national emergency

Post all political posts here.

Moderators: Hobie, AmBraCol

Forum rules
The rules are simple...
- no advocation of violence to anyone
- no cursing

Violation of the rules will result in deletion of the topic.
Post Reply
Message
Author
rossim92
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 747
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:42 am
Location: mechanicsville, md.
Contact:

national emergency

#1 Post by rossim92 » Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:39 am

My wife and son-in-law were talking about potus declaring an emergency and building the "wall" without congress approval. I don't really watch the news except when wife watches it. I asked whats the big deal on potus trying to stop the influx of illegal immigrants. Well, what they replied made sense. If the potus declared an emergency and had the wall built without congress approval, what is going to stop the next democratic potus from declaring a national emergency if the the crime rate that is commited with guns rises under his tenure from declaring a national emergency and confiscationg all guns? :(
Rossi 92 .357 lever
Henry .22 lever and a remington speedmaster 500 .22 lr
Marlin glenfield .22 boltaction
Mossberg 12 ga. pump
H&R 12 ga. topper
Mosin Nagant 91/30
Marlin 336W .30.30
Heritage rough rider .22 sa
Taylor smokewagon .357 sa
beeman sportsman rs2 dual caliber pellet rifle
henry .22 magnum pumpaction/octagon barrel

User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 24184
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: national emergency

#2 Post by AJMD429 » Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:11 am

The Second Amendment.
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "

Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 4353
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Alamogordo, NM

Re: national emergency

#3 Post by Bill in Oregon » Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:05 am

Doc, I wish I had your faith in that.
Rossi, the Democrat-controlled 94th Congress that in 1974 foolishly handed the executive branch virtual carte blanche regarding the declaration of emergencies did our blessed republic no favors.
This has nothing to do with the present issue of securing the border, and everything to do with the separation of powers.
I believe your concerns about a future president -- of either party -- using this power for mischief is very well placed.

User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 24184
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: national emergency

#4 Post by AJMD429 » Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:43 am

I share the concern, but the Constitution DOES specifically protect the keeping and bearing of arms, and I think it does give the president emergency powers to do things like protect borders, heck - he could put the military down there and do strafing runs with gatling-equipped choppers whenever intruders cross the border and I think it would be legal. Not nice, but legal.

The sad thing is that this ALL could have been avoided if the Republicans had done what they promised, instead of opposing Trump at every turn. :evil:

Republican legislators are far more dangerous to our nation than the Dumbascraps are - at least we KNOW they are out to destroy liberty.
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "

User avatar
vancelw
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3485
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:56 pm
Location: 90% NE Texas and 10% SE Montana

Re: national emergency

#5 Post by vancelw » Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:49 am

AJMD429 wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:43 am
I share the concern, but the Constitution DOES specifically protect the keeping and bearing of arms, and I think it does give the president emergency powers to do things like protect borders, heck - he could put the military down there and do strafing runs with gatling-equipped choppers whenever intruders cross the border and I think it would be legal. Not nice, but legal.

The sad thing is that this ALL could have been avoided if the Republicans had done what they promised, instead of opposing Trump at every turn. :evil:

Republican legislators are far more dangerous to our nation than the Dumbascraps are - at least we KNOW they are out to destroy liberty.
+1
You saved me some cutting and pasting....
Congress and the President have a DUTY to protect us from invaders. Though many have no concept of the word, 'Duty."
From my cold, dead hands.....
"Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world." - Thomas Carlyle

JerryB
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 5449
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:23 pm
Location: Batesville,Arkansas

Re: national emergency

#6 Post by JerryB » Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:13 pm

I believe that Obama has declared several national emergency situations, of course I read this on FOX news.
JerryB II Corinthians 3:17, Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

JOSHUA 24:15

User avatar
FWiedner
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: national emergency

#7 Post by FWiedner » Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:39 pm

In the foundation law of our nation, the People specifically task the President and the Congress to defend this nation.

That same law also recognizes that the People have the right to keep and bear arms.

Simply put, neither the President nor the Congress have the constitutional authority to disarm the People.

