This is how Hilary will end guns in the U.S......

[2aguy]

emails released by wiki leaks confirms that Hilary is going to use an executive order to strike down the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act...which means that when a gang banger buys a stolen gun from another criminal and hits an innocent person...right now that innocent person can't sue Glock because Glock did nothing wrong. An executive order from Hilary would striking down that law would mean that that innocent could sue Glock.......which would lead to a court fight since executive orders can't nullify laws created by congress and signed by the President.....

The next thing...it will go to the courts.......all the way up to the Supreme Court which, if Hilary wins, will be aa 5-4,, or 6-3 left wing, anti American court.....who will rule in her favor....thereby bypassing congress and not endangering any anti gun democrats.....

Wikileaks Email Reveals Hillary's Plan for Executive Orders Imposing Universal Background Checks, Gun Manufacturer Liability - The Truth About Guns

 

[Ringel05]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

 

[2aguy]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

 

[Ringel05]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They will? Constitutionally based her EO would be found to be an over reach and declared unconstitutional.
The only legal avenue is via the Predicate Exception clause and that is specifically limited to a manufacturer or seller knowingly committed a violation of an underlying statute and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, good luck with that one so far the results there have been mixed at best. As for the law itself there have already been multiple unsuccessful constitutional challenges, the law is constitutionally solid.
If you think Hillary will be able to stack the court with ultra progressive judges think again, she'll need both houses of congress to be solidly Democrat and even then there is a moderate contingent of Dems who represent gun friendly states who may or may not follow the party line.

 

[2aguy]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They will? Constitutionally based her EO would be found to be an over reach and declared unconstitutional.
The only legal avenue is via the Predicate Exception clause and that is specifically limited to a manufacturer or seller knowingly committed a violation of an underlying statute and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, good luck with that one so far the results there have been mixed at best. As for the law itself there have already been multiple unsuccessful constitutional challenges, the law is constitutionally solid.
If you think Hillary will be able to stack the court with ultra progressive judges think again, she'll need both houses of congress to be solidly Democrat and even then there is a moderate contingent of Dems who represent gun friendly states who may or may not follow the party line.

Do you know how the nomination process works? obviously not......she needs the Senate....and not one of the Republicans is going to stand in her way on judges....one of the first things they did the last time in office was to get the FBI files of over 1,000 people in congress and Washington........she will also have control of the FBI, the IRS and the NSA....so the already cowardly establishment republicans are not going to stand in the way of any of her Justices...so all she needs is the Senate to approve them...the house has no role in that...

And she won't care about gun friendly democrats...they will be removed from the threat because it will be the Supreme Court.....with lifetime appointments, who will declare the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstituional......the democrats won't have to vote and expose themselves.....

Once it is deemed unconstitutional......gun makers will be sued out of the country...then they will fall under the U.N. treaties on the export of arms...

 

[Ringel05]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They will? Constitutionally based her EO would be found to be an over reach and declared unconstitutional.
The only legal avenue is via the Predicate Exception clause and that is specifically limited to a manufacturer or seller knowingly committed a violation of an underlying statute and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, good luck with that one so far the results there have been mixed at best. As for the law itself there have already been multiple unsuccessful constitutional challenges, the law is constitutionally solid.
If you think Hillary will be able to stack the court with ultra progressive judges think again, she'll need both houses of congress to be solidly Democrat and even then there is a moderate contingent of Dems who represent gun friendly states who may or may not follow the party line.

Do you know how the nomination process works? obviously not......she needs the Senate....and not one of the Republicans is going to stand in her way on judges....one of the first things they did the last time in office was to get the FBI files of over 1,000 people in congress and Washington........she will also have control of the FBI, the IRS and the NSA....so the already cowardly establishment republicans are not going to stand in the way of any of her Justices...so all she needs is the Senate to approve them...the house has no role in that...

And she won't care about gun friendly democrats...they will be removed from the threat because it will be the Supreme Court.....with lifetime appointments, who will declare the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstituional......the democrats won't have to vote and expose themselves.....

Once it is deemed unconstitutional......gun makers will be sued out of the country...then they will fall under the U.N. treaties on the export of arms...

I know how the nomination process works and yes, I misstated (I missed that, should have proof read it), only the senate approve or rejects nominations. As for your assessment of the Senate Republicans it's yours and only the far righties believe that.
The problem again comes down to your believe that SCOTUS will automatically declare a law unconstitutional, a law that has already passed constitutional muster and while the possibility is always there the chances in this case are highly unlikely that SCOTUS would deem it unconstitutional.
Unlike you I refuse to give into election year paranoia.

