Pelosi To GOP: A Democratic President Could Declare National Emergency On Guns

Yes, but, sadly, all of those laws on firearm types of restrictions are technically unconstitutional as well. The words "shall not be infringed" apply here.

One of the things the left like to do is take things to the extreme and say "well, does that mean you should be able to own a tank, or rockets, or nukes?". My answer to that is, when the framers were writing the 2nd, it's clear by the text of the amendment, and by supporting documents (federalist papers), they were referring guns, muskets being what they had at the time. The 2nd amendment was written In 1791, the first automatic weapon wasn't made until 1892.

I disagree with what you say, but using your logic, automatic weapons aren't protected by the 2nd amendment. They were only referring to muskets.


'the right to keep and bear arms". Doesnt say anything about this applying only to muskets.

Doesn't say anything about automatic weapons or nuclear weapons either. You think those should be allowed?
----------------------------- the Second Amendment refers to Americans having the same weapons issued to the American Combat soldier . Full Auto weapons are legal in most USA States but not Nukes as combat soldiers don't commonly carry nukes Bulldog and Seawitch .

Exactly which line in the constitution says that?
It's not in the constitution, but it is in other documents that talk about what they were thinking when they wrote the 2A.
 
In other words, you think Nancy is full of shit.

Well, no. If Trump is allowed to set that precedent, then declaring a national emergency becomes just another partisan tool to be used by either party. Any future president from either party will be free to do it. Pelosi is correct to point that out.
lol There is no precedent being set. A national emergency is anything the President says it is. The question is, do the powers allowed to him under the National Emergencies Act allow him to do what he wants to do? On the question of building a border fence, the answer is, yes, but on the question of amending the 2nd amendment, the answer is, no. That's why Obama didn't declare a national emergency to impose restrictions on gun ownership. That's also why Nancy is full of shit and making a fool out of you.

Declaring a national emergency doesn't amend any law. It just ignores them.
Imposing legislation that runs counter to the Constitution is not one of the powers the National Emergencies Act allows to the President.

Declaring an emergency has nothing to do with passing legislation. It's ignoring legislation.
You are making no sense. Imposing restrictions on gun ownership is de facto legislation, and the legislation you are talking about ignoring is the Constitution.
 
I bet the cartels laughs every time he hears the news media say that all the drugs are called at ports of Entry to America. The cartel allows this to happen just so that they will not be looking elsewhere for drugs Coming to America
 
I disagree with what you say, but using your logic, automatic weapons aren't protected by the 2nd amendment. They were only referring to muskets.


'the right to keep and bear arms". Doesnt say anything about this applying only to muskets.

Doesn't say anything about automatic weapons or nuclear weapons either. You think those should be allowed?
----------------------------- the Second Amendment refers to Americans having the same weapons issued to the American Combat soldier . Full Auto weapons are legal in most USA States but not Nukes as combat soldiers don't commonly carry nukes Bulldog and Seawitch .

Exactly which line in the constitution says that?
It's not in the constitution, but it is in other documents that talk about what they were thinking when they wrote the 2A.
Of course it's the Constitution which says the right to keep and bear arms. To keep arms might just mean to have a weapon in your home, but to bear arms clearly means to carry a weapon outside your home.
 
52269893_2111967682174250_5278798450719195136_n.jpg


God bless Nancy Pelosi!
 
...Idiot...
Calm yourself, Princess, before you soil your undies... and mind your manners in the presence of your betters, eh?

...there is absolutely no difference between a direct or general categorical language...
We have a State of Emergency on our hands and your first line of defense is semantics and grammatical assertions?

Silly, silly little Princess.


...Constitution EXPLICITLY gives the spending aproriation power to Congress...
It does, indeed.

In the case of several of the funding-pools now known to be in the cross-hairs, they're all subject to discretion and broad interpretation.


...and by unilaterally appropriating funds for the wall Trump would be breaking the law...
Which aspect of the discretionary-usage-pool guidelines and statutes is he violating?

...Otherwise presidents would just move the money around at will - DUH
True. That's not what's happening here. The Creature is merely applying Discretion to discretionary funds.

Ain't nobody that can shell-game other people's money than a Robber Baron like The Creature. :21:

You snowflakes are in over your head on this one.