:|
Government office attracts the power-mad, yet it's people who just want to be left alone to live life on their own terms who are considered dangerous.

guido4198
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 985
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:08 am
Location: S. E. Florida

Re: national emergency

#8 Post by guido4198 » Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:42 am

I understand why folks bring this up.
That very point was made by Nancy Pelosi and pretty much everyone in the media who could get in front of a camera as a clear THREAT to gun owners.
My response is simply: "What has stopped them thus far from such a declaration ? "
It's hard for me to believe that Barack Obama and Eric Holder would not have already done it, if they thought it would have passed Constitutional muster. (and that's two individuals with a VERY LOOSE interpretation of the United States Constitution).
I'm sorry it came to this, but I applaud our President for taking the initiative to protect our country from the invasion that has been ongoing for a long time. Building a wall is a last ditch attempt to protect the country. IF...if we had a Congress that understood their responsibility, they would have already changed the law which causes the problem to be so overwhelming in the first place. That is: The ludicrous idea that once an illegal invader sets foot on American soil, illegally or otherwise and makes an "Asylum claim" that person is ENTITLED to stay until a hearing can be held to determine if they qualify.
With that MAGNET drawing people to our borders...we will never be able to totally stop the invasion. A better plan, that would go a long way to protect America is to deny any asylum claim that is not made through our immigration office in OMAHA. NO claims are processed at the actual borders. Further...NO claim is accepted from anyone who is already in the country illegally. To make all this happen, the law has to be changed which is why Democrats are able to fight the President in the courts.
Having LOST the House in the last midterms....changing the law will NOT happen.

User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 6588
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: national emergency

#9 Post by Grizz » Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:38 am

the true national emergency is the political cabal that is succeeding in destroying America

User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 24184
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: national emergency

#10 Post by AJMD429 » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:02 am

Grizz wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:38 am
the true national emergency is the political cabal that is succeeding in destroying America
Yep....
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "

User avatar
BlaineG
Posting leader...
Posts: 26946
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Spanaway, Washington

Re: national emergency

#11 Post by BlaineG » Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:57 pm

Let's see...how to say this....
If it's constitutional, I'll support it.
If it's not, I won't....no matter how good an idea it is.
If "We" are not scrupulous and dot every "i" and cross every "t" it will come back and bite us on the butt some day in future.
If You Back Me Into A Corner There Will Not Be Enough Room For Both Of Us. :evil:

User avatar
Ysabel Kid
Moderator
Posts: 24673
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA
Contact:

Re: national emergency

#12 Post by Ysabel Kid » Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:13 pm

The National Emergency act from the early 70's was actually a restraint on executive authority. President Trump's declaration basically allows him to move relatively small piles of money around for projects previously approved by Congress. A future half-brained Democrat (but I repeat myself) President could declare the national emergency on guns, climate, etc., but would not have the authority to do anything other than what was outlined by the act or previously approved by Congress.

This is NOT to say they wouldn't try. BHO's whole time in office was one Constitutional offense after another, basically daring Congress and the Courts to challenge him, knowing the MSM would defend him regardless. But the left has tipped its hand with letting lower courts issue injunctions against President Trump. They established the precedent, and will end up living by end when the Dem's have the White House again. Granted, Constitutionalist judges will hesitate to exceed the bounds of their authority, but like Harry Reid's "nuclear option", the left will rue the day they went hog wild on injunctions.

I imagine a clear violation of the Constitution, especially on guns, would get pretty much instant injunctions. You'd have other counties and states declare themselves "sanctuaries" against these unconstitutional edicts. Plus the challenges would get fast-tracked to the SCOTUS. If we could just replace Ginsberg, I'd feel better (I'm less than impressed with Roberts), but I'd say we are better than even money in that venue as it stands today. And the left knows it.

Of course, should some nitwit declare a national emergency and try to abridge the 2A, they would get the national emergency they just declared - or, at least I hope so. I hope there would be enough of us that would give them the single-finger salute and state, in unison, "Come and Take Them!". :evil: :evil: :evil:
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest