Will Democrats Declare A National Emergency to Get Rid of Guns?


#44

You’d love the military kicking in doors to find guns, wouldn’t you?


#45

democrat presidential order to ban cars as well…


#46

Don’t worry- it’ll never happen. Now allowing a president to make unilateral budget decisions for his policy objectives- that should never happen either, right?


#47

Don’t be silly. Banning guns (setting aside for the moment of the Constitutionality of such a move) will not stop murder. Not even close.


#48

I suppose you think that makes violating the Constitution okay. To apply rolltide’s logic above to your statement, the fact that people have been murdered makes murder okay.


#49

Sure. George W. Bush used the state of emergency after 9/11 to call hundreds of thousands of reservists and members of the National Guard into active duty in Iraq. Do you think that was previously funded by Congress and didn’t cost in the billions?

Presidents have been using the National Emergencies Act (which was enacted to curb what many felt were abuses of Executive power by several earlier Presidents) since it was enacted in 1976. In fact, about 30 of them remain in effect to this day even though they must be reviewed and renewed by Congress after one year and every six months after. None of them are free of cost and none of them were initially funded by Congress.


#50

Considering the murder rate has fallen consistently since the 1970s, what excuse are you going to use to call it an emergency? Perhaps you can use Media hype. That’s way up.


#51

What part of 60 votes in the Senate do you not understand?


#52

Nope- every single amendment to the constitution has its limits- as has been adjudicated again and again.


#53

I could see them using this to push the new Green Deal.


#54

I don’t see were they’re going to find 100 trillion in the budget for the green new deal.


#55

defense budget is pretty big.


#56

So then, what is the metaphor for Pelosi’s and Schumer’s position against the wall? Particularly when both of them were in positions of power when the existing primary barriers were funded.


#57

Good point. I think I’ll send him a letter.


#58

That issue has already failed the Constitutional test.

Besides, knowing which law abiding person owns what gun does absolutely nothing to reduce criminal activity related to guns. It doesn’t solve crimes and it doesn’t lead to convictions. It is a myth of Hollywood and TV Crime shows.


#59

Good. He needs a strong constitutionalist to explain who controls the power of the purse.


#60

They could restrict ammunition purchases, semi-auto purchases, etc. They don’t necessarily have to “ban” guns. There are myriad ways to make them harder to use or more expensive to shoot without subverting the constitution.

And Donald just set the precedent for them to do that.


#61

Its a bad idea- as has been verified by poll after poll of the American people.


#62

Border crossings are at an all time low, yet that qualified as an emergency…soooooo…


#63

Yes, but once the appropriation is made, reappropriation within the intent of the original appropriation (there is a huge amount of leway in some appropriations) is permissible by the Administration. That is the whole idea of the Nat. Emergencies Act … to give the President the discretion to use existing funds to cover the cost of a declared emergency without having to wait for Congress to approve specific funding to cover it.