Personally, I think The Wall is a dumb idea.

But I think you LibTards are even dumber to have let this unfold.

It's going to be great fun, watching you clowns piss and moan and put on the hair shirt and wail and gnash your teeth over this one.
 
Pelosi To GOP: A Democratic President Could Declare National Emergency On Guns
This is what happens when Botox seeps into your brain.

Congress passed legislation that gives POTUS emergency authority.

There is no legislation or executive action that overrides the Constitution.

You've got to be dumb as turtle turds to agree with Pelosi
 
Obama didn't do that because you don't claim national emergencies for partisan purposes.
In other words, you think Nancy is full of shit.

Well, no. If Trump is allowed to set that precedent, then declaring a national emergency becomes just another partisan tool to be used by either party. Any future president from either party will be free to do it. Pelosi is correct to point that out.
lol There is no precedent being set. A national emergency is anything the President says it is. The question is, do the powers allowed to him under the National Emergencies Act allow him to do what he wants to do? On the question of building a border fence, the answer is, yes, but on the question of amending the 2nd amendment, the answer is, no. That's why Obama didn't declare a national emergency to impose restrictions on gun ownership. That's also why Nancy is full of shit and making a fool out of you.

Declaring a national emergency doesn't amend any law. It just ignores them.
Imposing legislation that runs counter to the Constitution is not one of the powers the National Emergencies Act allows to the President.

I'm sure that argument will be used in opposition to Trump's latest childish action.
 
I disagree with what you say, but using your logic, automatic weapons aren't protected by the 2nd amendment. They were only referring to muskets.


'the right to keep and bear arms". Doesnt say anything about this applying only to muskets.

Doesn't say anything about automatic weapons or nuclear weapons either. You think those should be allowed?
----------------------------- the Second Amendment refers to Americans having the same weapons issued to the American Combat soldier . Full Auto weapons are legal in most USA States but not Nukes as combat soldiers don't commonly carry nukes Bulldog and Seawitch .

Exactly which line in the constitution says that?
It's not in the constitution, but it is in other documents that talk about what they were thinking when they wrote the 2A.

Those other documents are not the constitution, and have no legal authority over anything. Any document I might write would have just as much legal authority.
 
52269893_2111967682174250_5278798450719195136_n.jpg


God bless Nancy Pelosi!

Trump's going to take her joke of a victory and shove it up her wrinkled old crack and get his wall anyway

You mean by stealing money from the troops?

Where is Trump getting border wall money? From funds intended for military family housing upgrades
Blame it on the Democrats it's their fault

Why not blame Mexico for not paying for Trump's fantasy wall - like he PROMISED hundreds of times?
 
52269893_2111967682174250_5278798450719195136_n.jpg


God bless Nancy Pelosi!

Trump's going to take her joke of a victory and shove it up her wrinkled old crack and get his wall anyway

You mean by stealing money from the troops?

Where is Trump getting border wall money? From funds intended for military family housing upgrades
52269893_2111967682174250_5278798450719195136_n.jpg


God bless Nancy Pelosi!

Trump's going to take her joke of a victory and shove it up her wrinkled old crack and get his wall anyway

You mean by stealing money from the troops?

Where is Trump getting border wall money? From funds intended for military family housing upgrades
Blame it on the Democrats it's their fault
Republicans had full control of congress for two years, but blame it on democrats?
SVbDeIl.jpg
 
52269893_2111967682174250_5278798450719195136_n.jpg


God bless Nancy Pelosi!

Trump's going to take her joke of a victory and shove it up her wrinkled old crack and get his wall anyway

You mean by stealing money from the troops?

Where is Trump getting border wall money? From funds intended for military family housing upgrades
52269893_2111967682174250_5278798450719195136_n.jpg


God bless Nancy Pelosi!

Trump's going to take her joke of a victory and shove it up her wrinkled old crack and get his wall anyway

You mean by stealing money from the troops?

Where is Trump getting border wall money? From funds intended for military family housing upgrades
Blame it on the Democrats it's their fault
Republicans had full control of congress for two years, but blame it on democrats?
SVbDeIl.jpg
They've tried to work with them Democrats but they're still mad about Hillary's loss
 

Forum List

Back
Top