• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Pelosi: Democrat President Could Use Emergency Powers For Gun Control

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Trump is using emergency powers for personal pet project.
Idiots shift conversation to Pelosi using hypothetical about gun control used to make point to republicans supporting Trumps asinine thought process.
 
blackangst1 said:
What the fuck? I said what meant. Keep up this isn't about the wall.
Click to expand...

Oh it certainly is about the Wall. Trump is about to provide the means to a Democrat so inclined to do all sorts of things by his or her own authority. Trump will make the nation secure from immigrants and they by taking guns. Remember that in an emergency Presidents have all sorts of powers they usually don't. So seizing weapons would dramatically reduce child killings over time. Climate change which is a genuine emergency can be a project of immense scale, and socialized medicine as well.

Congrats to Trump supporters for effectively destroying our system of government.

All for another brick in the wall.
 
pauldun170 said:
Trump is using emergency powers for personal pet project.
Idiots shift conversation to Pelosi using hypothetical about gun control used to make point to republicans supporting Trumps asinine thought process.
Click to expand...

Yes that's what Pelosi is saying, but what she isn't is that the genie never goes back in the bottle and will be used again.
 
Texashiker said:
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.
Click to expand...

They already fixed the problem.
Trump is late to the game, but trying to take credit for other's accomplishments once again.

If you're going to call an emergency, best not to do it when the problem is at a 45yr historic low.
9908282-16x9-940x529.jpg


OTOH, a real crisis:
Mass shootings are becoming more frequent and deadlier.
20171111_woc931.png

55.png

ch33zw1z said:
Alt facts feel so good
Click to expand...

He's so truthiness
 
Just more evidence that the left is just itching to get rid of guns. She could have used alcohol deaths or tobacco deaths (much bigger killers than guns), but chose guns. Amazing.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Oh it certainly is about the Wall. Trump is about to provide the means to a Democrat so inclined to do all sorts of things by his or her own authority. Trump will make the nation secure from immigrants and they by taking guns. Remember that in an emergency Presidents have all sorts of powers they usually don't. So seizing weapons would dramatically reduce child killings over time. Climate change which is a genuine emergency can be a project of immense scale, and socialized medicine as well.

Congrats to Trump supporters for effectively destroying our system of government.

All for another brick in the wall.
Click to expand...

Healthcare would be a better bet. Yes a future guy could call guns an emergency but the guy after him will end the emergency. Guns then return.
Medicare for all is more similar to the wall, basically an entitlement that no future President would remove out of fear from people losing a benefit.
 
SlowSpyder said:
Just more evidence that the left is just itching to get rid of guns. She could have used alcohol deaths or tobacco deaths (much bigger killers than guns), but chose guns. Amazing.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the second hand smoke national emergency.

Please fwd your thoughts to the WH for consideration.
 
Last edited:
SlowSpyder said:
Just more evidence that the left is just itching to get rid of guns. She could have used alcohol deaths or tobacco deaths (much bigger killers than guns), but choose guns. Amazing.
Click to expand...

Dude you are so good at twisting words.
If the new world works like a President can declare anything he or she decides is an emergency then why not declare guns a national emergency, why not declare healthcare a national emergency.
As I stated before, the President could have had his wall funded within a couple of months when he first took office. There was a solid compromise that all Democrats would have gone along with.
His party went fucking nuts over the compromise and said we’ll approve something on their own but they couldn’t come to agreement within the Republican Party as to what to do.
Now we are looking at the potential for this President and any President in the future to greatly increase their powers and Congresses power of the purse becoming a recommendation.
 
ch33zw1z said:
You're so smart.
Click to expand...

She chose to use guns as an example, not choking on pen caps, not second hand smoke (kills more innocent victims at a clip of almost 4x as much as guns). But she brought up using emergency powers to harm gun rights. The left has jumped the shark.
 
Texashiker said:
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.
Click to expand...
Its about your guy being an idiot, lazy but still wanting his wall.

He had 25B last summer for his stupid wall the Dems offered but reneged.

If you were interested in stopping illegals being in the country or drugs entering the country stop them at their primary source. Visa overstays and ports of entry.
 
Bitek said:
Ah yes, the second hand smoke national emergency.

