with, as Chief Executive, promulgating more/different regulations and standards through the BATFE, as an executive department, with powers delegated by Congress? (Honestly asking where, if at all those would show up from the President's Desk)
Click to expand...

Three US administrations have banned guns from import, citing the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA 1968. When a gun is banned from import the BATFE either contacts the importer and tells him to cease importing the gun or publishes a letter.
 
But not a specific, and reasonably plausible one on the White House website that will in fact get a response with enough signatures?
 
As I understand it, we're just not doing links to online petitions and polls. Whether a particular one is "reasonably plausible" is a matter of speculation.
 
^^^ This is not germane to the importation of small arms of ammunition for them. It's about defining who is responsible for the list of items prohibited for export from the USA.



Willie


.
 
Let me attempt to work on this topic from another angle

What power does the ATF have to regulate imported ammunition?

What is the flexibility in their determination in what surplus ammunition can be defined as not being intended for sporting purposes?

Explain the intricacies in their incorporated judicial body? What powers it has in interpreting ATF guidelines?

Is newly made commercial ammunition subject to restriction if it could be determined under ATF rules to not being intended for sporting use?

Hopefully this will help to explain what my concerns are. The power of the ATF has already been granted before Obama ever took office, Even some new rules can be instituted under the framework without overstepping the bounds.

From my understanding the ATF has its own executive, legislative and judicial bodies that can operate under the power that is given to them.
 
Come and take it. said:
From my understanding the ATF has its own executive, legislative and judicial bodies that can operate under the power that is given to them.
Click to expand...
BATFE is a piece of the Department of Justice, which sits within the executive branch of the federal government. It has some regulatory authority, but that is not a "legislative body" in the traditional sense of having a bicameral legislature. What sort of "judicial body" do you understand ATF to have? I've never heard any such thing. :confused:
 
Come and Take it - BATFE has no "legislative" or "judicial authority" - it does have limited authority within certain U.S. laws to write and enact regulatory statutes which are intended to add flesh to the bones, so to speak, of legislation passed by Congress but which has inadequate specificity to enforce. Typically such bills are written with language instructing BATFE or whatever the appropriate executive agency might be to write enacting statutes providing more specificity and detail as to how the law can be complied with and how it is to be enforced.
 
Come and Take it - BATFE has no "legislative" or "judicial authority" - it does have limited authority within certain U.S. laws to write and enact regulatory statutes which are intended to add flesh to the bones, so to speak, of legislation passed by Congress but which has inadequate specificity to enforce. Typically such bills are written with language instructing BATFE or whatever the appropriate executive agency might be to write enacting statutes providing more specificity and detail as to how the law can be complied with and how it is to be enforced.
Click to expand...

I don't know how the ATF is structured but I assume it is like every other agency of which I am aware and has "legislative" authority by passing administrative regulations. While tolerated as part of the Executive Branch's authority to implement legislation, only the most naive would believe there is no legislating through adoption of administrative regulations.

Likewise, administrative agencies often have a judicial function. Dispute a social security disability, for example, and your first step is a hearing in front of a hearing officer employed by the Social Security Administration. I assume the ATF or the DOJ employs hearing officers. While parts of decisions can be reviewed by the courts, the courts generally defer to the agency's factual findings and, to a degree, the agency's interpretation of the statutes which it administers. This latter point was an issue in a recent SCOTUS opinion where the minority thought the courts should not defer whatsoever to an agency's legal interpretation. Don't remember the case.
 
To be more specific how extreme can the sporting interpretation be exercised in the restrictive sense?
Click to expand...
I would think it could be used to to keep out most firearms except maybe over/under shotguns and maybe single shot target guns.

This restriction is what keeps out a bunch of M1 Garands sitting in South Korea. The Garands primarily serve two functions today -- collector pieces and match shoots, a sporting purpose. Yet, they're out.
 
Chinese made rifle and pistol ammunition were banned from import in about 1994 when China received most favored nation trade status.

Three US administrations have banned the importation of long guns citing the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA 1968. In 1984 the Striker-12 semi-auto shotgun was banned from import: This was the first long gun banned from import.

The 1984 ban of the Striker-12 set a precedence for future bans. In 1986 another shot gun was banned from import. In 1989 over 40 milsurp rifles were banned from import. In 1998 certain "assault weapons" were banned from import.
 
Last edited:
Than we move on to Eastern European, African, Spanish, Isreali, Russian, Indian etc. etc. surplus military ammunition.

Specifically... can they ban the importation of ordinary full metal jacket military surplus ammunition from these sources?

Can they ban the importation of newly manufactured full metal jacket ammunition (labeled for commercial sale) from Russia?

under the existing authority of the BATF.
 
To be more specific how extreme can the sporting interpretation be exercised in the restrictive sense?
Click to expand...
We may soon see. I expect some sort of import controls to be proposed soon.

Apparently, Century International (the guys who import most of the SKS/AK-47/Mosin stuff) agree. They have raised their prices roughly 60% across the board. If you want a Romanian WASR/10, it's going to run at least $800 at retail from here out.
 
thallob said:
Chinese made rifle and pistol ammunition were banned from import in about 1994 when China received most favored nation trade status.
Click to expand...

wikipedia said:
In 1993, the import of most Norinco firearms and ammunition into the United States were blocked under new trade rules when China's Most Favored Nation status was renewed. The prohibition did not apply to sporting shotguns or shotgun ammunition however. The year subsequent to that, U.S. Customs agents conducted a sting against Atlanta based importers of Norinco firearms. According to an affidavit signed by two of the undercover agents involved in the investigation dubbed "Operation Dragon Fire", representatives from Norinco offered to sell urban gangs shoulder-held missile launchers capable of downing a large commercial airliner.[2]
Click to expand...

Also I seem to remember that Norinco was caught trying to sell type 56 rifles (AK-47 select fire) to gangs as well, something around 2000 unlicensed imports. Hence the ban on everything but smoothbore guns and ammo for same.
 
^^^ This is not germane to the importation of small arms of ammunition for them. It's about defining who is responsible for the list of items prohibited for export from the USA.



Willie
Click to expand...

I read it and am not so sure.

II. Final Rule
Because the Department of Justice
regulations at 27 CFR part 447 listing
the defense articles and defense services
controlled by the Attorney General for
purposes of permanent import currently
adopt, with some exceptions, the list of
defense articles and defense services
controlled by the Secretary of State, and
because certain defense articles and
defense services on the Department of
State export control list that appears in
the ITAR, 22 CFR 121.1, will, in the
future, be removed from that list and
controlled for export and temporary
import by the Secretary of Commerce,
the Department of Justice is clarifying
its regulations by amending 27 CFR
447.21, to do the following:
(i) Remove the language adopting the
State Department export control list
maintained in the ITAR;
(ii) Clarify that the Attorney General
exercises delegated authority to
designate defense articles and defense
services for inclusion on the USML for
purposes of permanent import controls,
regardless of whether such items are
controlled by the Secretary of State for
purposes of export or temporary import;
and
(iii) Clarify that the defense articles
and defense services regulated for
purposes of permanent import pursuant
to the AECA authority delegated to the
Attorney General appear in the
permanent import control list labeled
the USMIL, set out at 27 CFR Part 447,
and that the USMIL is a subset of the
USML pursuant to the AECA.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top