Jump to content


Welcome to Long Island Firearms, Long Island's premier source for news and education!

Welcome to Long Island Firearms, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of Long Island Firearms by signing in or creating an account. You also have the ability to login with your facebook or twitter account. See the icons in the upper right hand corner.
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get automatic updates
  • Get your own profile and make new friends
  • Customize your experience here
Get the latest facts on the new NY SAFE gun laws that effect you!

Photo

Trump Executive Order Designating "Militia" Rifles

trump executive order militia awb

  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#1 BLAMMO

BLAMMO

    Lousy Shot

  • Club LIF Member
  • Others: Donated Member

  • 16,107 posts
  • LocationTrapped behind enemy lines

Posted February 24 2017 - 01:35 PM

The "Militia" being the armed citizenry
 
http://www.thetrutha...litia-purposes/
 
 

Proposed Executive Order Designating Certain Rifles for ‘Militia Purposes’

The faulty Fourth District decision issued last week upholding Maryland’s Scary Gun Ban runs afoul of good jurisprudence. The ruling found that Second Amendment protections don’t extend to individuals who wish to own certain semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15, calling them, “weapons that are most useful in military service.” However, a document sent to me yesterday offers hope of correcting that in the form of a proposed executive order to be issued by President Trump.

Virginia attorney Lenden Eakin sent me the text of the proposed order and gave permission to share it. I’d like run it past the Armed Intelligentsia here at TTAG to get your take.

The simple mechanism of attorney Eakin’s proposal: by defining certain categories of rifles for militia use, the President could strike state and local bans on many of the most popular “assault rifles” and their magazines.

Mr. Eakin also notes: “An Executive Order like this could have a significant impact on the litigation to challenge Assault Weapons Bans currently making its way through the Courts. It would help the challengers.”

UPDATE: I neglected to note in the original story how this is meant to serve as a stop-gap measure. Ideally, only until a more permanent remedy could be achieved. Or alternatively, until the Supreme Court, with one or more President Trump appointees, could reverse that Fourth Circuit ruling and strike scary gun bans on the whole.

EXECUTIVE ORDER

– – – – – – –

DESIGNATION OF MILITIA RIFLES

By the authority vested in me as President and Commander in Chief of the Militia by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to ensure the ability of citizens of the United States to defend themselves, their communities and their States, as well as to ensure the safety and security of our Nation, I hereby order as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. Both individual and community safety are critically important to the national security of the United States. Terrorism, transnational criminal activity and potential acts of war by foreign nations present a significant threat to national security and our citizens, who have the right and the duty to defend themselves, their communities, their States and the Nation.

Section 2. Policy. It is the policy of the executive branch to:

(a) Support and defend the Constitution, including the Second Amendment right of citizens to keep and bear arms for Militia purposes,as well asself-defense.

( B) Encourage citizens to be prepared to act as members of the Militia to defend communities, States and the Nation, as part of the common defense contemplated by the Constitution of the United States.

© Discourage restrictions by States and political subdivisionson individual possession of firearms suitable for Militia purposes by citizens of the United States.

Section 3. Definitions.

(a) “Militia” has the meaning given the term in Title 10, Section 311 of the United States Code to include the Unorganized Militia, as well as the meaning given to the term “Militia” under equivalent State statutes.

( B) “Self-Defense” shall mean the actions of citizens to defend themselves and their families from physical attack.

© “Communities” shall mean neighborhoods, towns, cities, counties and other political subdivisions of citizens who live in distinct geographic areas within a State.

(d) “State” shall mean one of the fifty States of the United States.

(e) “Militia Purposes” shall mean training, practice and preparedness which could improve the ability of a citizen to act,and to be armed in case of a need to act, as a member of a local, State or National organization commanded by government officials and responsive to a physical threat. Appropriate organizations include those commanded by an elected county or city Sheriff;those commanded by the Governor of a State through officers of that State’s Defense Force as authorized by Title 30, Section 109 of the United States Code, or through officers of that State’s National Guard;and organizations commanded by the President through officers of the Active or Reserve components of U.S. Armed Forces.

(f) “Militia Rifles” shall mean the firearms designated in Section 4 that are made in America and suitable for use in self-defense, community defense, defense of States and defense of the Nation.

