Pelosi: Democrat President Could Use Emergency Powers For Gun Control

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jan 25, 2011
16,699
8,909
146
What presidential EO could possibly reduce gun deaths significantly;y? Genuinely curious.
If Trump does this and nothing is done to check him on it then it really doesn’t matter if anything in the future is effective. They can just ban what they want no matter how ineffectual it is. Just like the wall won’t do much of anything now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
If Trump does this and nothing is done to check him on it then it really doesn’t matter if anything in the future is effective. They can just ban what they want no matter how ineffectual it is. Just like the wall won’t do much of anything now.
If Trump does what?
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
right now? not very much. but in the future? if trump is dumb enough to declare a national emergency when there is none - and it goes unchecked - then yes, very much so.
Like what for example. I haven't read anything about Trump issuing EO regarding him control.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
I do not think is about the wall per say, but democrats refusal to compromise on the issue.

Just a few years ago nancy, chuck and even obama said we need to secure the southern border. Now that Trump is in office and willing to take action, chuck and nancy are crawfishing.

Why wasn't Trump so willing to take action during his first 2 years in office? Yaknow, while the Republicans controlled Congress and it didn't matter what Chuck and Nancy said?
Why is it so important now when it wasn't important then?
 

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
9,457
12,991
146
I figure the worst is yet to come.

Trying to fair to both sides, the left seems to twist and omit facts more than the right. I am sure people will disagree with that. Take huffpost for example, they leave certain facts out to promote their agenda.

Do right leaning sites leave certain facts out? Sure they do, but not to the extent of the left leaning sites.

Are you slow's cousin? I see glaring similarities in the idiocy.

What the fuck? I said what meant. Keep up this isn't about the wall.

It's also not about guns.

If Trump does what?

Having no reading comprehension does not equate to what you are reading not making sense. Stop being intentionally daft.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
It's also not about guns.

I guess you didnt read nor comprehend the subject of the OP?
Pelosi: Democrat President Could Use Emergency Powers For Gun Control
So gun control has nothing to do with guns? Put the pipe down man.

Having no reading comprehension does not equate to what you are reading not making sense. Stop being intentionally daft.

Speaking of lack of reading comprehension and being daft...my reply was to the quote "If Trump does this and nothing is done to check him on it " so I was asking if he does what? I would guess he was talking about executing EO for the wall, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the OP. Which, again, you missed.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,993
13,519
136
CNN - Far left, like way off the chart left. I have been watching CNN propaganda since the late 1980s, and it has not changed.

Fox - Central right. Overall, I feel Fox "tries" to present facts with only a slight right slant.

It can be a tit for tat. If the next democrat uses emergency powers on guns, the next GOP can use emergency powers on abortion.... etc.

I felt what Trump offered to democrats, as in granting dreamers extended stays, was fair. Democrats on the other hand REFUSED to compromise. Who do we side with? Someone who offered an olive branch, or someone who refused to budge?

And that is the problem. In the face of facts, massive indictments and evidence of extreme evil, Fox will still back ie. Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Flynn etc etc etc.. And Fox will lie to you straight to your skull, into your brain, sell you conspiracy theories ala deepstate, in effort to keep a dude in power who has shown he is willing to back an agenda of robbing the american people and giving it all to the rich.
Fox is state TV man. An peopaganda outlet. And it will sell your soul down the river right into the hands of Vlad and oligarks if it means more tax cuts.
Look what it has done to you in terms of the proposed above 10M personal tax income.. IT LIES TO YOU... to the point that you consider all these people here on this board fake news even as they spell the real facts out one by one.
Fox is not center right. Fox is anti-you.
CNN may be leaning left but is pretty centrish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,202
18,671
146
Well that would do it. Although I guess I meant something reasonable that wouldnt hurt 98% of responsible gun owners.

The point is abusing the "NE" leaves the door open for subsequent admins to abuse it. Guns is a topic that will grab the rights attention and hopefully get them to realize that the great deal maker isn't making great deals and is hurting the nation by circumventing checks and balances.

24 months republicans ran it all, now all of a sudden it's an emergency, what a joke Trump and mcturtle are.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
The point is abusing the "NE" leaves the door open for subsequent admins to abuse it. Guns is a topic that will grab the rights attention and hopefully get them to realize that the great deal maker isn't making great deals and is hurting the nation by circumventing checks and balances.

24 months republicans ran it all, now all of a sudden it's an emergency, what a joke Trump and mcturtle are.

Gun control isn’t a good example to illustrate this concern. First, border walls don’t have the protection of a dedicated Constitutional amendment like the 2nd. Second border walls aren’t distributed among 300+ million people across the entire county like guns are. Third and perhaps most importantly, a wall doesn’t shoot back if you try to come and take it away. You don’t routinely see people with T-shirts saying “you’ll have to pry a border wall out of my cold dead fingers” either. Abortion and guns are probably the only two things that if you tried to ban them, which would cause nationwide public revolts that could conceivably topple the government.

