• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

"Executive Order Banning Online Gun Talk – What To Do About It"

Periphery

Banned
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
1,274
Likes
152
You conveniently forget that I referred to this as bogus. I was disputing that the "State Department" issues EOs, as you claimed. "Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies."

You're really not paying any attention, are you? Let me break it down for you.

I never said the State Department issues EO's, they issued THIS which is NOT an EO. The EO this falls under is from 1993, and this ITR is from the 70's.
 

Kevin_NH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
8,901
Likes
2,780
Location
WNW of MHT
I was wrong, the proposal does mention an EO, Executive Order 13563, as part of the justification for making these changes. But read that text of 13563 before you freak out!

Help me understand this thread clearly. The .gov wants to ban talk! And here I've been thinking that .gov emloyee's took an oath to defend the "whole" constitution of the United States. I guess that they get to cherry pick the parts that they'd like to defend. When did free choice cherry picking happen? I must have missed that in the news.
Read the full text as published in the Federal Register. The State Department claims the proposed changes are intended to revise the definition of ‘‘public domain’’ in ITAR § 120.11 in order to simplify, update, and introduce greater versatility into the definition. IOW, to make it more understandable, and reduce the potential for unreasonable prosecutions.

Various groups, including the NRA-ILA, have their own, darker, interpretation of the proposed changes.
 

Varmint

NES Member
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
17,432
Likes
9,697
Location
North Shore, MA
Executive order? No, and companies like Facebook might like to ban all gun related posts, but they don’t want to lose millions of users at once. There are already alternatives popping up in response to their censorship.
 

M125X

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Nov 24, 2013
Messages
1,607
Likes
1,002
They will probably pass an actual law instead. And some Republicans will also join and vote for it. To stop “violence and possible insurrection”... you know, for the children.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
3,997
Likes
4,266
Location
NH
I was partial to the Fifth General Order. The private may only be relieved by relieving himself while waiting for relief from the reliever. . . . or something like that.
Clearly you have no idea of the significance of general order 24. It states that all life on the planet should be destroyed. (A taste of armageddon)!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
4,209
Likes
2,884
Location
North Taxolina
Executive order? No, and companies like Facebook might like to ban all gun related posts, but they don’t want to lose millions of users at once. There are already alternatives popping up in response to their censorship.

I heard a radio ad for Facebook the other morning. It was kind of pathetic sounding. Cant imagine they’d be buying morning radio spots if they weren’t already bleeding pretty heavily.
 
Top Bottom