Section 4. Designation of Militia Rifles. That the following firearms and accessories are authorized and appropriate for individual citizens to keep and bear for Militia purposes under the Constitution and the laws of the United States:

(a) The AR-15 and similar semi-automatic rifles, to include flash suppressors and bayonet lugs, magazines of up to thirty round capacities, M-7 bayonets, and ammunition in 5.56 NATO or .223 Remington, in all quantities.

( B) The M1A and similar semi-automatic rifles, to include flash suppressors and bayonet lugs,magazines of up to twenty round capacities, M-6 bayonets, and ammunition in 7.62 NATO or .308 Winchester, in all quantities.

© The M1 Garand and similar semi-automatic rifles, to include flash suppressors and bayonet lugs, M-5 bayonets, and ammunition in.30-’06 Springfield, in all quantities.

(d) Bolt action rifles in the calibers of .30-’06 Springfield; 7.62 NATO or .308 Winchester; 5.56 NATO or .223 Remington; or any substantially equivalent caliber, and ammunition appropriate for the rifles, in any quantity.

(This list could easily be expanded.)

Section 5. Pre-emption. This Executive Order is intended to pre-empt the laws of States or political subdivisions that infringe upon the rights of citizens to keep and bear the arms designated in Section 4.

Section 6. Judicial Notice. That the judges of all State and Federal Courts are hereby given notice that possession of the designated Militia Rifles and accessories by citizens should not be restricted or infringed upon by State laws or the laws of a political subdivision of a State and any such law should be reviewed under the strict scrutiny standard to determine whether it is a violation of the Constitution of the United States after judicial consideration of this Order and the fact that it was issued by the Commander in Chief of the Militia.

Donald J. Trump

THE WHITE HOUSE

March __, 2017



PROPOSED EXECUTIVE ORDER DESIGNATES MILITIA RIFLES FOR CITIZEN OWNERSHIP


  • Lou G and LarryD23 like this

# Advertisement

Advertisement

Posted A minute ago



#2 Tom Mac

Tom Mac

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 867 posts
  • LocationLI, NY

Posted February 24 2017 - 01:53 PM

Going to buy some AR company's stock.... it will sky rocket when people buy AR in the next 4 yrs in states like NY


  • Parashooter likes this

#3 ProGodProGunProLife

ProGodProGunProLife

    Gun Guru

  • LIF Site Moderator
  • Others: Club LIF Member

  • 6,106 posts
  • LocationSuffolk

Posted February 24 2017 - 01:53 PM

I would be worried that it would concede that the POTUS could decide what types of guns are and are not constitutionally protected. In the long run it could bite us in the rear end, next time we have an anti as POTUS.

The 2A protects the individual right to keep and bear ARMS, period, not "militia arms".
  • grifhunter, Parashooter, Infringed and 3 others like this

#4 Lou G

Lou G

    Gun Guru

  • Club LIF Member
  • 597 posts
  • LocationSuffolk

Posted February 24 2017 - 03:14 PM

I will wait and see if this true or not. Then you have see if andy and his friends try a end around play. Like you can have the gun but limited mags and quantity Let's see how this pans out. 



#5 Parashooter

Parashooter

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 10,526 posts

Posted February 24 2017 - 03:39 PM

I will wait and see if this true or not. Then you have see if andy and his friends try a end around play. Like you can have the gun but limited mags and quantity Let's see how this pans out. 

The proposed order includes magazines - "in all quantities"

One thing I don't like is there is still a capacity limit (30, 20, depending on the gun)  I think the 40, 50, 100rd. etc. mags are the less-common sizes, but they are still there, and people still want them.

 

I also agree with PGPGPL's point that this could set  policy for the next time we have an anti-gun president to not only UNdo this order, but to give us the worst restrictions ever.

 

It also fails to prohibit any registration schemes - you know, so they "know where they are and who has them"  (Sen. Marcellino's words...)  

 

I'd rather see it set in Law...   


  • Lou G and Ridetoglide like this

#6 Tom Mac

Tom Mac

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 867 posts
  • LocationLI, NY

Posted February 24 2017 - 04:11 PM

I believe the one ruling stated firearms in "common use"  ( was that Heller ? )... I can live with that.

 

I can see the ban on real machine guns.