 

[2aguy]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They will? Constitutionally based her EO would be found to be an over reach and declared unconstitutional.
The only legal avenue is via the Predicate Exception clause and that is specifically limited to a manufacturer or seller knowingly committed a violation of an underlying statute and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, good luck with that one so far the results there have been mixed at best. As for the law itself there have already been multiple unsuccessful constitutional challenges, the law is constitutionally solid.
If you think Hillary will be able to stack the court with ultra progressive judges think again, she'll need both houses of congress to be solidly Democrat and even then there is a moderate contingent of Dems who represent gun friendly states who may or may not follow the party line.

Do you know how the nomination process works? obviously not......she needs the Senate....and not one of the Republicans is going to stand in her way on judges....one of the first things they did the last time in office was to get the FBI files of over 1,000 people in congress and Washington........she will also have control of the FBI, the IRS and the NSA....so the already cowardly establishment republicans are not going to stand in the way of any of her Justices...so all she needs is the Senate to approve them...the house has no role in that...

And she won't care about gun friendly democrats...they will be removed from the threat because it will be the Supreme Court.....with lifetime appointments, who will declare the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstituional......the democrats won't have to vote and expose themselves.....

Once it is deemed unconstitutional......gun makers will be sued out of the country...then they will fall under the U.N. treaties on the export of arms...

I know how the nomination process works and yes, I misstated (I missed that, should have proof read it), only the senate approve or rejects nominations. As for your assessment of the Senate Republicans it's yours and only the far righties believe that.
The problem again comes down to your believe that SCOTUS will automatically declare a law unconstitutional, a law that has already passed constitutional muster and while the possibility is always there the chances in this case are highly unlikely that SCOTUS would deem it unconstitutional.
Unlike you I refuse to give into election year paranoia.

It isn't election year paranoia......already there are left wing lower courts completely ignoring Heller...the 9th circuit comes to mind....as well as several others......their is no such thing as "Legal Precedent" for left wing judges...there is only advancing the left wing social causes......

 

[Ringel05]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They will? Constitutionally based her EO would be found to be an over reach and declared unconstitutional.
The only legal avenue is via the Predicate Exception clause and that is specifically limited to a manufacturer or seller knowingly committed a violation of an underlying statute and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, good luck with that one so far the results there have been mixed at best. As for the law itself there have already been multiple unsuccessful constitutional challenges, the law is constitutionally solid.
If you think Hillary will be able to stack the court with ultra progressive judges think again, she'll need both houses of congress to be solidly Democrat and even then there is a moderate contingent of Dems who represent gun friendly states who may or may not follow the party line.

Do you know how the nomination process works? obviously not......she needs the Senate....and not one of the Republicans is going to stand in her way on judges....one of the first things they did the last time in office was to get the FBI files of over 1,000 people in congress and Washington........she will also have control of the FBI, the IRS and the NSA....so the already cowardly establishment republicans are not going to stand in the way of any of her Justices...so all she needs is the Senate to approve them...the house has no role in that...

And she won't care about gun friendly democrats...they will be removed from the threat because it will be the Supreme Court.....with lifetime appointments, who will declare the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstituional......the democrats won't have to vote and expose themselves.....

Once it is deemed unconstitutional......gun makers will be sued out of the country...then they will fall under the U.N. treaties on the export of arms...

I know how the nomination process works and yes, I misstated (I missed that, should have proof read it), only the senate approve or rejects nominations. As for your assessment of the Senate Republicans it's yours and only the far righties believe that.
The problem again comes down to your believe that SCOTUS will automatically declare a law unconstitutional, a law that has already passed constitutional muster and while the possibility is always there the chances in this case are highly unlikely that SCOTUS would deem it unconstitutional.
Unlike you I refuse to give into election year paranoia.

It isn't election year paranoia......already there are left wing lower courts completely ignoring Heller...the 9th circuit comes to mind....as well as several others......their is no such thing as "Legal Precedent" for left wing judges...there is only advancing the left wing social causes......

Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[bitterlyclingin]

DOMA and Comrade Sheikh Buraq the cucksocker.

 

[2aguy]

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They will? Constitutionally based her EO would be found to be an over reach and declared unconstitutional.
The only legal avenue is via the Predicate Exception clause and that is specifically limited to a manufacturer or seller knowingly committed a violation of an underlying statute and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, good luck with that one so far the results there have been mixed at best. As for the law itself there have already been multiple unsuccessful constitutional challenges, the law is constitutionally solid.
If you think Hillary will be able to stack the court with ultra progressive judges think again, she'll need both houses of congress to be solidly Democrat and even then there is a moderate contingent of Dems who represent gun friendly states who may or may not follow the party line.

