It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dems warn Trump: Next president could call emergency on guns if courts back border order

page: 3
30
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Laugh at him now, but he's gonna be one of the ones they pay in granola to come take our guns.




posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: shooterbrody

Laugh at him now, but he's gonna be one of the ones they pay in granola to come take our guns.

granola......

wasn't there a portlandia episode on such?



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Got it so Democrats continue to not understand how the constitution works, he has at least a week legal standing, they would have none plus the little thing about a changing a constitutional amendment.

I miss the days where democrats werent bat snip crazy.

Also no not a trumpster, didnt vote for him last time, wont vote for him in 2020 and I think the republicans are just slightly less bat snip crazy.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 01:58 PM
link   
The left is trying to make a point that disagreements and deals shouldn't be undermined by Potus declaring national emergencys.

I'd have to agree with them. They made a deal and now the president is using potus powers to get what he didn't get out of the deal.

Trump isn't doing anything illegal, but I agree that it sets a dangerous path for the future of checks and balances.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: blueman12

So congress should change the law?



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yea just wait until the left elects the trump version of leftists.. National Emergency after Congress refuses to pass the super new green deal..

Trump's twin, Mr. P.C Trump... here to take away your guns and build airport-like fast walkways for immigrants in our new open border country!



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yea just wait until the left elects the trump version of leftists.. National Emergency after Congress refuses to pass the super new green deal..

Trump's twin, Mr. P.C Trump... here to take away your guns and build airport-like fast walkways for immigrants in our new open border country!


and those kind of statements are what we are counting on for trump 2020 win
seems the left really does want gun confiscation



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

I'm not sure what Congress should do.. Obama used national emergencies too, but not in this way. I get why trump is doing it, because he got screwed on the deal. But, it might not be good for the future.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: blueman12

obama did the EXACT same thing with hhs and daca
he moved money from the EXACT same military construction budget

lol

look it up



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   
National emergencies against a disease, Public Safety threat, aggression.....etc will stand. National emergencies against the constitution won’t.

There needs to be a term for what the Democrats are doing.

How about verbal Clickbait?

Because the premise of this is ludicrous.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Trump's emergency for a wall is winning, even though just a minority wants it.
Others just pointing out this would make a dangerous precedence makes you all hysterical and forseeing the end of democracy, America, the world, .... aaaaaaah!

You grab'em-by-the-pussy fanboys are really fun to watch. Twisted, tiny minds at work.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:28 PM
link   
The threat doesn't make much real world sense.

Right or wrong aqueraing funding for a boarder wall is a very limited in scope endeavor. It doesn't require the effort of a lot of people to accomplish. Right or wrong declaring a state of emergency to "lawfully" move money around the executive branch of government is relatively easy and doesnt have a lot of moving parts.

Declaring new and sweeping gun control laws; and than prosecuting those who do not obay is a massive undertaking. Declaring the national Emergency might be as easy as a stroke of a pen ... actually carrying it out would be impossible. The best you could do is stop a sma group of manufacturers from manufacturing certain weapons until the next Republican president comes to power.

The Democrats threats have no teeth and the news media should stop scare mongering over it.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Double post
edit on 4-3-2019 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
National emergencies against a disease, Public Safety threat, aggression.....etc will stand. National emergencies against the constitution won’t.

There needs to be a term for what the Democrats are doing.

How about verbal Clickbait?

Because the premise of this is ludicrous.

If a future president wants to declare a national emergency to direct more funding into environmental initiatives, that would be totally legal. But declaring an emergency and then trying to shut down oil refineries or factories or something like that would be illegal, and would not survive a court challenge.

Again, Trump is working within the law (not outside it), and all he's really doing is shifting funding priorities.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: neo96

Trump's emergency for a wall is winning, even though just a minority wants it.
Others just pointing out this would make a dangerous precedence makes you all hysterical and forseeing the end of democracy, America, the world, .... aaaaaaah!

You grab'em-by-the-pussy fanboys are really fun to watch. Twisted, tiny minds at work.


I always wondered as a woman why the left has to be just so outright crude when describing those that voted for him.

Do you really have nothing else, or is that just as high as your verbal skills go?

And why does nobody on the "sexual freedom" left understand what the term "consensual" means?

I mean, one of your icons is a rapist and you're fine with that.

Just puzzling.

To the OP, never never going to happen because they will have to amend the Constitution to fully implement it.

There just isn't (and never will be) enough support for it in America.

So yes, they will keep chipping away on the State level and keep the Federal wins they already have.

But realistically there is nowhere else for them to go on the Federal level and if Trump places another SC judge you are going to have a ton of 2A cases heading that direction to reverse most of that.

So just scare-mongering, which is typical for that side of the political spectrum.




posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 02:59 PM
link   
But see here is the difference.

You would have to actually come and take the guns.

Nobody is willing to die to stop the wall.

kthxbai.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 03:01 PM
link   
So I ask this, are they that stupid, or is this a weak ass fear and intimidation tactic, because never will achieve what you want, in fact it will be the opposite.

Don't step on snek.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I say go for it.

Maybe we can make the Dimocrat party go extinct that way.



edit on 4-3-2019 by SKEPTEK because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I agree trumps within the law.

The examples I gave for valor declarations of a national emergency was brief.

My main point was if you declare one against the bill of rights you’re going to lose in court hands down.

I even doubt the nutty 9th would uphold the order .



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Lysergic

Here’s a riddle .

If I have 10 guns and the government tells me to give up 8 of them.


How many would I have left ?




Yep you’re right 10!!!!!!
edit on 4-3-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
30
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join