If you want to say that NE could be used to unilaterally begin AOC “green new deal” or something that I could see.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,202
18,671
146
Gun control isn’t a good example to illustrate this concern. First, border walls don’t have the protection of a dedicated Constitutional amendment like the 2nd. Second border walls aren’t distributed among 300+ million people across the entire county like guns are. Third and perhaps most importantly, a wall doesn’t shoot back if you try to come and take it away. You don’t routinely see people with T-shirts saying “you’ll have to pry a border wall out of my cold dead fingers” either. Abortion and guns are probably the only two things that if you tried to ban them, which would cause nationwide public revolts that could conceivably topple the government.

If you want to say that NE could be used to unilaterally begin AOC “green new deal” or something that I could see.

Hey, that's was pelosi's intent. And it got their attention, and maybe will lead to conservatives to draw the conclusion you just did. The wall isn't actually a national emergency scenario.

NE circumvents congress, checks and balances neutralized, constitutional rights in jeopardy is not far fetched. Obviously Cons won't go after guns, but there are certainly other amendments that I can see them attacking.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,120
10,946
136
Gun control isn’t a good example to illustrate this concern. First, border walls don’t have the protection of a dedicated Constitutional amendment like the 2nd. Second border walls aren’t distributed among 300+ million people across the entire county like guns are. Third and perhaps most importantly, a wall doesn’t shoot back if you try to come and take it away. You don’t routinely see people with T-shirts saying “you’ll have to pry a border wall out of my cold dead fingers” either. Abortion and guns are probably the only two things that if you tried to ban them, which would cause nationwide public revolts that could conceivably topple the government.

If you want to say that NE could be used to unilaterally begin AOC “green new deal” or something that I could see.

Considering how important gun rights are to conservatives in general - Pelosi using gun rights is actually the perfect item to show why trump declaring a national emergency is a terrible idea.

It's the same reason why Europe started proposing huge import taxes on american bourbons and whiskeys when Trump was doing his deal making. The economic impact was small. But who makes bourbon and whiskeys? Lots of folks in conservative strongholds that voted Trump into office.

Pelosi is trying to point out that the long-term consequences will be politically disastrous and leave the door wide open for a Democrat president to unilaterally change laws on a topic that conservatives hold very, very dear.

For example, with a Democrat president, the next school shooting that happens, the president could declare a National emergency to enact an assault weapon ban, high capacity magazine ban, limit ammo purchases, and require ID for ammo purchases. All of this would be entirely within the 2A, as SCOTUS has already ruled that it's not an unlimited right. And you know conservatives would lose their minds if that happened.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,757
2,533
126
What Pelosi was saying, in essence, that if Trump successfully sets this precedent, then any future President can declare an emergency in order to implement something that they can't get Congressional approval for.

It also means that the courts absolutely ignore the plain meaning of the Constitution, that Congress is permanently essentially meaningless and our form of government is a sham. Welcome to the Imperial President/Czar.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,202
18,671
146
I do not think is about the wall per say, but democrats refusal to compromise on the issue.

Just a few years ago nancy, chuck and even obama said we need to secure the southern border. Now that Trump is in office and willing to take action, chuck and nancy are crawfishing.

Alt facts feel so good
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,238
136
Well that would do it. Although I guess I meant something reasonable that wouldnt hurt 98% of responsible gun owners.

No regards to the scores of dead children with their brains splattered upon the schoolhouse walls?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
I do not think is about the wall per say, but democrats refusal to compromise on the issue.

Just a few years ago nancy, chuck and even obama said we need to secure the southern border. Now that Trump is in office and willing to take action, chuck and nancy are crawfishing.

Congrats on realizing that your support of Trump opens an avenue for anyone to declare your weapons illegal and force you to surrender them. As things stand Trump supporters want to see him get away with this and haven't the brains to realize that if this happens and the courts don't stop it then anything goes, including your guns and you'll have done it to yourselves. Of course they'll blame Democrats after they themselves have opened the barn doors for whatever your opposition wants. Trump wants the One Ring of power with authoritarians like Laura and Sean crying for that power then expect once the power passes to another that it won't be used.

Nice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ewdotson

Golden Member
Oct 30, 2011
1,295
1,520
136
Seriously, when folks are suggesting that future Democratic presidents could declare national emergencies over things like climate change or gun control, they (mostly) aren't intended as serious policy proposals. Their purpose is to demonstrate what a terrible, terrible idea it is for Congress to cede their Constitutionally delegated powers to the Executive to this extent. No matter how one feels about the idea of a border wall itself, no one should be ok with wrecking the checks and balances between the branches of Congress to get it.