Do you know how the nomination process works? obviously not......she needs the Senate....and not one of the Republicans is going to stand in her way on judges....one of the first things they did the last time in office was to get the FBI files of over 1,000 people in congress and Washington........she will also have control of the FBI, the IRS and the NSA....so the already cowardly establishment republicans are not going to stand in the way of any of her Justices...so all she needs is the Senate to approve them...the house has no role in that...

And she won't care about gun friendly democrats...they will be removed from the threat because it will be the Supreme Court.....with lifetime appointments, who will declare the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstituional......the democrats won't have to vote and expose themselves.....

Once it is deemed unconstitutional......gun makers will be sued out of the country...then they will fall under the U.N. treaties on the export of arms...

I know how the nomination process works and yes, I misstated (I missed that, should have proof read it), only the senate approve or rejects nominations. As for your assessment of the Senate Republicans it's yours and only the far righties believe that.
The problem again comes down to your believe that SCOTUS will automatically declare a law unconstitutional, a law that has already passed constitutional muster and while the possibility is always there the chances in this case are highly unlikely that SCOTUS would deem it unconstitutional.
Unlike you I refuse to give into election year paranoia.

It isn't election year paranoia......already there are left wing lower courts completely ignoring Heller...the 9th circuit comes to mind....as well as several others......their is no such thing as "Legal Precedent" for left wing judges...there is only advancing the left wing social causes......

Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree.

And I agree....

 

[Syriusly]

emails released by wiki leaks confirms that Hilary is going to use an executive order to strike down the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act...which means that when a gang banger buys a stolen gun from another criminal and hits an innocent person...right now that innocent person can't sue Glock because Glock did nothing wrong. An executive order from Hilary would striking down that law would mean that that innocent could sue Glock.......which would lead to a court fight since executive orders can't nullify laws created by congress and signed by the President.....

The next thing...it will go to the courts.......all the way up to the Supreme Court which, if Hilary wins, will be aa 5-4,, or 6-3 left wing, anti American court.....who will rule in her favor....thereby bypassing congress and not endangering any anti gun democrats.....

Wikileaks Email Reveals Hillary's Plan for Executive Orders Imposing Universal Background Checks, Gun Manufacturer Liability - The Truth About Guns

Wait I thought Obama had already seized all of your guns!

I can remember when the gun nuts predicted President Obama was going to be seizing your guns- so you all rushed out and bought lots of guns.

Did Obama miss a few of yours?

LOL

 

[2aguy]

emails released by wiki leaks confirms that Hilary is going to use an executive order to strike down the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act...which means that when a gang banger buys a stolen gun from another criminal and hits an innocent person...right now that innocent person can't sue Glock because Glock did nothing wrong. An executive order from Hilary would striking down that law would mean that that innocent could sue Glock.......which would lead to a court fight since executive orders can't nullify laws created by congress and signed by the President.....

The next thing...it will go to the courts.......all the way up to the Supreme Court which, if Hilary wins, will be aa 5-4,, or 6-3 left wing, anti American court.....who will rule in her favor....thereby bypassing congress and not endangering any anti gun democrats.....

Wikileaks Email Reveals Hillary's Plan for Executive Orders Imposing Universal Background Checks, Gun Manufacturer Liability - The Truth About Guns

Wait I thought Obama had already seized all of your guns!

I can remember when the gun nuts predicted President Obama was going to be seizing your guns- so you all rushed out and bought lots of guns.

Did Obama miss a few of yours?

LOL

Moron....we have already addressed this.....obamacare was the most important thing......and he didn't want to lose democrats because of anti gun votes, so he just stacked the courts...and we have already seen decisions because of this......now, they can completely turn the court against civil rights....and they will.....and they won't lose one democrat because they voted against guns....they will be insulated....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They'd be ruling on the EO, not the law, Chicken Little.

 

[Anathema]

I guess this assumes that the 300 million guns already in circulation would just evaporate into thin air.

 

[2aguy]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They'd be ruling on the EO, not the law, Chicken Little.

They can rule on the law in their ruling .....and they will....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They'd be ruling on the EO, not the law, Chicken Little.

They can rule on the law in their ruling .....and they will....

Nope

 

[2aguy]

Hate to be the one to tell ya this but no president can undo a law via an Executive Order, EOs do not trump laws.

She won't have to ........she will do the executive order...then it will go to court...the Supreme Court will rule the Lawful Commerce in Arms act unconstitutional...and the harassment law suits will shut down gun makers.......all without one vote in congress...

They'd be ruling on the EO, not the law, Chicken Little.

They can rule on the law in their ruling .....and they will....

Nope

Yep......