#7 Parashooter

Parashooter

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 10,526 posts

Posted February 24 2017 - 05:08 PM

I believe the one ruling stated firearms in "common use"  ( was that Heller ? )... I can live with that.

 

I can see the ban on real machine guns.

 

"Real machine guns" are NOT banned - just heavily regulated.



#8 Banzai

Banzai

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 2,192 posts

Posted February 24 2017 - 06:49 PM

I have issues as it was written. First off, no mention of pistol grips or adjustable stocks which are restricted in many states like ours. I couldn't care less about a bayonet lug. Our guns are close to useless without a pistol grip.

 

Secondly, "Appropriate organizations include those commanded by an elected county or city Sheriff; those commanded by the Governor of a State through officers of that State’s Defense Force as authorized by Title 30, Section 109 of the United States Code, or through officers of that State’s National Guard;and organizations commanded by the President through officers of the Active or Reserve components of U.S. Armed Forces."

 

Outside of the national guard or armed forces, this gives the sheriff or governor the right to determine what is or is not acceptable as an appropriate organization. Both our governor and our sheriffs are total as*hats and will not recognize anything as an acceptable organization. So how the heck is that going to help us?



#9 Steyr AUG man

Steyr AUG man

    Newbie

  • Junior Member
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted February 24 2017 - 09:50 PM

How about changing section 4 subsection (a) to read : Any and all semi-auto, bolt action, or lever action rifle, in any caliber, and with any attachment made or remade, designed or redesigned to be attached thereto or thereon, that makes the rifle easier to handle, carry, shoot, load, or aim. Also included are magazines, detachable or attached, in all capacities, and in all quantities.


The above would be more acceptable to me.

#10 VolkoSupply

VolkoSupply

    Gun Guru

  • Forum Sponsor
  • Others: Club LIF Member

  • 2,830 posts

Posted February 24 2017 - 10:05 PM

How about changing section 4 subsection (a) to read : Any and all semi-auto, bolt action, or lever action rifle, in any caliber, and with any attachment made or remade, designed or redesigned to be attached thereto or thereon, that makes the rifle easier to handle, carry, shoot, load, or aim. Also included are magazines, detachable or attached, in all capacities, and in all quantities.


The above would be more acceptable to me.

If the exec order is trying to couch it as "militia" arms, it will keep things to US surplus.

 

IE, if we are invaded by <insert bad guys here> and all able bodied men are required to report to their local state/national guard armory....If you show up with a garand, M1-A, or AR style rifle our gov't has the required ammo and magazines to keep you in the fight.  If you show up with an AK-74, uncle Sam doesn't have stockpiles of ammo for you.

 

That being said there are plenty of M-16 rifles across the country in said armories, but if push comes to shove you want all the guns you can get.



#11 typhoon4x4

typhoon4x4

    Gunowner

  • Established Member
  • 27 posts
  • LocationSUFFOLK

Posted February 24 2017 - 11:26 PM

I hope so



#12 zzrguy

zzrguy

    That Guy

  • LIF Site Moderator
  • Others: Club LIF Member

  • 10,096 posts
  • LocationIn a dark corner in the center of my happy place.

Posted February 24 2017 - 11:46 PM

Interesting very interesting 



#13 Ancap

Ancap

    Respected Gunowner

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 149 posts

Posted February 25 2017 - 08:31 AM

I have issues as it was written. First off, no mention of pistol grips or adjustable stocks which are restricted in many states like ours. I couldn't care less about a bayonet lug. Our guns are close to useless without a pistol grip.

Secondly, "Appropriate organizations include those commanded by an elected county or city Sheriff; those commanded by the Governor of a State through officers of that State’s Defense Force as authorized by Title 30, Section 109 of the United States Code, or through officers of that State’s National Guard;and organizations commanded by the President through officers of the Active or Reserve components of U.S. Armed Forces."

Outside of the national guard or armed forces, this gives the sheriff or governor the right to determine what is or is not acceptable as an appropriate organization. Both our governor and our sheriffs are total as*hats and will not recognize anything as an acceptable organization. So how the heck is that going to help us?

Actually, Suffolk county Sheriff Demarco believes in nullification of unconstitutional laws and for a long time was the only sheriff in the Northeast that did.

