What order are you speaking of? "By executive order, I do hereby ban all mass shootings in the U.S." I wish it was that simple.
![]() |
What order are you speaking of? "By executive order, I do hereby ban all mass shootings in the U.S." I wish it was that simple.
why didn't the emperor ? God knows he made enough EOs . Here's a clue . No place has tougher gun laws than Chi-town. A lot of good that does
For the dufus that should be easy peasy.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...3&&FORM=VRDGAR
In the great liberal tradition of completely ignoring the Constitution, it would be easy. For the rest of America that respects the rule of law, it is legally impossible. Not even your hero, Mr. Obama, dared to go that far.Quote:
How easy was that?
Even better, there will be no wicked hearts in heaven. "But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart, and these defile them. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts—murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander."Quote:
At least, there won't be guns in heaven
The problem lies in the hearts of people. Only Jesus can fix that.
The dufus doesn't care about the law, let alone the constitution. He is above all that. Ask him.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...ny_voters.html
You're the one proposing he issue a completely unconstitutional and unlawful executive order.Quote:
The dufus doesn't care about the law, let alone the constitution. He is above all that. Ask him.
No I did not, I proposed he FIX things the way he has been doing by EO.
Post 125. WG posted,"No. By executive order, I do hereby ban all guns of any type in the US."
Your reply was, "How easy was that?"
Sure sounded like you endorsed her idea, doesn't it???
Sounds more like I endorsed both our ideas.
Either way, you DID endorse her idea, and it was an unlawful, unconstitutional proposal. I think she meant it to be an expression of frustration as much as anything, and I can understand that.
btw the Pelosi bills that Dems are demanding be bumrushed through the Senate are DOA because the Dems bumrushed the bill through the House rejecting EVERY amendment offered by Repubicans .(HR 8 and HR 1112) Typical of the Dems the bill would do nothing to prevent illegal gun use but add heavy burdens to legal gun owners and purchasers ,that would only make it more expensive and difficult to buy or sell firearms. IFthese bills became law, a future anti-gun president could declare a national emergency on gun violence and thereby shut down the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
I guarantee that almost 100% of the guns used in crime sprees throughout urban US are either stolen or purchased on the black market . As far as El Paso and Dayton;
As far as we know, neither gunman would have been stopped from purchasing a weapon by an “expanded” background check or any kind of background checks that didn’t have a pre-crime component. Neither shooter had a criminal record. How about enforcing laws we have ?The Sutherland Springs church shooter, was convicted of assaulting his wife and stepson .The FBI blew it .The Charleston church shooter had narcotic convictions. That info never made it to the FBI as it should have . TheVirginia Tech killer bought guns after a courtfound him a danger to himself . Again the info never got passed on. All could've been prevented with existing law. .
Not to mention that the murder count in Baltimore will be about 300 this year. The general response is to yawn. There is no political advantage to be gained by liberals, so they are completely comfortable in ignoring it. If only E. Cummings was a republican!!
yes I yawn when people start to repeat themselves
Touching, maybe an example of what conservatives can do beside beetch. NY are you listening!
Great story.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:07 AM. |