Congressman Proposes Executive Action Obama Should Take
Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida wants President Obama to take executive action on guns.
Click here for reuse options!In a Thursday letter to the president, Hastings laid out three reforms he thinks the administration can adopt unilaterally as “good starting points” toward the common goal of keeping guns from the hands of violent people.
Hastings emphasized that congressional action is the preferable route, but in the face of a Republican-led Congress that’s refused to consider the issue, he’s urging Obama to act on his own…
Hastings agrees that the law governing those “engaged in the business” of selling guns needs to be revisited. He also suggests Obama has the power to expand the definition of firearms to include “unfinished receivers,” unregulated gun components that are sold separately and allow almost anyone to piece together homemade firearms that are effectively untraceable.
Lastly, Hastings wants Obama to strengthen the federal ban on gun ownership by domestic abusers. He says ill-defined legal language has created loopholes allowing some convicted of those crimes to skirt the prohibition.
“While these proposals are not the only needed reforms to our nation’s gun laws, and no single measure has the ability to completely alleviate the epidemic of gun violence in our nation, these common sense measures are important first steps that can be taken immediately to help save lives,” Hastings wrote.
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
4 responses to Congressman Proposes Executive Action Obama Should Take
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
tracey marie October 17th, 2015 at 07:33
67% of domestic violence deaths were the abusers using a gun to kill the women when they were leaving.
LudicrousSextus October 17th, 2015 at 15:49
So we take it Hastings didn’t read the Harvard study? Go figure.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
maggie October 17th, 2015 at 16:33
the roseburg shooting was newtown all over again…..mother a gun nut, her son disabled. their activity: going to the gun range…the taxpayer paid for clean up and suppression crew was very efficient, reporters refused to go after the story and settled for standing by and gawking, and the guy that sold them many of the mother and son their weapons raked it in hand over fist as the local towns people stampeded to his door for more guns and ammo….the gun dealer really made out, you could say he made a killing….so to speak….oregon (and washington) currently are trying to outlaw anything containing the sale of Ivory to stop the slaughter of elephants and rhino’s. The NRA is trying to stop them because they say that it will make their weapons “less marketable” in the dealer and private sale market….(if they contain any ivory components…apparently desirable) Alan from micro soft is putting money against the NRA in washington..but hasn’t backed the petition in oregon….the NRA does not care about endangered animals or innocent people….I feel so badly for the victims of gun violence but I have no sympathy for those that allow wholesale massacre of animals and people just so the NRA can have carte blanche to do what ever it wants…..as trying to pass a law to prevent the slaughter of endangered animals proves….they are only interested in money; they don’t care who is hurt…and they think that taxpayers should pay for the bloody messes they produce everyday…..;(
illinoisboy1977 October 18th, 2015 at 08:54
The president can’t redefine what is in a written law. He can only order federal employees to take certain actions, which do not include modifying laws. Since firearms are regulated by Congress-passed statutes, only Congress can change the definition of what does and does not constitute a firearm. If he tries this route, someone will file a lawsuit and the Supreme Court will shoot down yet another example of the President overstepping his authority.