#14 Skywalker

Skywalker

    Respected Gunowner

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 117 posts

Posted February 25 2017 - 08:34 AM

One are of concern I have is the Federal vs States rights battle that is obviously coming.  

 

The WH in my view hasn't taken a consistent and logical path yet.  The recent marijuana talk about the Feds over riding recent local state elections was not smart.  So they respect states rights with abortion for example, but not with drugs?  How about firearms?  

 

Look, I'm all for a Federal right to carry and a Federal fix of all the stupidity with gun laws with NY, NJ, CT., etc but if the first month has shown anything, we will be in the courts every day.  So lets be smart and win. 


  • Ancap likes this

#15 Banzai

Banzai

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 2,192 posts

Posted February 25 2017 - 04:13 PM

Actually, Suffolk county Sheriff Demarco believes in nullification of unconstitutional laws and for a long time was the only sheriff in the Northeast that did.

 

The ability and number of obstacles constantly thrown in our way to get a permit or even simply buy a handgun has gotten exponentially worse over the past years in Suffolk County. Pretty sure those are all put in place by the Sheriff, so if that's the case he's no better than Bloomturd or Cuomo. I judge by action, not words, and Suffolk is all about making law abiding citizens more lives more difficult while crime keeps going up.


  • Lou G likes this

#16 Banzai

Banzai

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 2,192 posts

Posted February 25 2017 - 04:44 PM

One are of concern I have is the Federal vs States rights battle that is obviously coming.  

 

The WH in my view hasn't taken a consistent and logical path yet.  The recent marijuana talk about the Feds over riding recent local state elections was not smart.  So they respect states rights with abortion for example, but not with drugs?  How about firearms?  

 

Look, I'm all for a Federal right to carry and a Federal fix of all the stupidity with gun laws with NY, NJ, CT., etc but if the first month has shown anything, we will be in the courts every day.  So lets be smart and win. 

Yeah, good points, but a lot of these developing issues are corrections that have gone unchecked as States overreach in their authority and contradict Federal law, so there's bound to be some appearance of flip flopping when there actually isn't. Last I heard they were approaching the pot issue as cracking down on states where it was still illegal and leaving the others alone which seems within their legal right without infringing on the state. Regarding the gun issue, it can easily be argued that many states are obstructing our Federal right to bear arms so in cases like NY, the state needs a serious b*tch slap. Immigration, again, a state or city cannot impose it's own laws when they blatantly conflict or in this case even impede Federal law, so we need a crackdown on sanctuary cities. State's rights should be null and void when they overreach and infringe on our Constitutional rights or blatantly conflict with Federal law.


  • hawkeye and Lou G like this

#17 38 sup

38 sup

    Gun Guru

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 530 posts
  • Locationkings park

Posted February 25 2017 - 05:22 PM

I would just like to see that any law abiding individual can have any firearm without restriction for sport and protection anywhere in the United States.
  • Banzai, kardoc, lastdollar and 1 other like this

#18 Ancap

Ancap

    Respected Gunowner

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 149 posts

Posted February 25 2017 - 05:50 PM

The ability and number of obstacles constantly thrown in our way to get a permit or even simply buy a handgun has gotten exponentially worse over the past years in Suffolk County. Pretty sure those are all put in place by the Sheriff, so if that's the case he's no better than Bloomturd or Cuomo. I judge by action, not words, and Suffolk is all about making law abiding citizens more lives more difficult while crime keeps going up.


No, it's the firearm community on Long Island, that never really wanted to pursue nullification

It always seems voting for moderates and using oppressive courts are the only options they want to pursue

Just saying

#19 Camaro45th

Camaro45th

    Sharp Shooter!

  • Established Member + Classifieds
  • 426 posts
  • LocationNassau

Posted February 25 2017 - 07:10 PM

Ok....so when can we buy an AR the way it's suppose to be?!? That's the question we all want to know!!!
  • Banzai likes this

#20 Steyr AUG man

Steyr AUG man

    Newbie

  • Junior Member
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted February 25 2017 - 07:52 PM

No, it's the firearm community on Long Island, that never really wanted to pursue nullification
It always seems voting for moderates and using oppressive courts are the only options they want to pursue
Just saying


There's just not enough of us to have a serious candidate actually support our views. Let's not fool ourselves that everyone feels as we do.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: trump, executive order, militia, awb

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users