Please fwd your thoughts to the WH figure consideration.
Click to expand...


I personally don't believe either are a national emergency. But, if gun deaths are a national emergency, then how would something that kills 4x as many innocents, isn't protected by the constitution, and does not save any lives (no positive impact on society) not be an emergency too?
 
You righties have truly lost your minds. Going nuts over what Nancy might do but she could only do it if your guy declares a FAKE national emergency.

If Trump lived out his fantasy of shooting someone on 5th ave you would blame Bloomberg for arresting him
 
SlowSpyder said:
Just more evidence that the left is just itching to get rid of guns. She could have used alcohol deaths or tobacco deaths (much bigger killers than guns), but chose guns. Amazing.
Click to expand...

Congratulations, it looks like you are getting what you ask for. If allowed to stand your wall will have merely cost the underpinnings of the Constitution to be removed and it will be used against whatever you want. Trump wants this Wall so badly that he will become the authoritarian in charge who poured gas on the Founding document and you gleefully handed him the match and lit it for him.

You have no right to complain about the aftermath.
 
SlowSpyder said:
I personally don't believe either are a national emergency. But, if gun deaths are a national emergency, then how would something that kills 4x as many innocents, isn't protected by the constitution, and does not save any lives (no positive impact on society) not be an emergency too?
Click to expand...
If you don't then why are you not outraged that...

Trump is lying about it.
 
HomerJS said:
You righties have truly lost your minds. Going nuts over what Nancy might do but she could only do it if your guy declares a FAKE national emergency.

If Trump lived out his fantasy of shooting someone on 5th ave you would blame Bloomberg for arresting him
Click to expand...


Nah, just another straw on the camel's back where Democrat turds try to deface the 2A and rights of all Americans. Some of us don't like that.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Congratulations, it looks like you are getting what you ask for. If allowed to stand your wall will have merely cost the underpinnings of the Constitution to be removed and it will be used against whatever you want. Trump wants this Wall so badly that he will become the authoritarian in charge who poured gas on the Founding document and you gleefully handed him the match and lit it for him.

You have no right to complain about the aftermath.
Click to expand...


So you think Trump getting money for a construction project, something that was wanted by both parties over the years, is somehow equivalent to shitting on the bill of rights? Do tell more.
 
HomerJS said:
You righties have truly lost your minds. Going nuts over what Nancy might do but she could only do it if your guy declares a FAKE national emergency.

If Trump lived out his fantasy of shooting someone on 5th ave you would blame Bloomberg for arresting him
Click to expand...


You aren't up to speed it seems. Poland was at fault because they didn't surrender to Hitler, whom his party backed to the hilt.
 
SlowSpyder said:
Nah, just another straw on the camel's back where Democrat turds try to deface the 2A and rights of all Americans. Some of us don't like that.
Click to expand...

Sucks. You just tossed your rights under the bus. I hope that wall is worth everything you may eventually give up when you burned the rights of others and it bites you back.
 
All of this gun business is only ever an issue if Trumpism ever cede control... You fools dont think Vlad has a plan for that??
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Sucks. You just tossed your rights under the bus. I hope that wall is worth everything you may eventually give up when you burned the rights of others and it bites you back.
Click to expand...


Like I asked above, you think the president using emergency powers to get funding for a barrier, something that wasn't an issue to either party before, does that set precedent so a future president can shit on the bill of rights, in this case the 2A? That seems to be what you are implying, so I want to know how. You are comparing two very different things.
 
SlowSpyder said:
So you think Trump getting money for a construction project, something that was wanted by both parties over the years, is somehow equivalent to shitting on the bill of rights? Do tell more.
Click to expand...

The only thing left at this point is the irony of you saying this. You think the Wall is so valuable that you just shat on the Bill of Rights and more, the foundations of government as well. Yes, it's happening in an hour or so, you surrendering the separation of powers for a President of vastly more power than yesterday, a precedent in perpetuity, all for a construction project that people now as a whole do not support. The Dems were elected in November to oppose your agenda under Trump and you may get what you want. But like literal arsonists you have no right of complaint when the fire you started burns your house down. In fact it's merely cosmic justice.

Everything that happens from this day forward is on your front step and you let the beast out and are proud of it. This will come back to haunt you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top