I grinned, how about you?

Pelosi warns GOP: Next president could declare national emergency on guns.

Beside the obvious stupidity of trying to suspend a constitutional right and having it survive the legal challenge in the Supreme Court, I had to chuckle at the idea that less than half a million Federal LEOs will voluntarily go out and get ugly on at least 80 million gun owners who have a low ball 300 millions firearms and between a trillion and 2 trillion rounds of ammunition in their stashes.

The mass resignation of Federal Law Enforcement agents would be one for the books.

 

13 Replies to “I grinned, how about you?”

  1. You’re more optimistic than I am. We haven’t seen mass resignations in NY, MA, NJ, CT, etc over their laws. We HAVE seen some rural elected sheriffs say they won’t enforce some laws in WA and I think IL, but no one is giving up their pension and their career over someone else’s rights. Even if they did, that might be worse since you would be left with law enforcement consisting entirely of people 100% willing to kill you for owning an 11 round magazine.

    1. I see what you mean, but there has been no enforcement either and this is gonna be federal. Less love for somebody who is not from town and comes to your town, your home demanding stuff. Plus Feds think local LEOs have cooties and the locals have no love for that shit.

    2. To my knowledge, and granted I don’t trawl news sites, there has been very little application of the laws against the average person in CT. They seem to be typically used as add on charges or bargaining chips.

  2. Sure Nancy, sure. How about you be the #1 through the door on the entry team you old fart bag?

    She is just a kook, pure and simple. Kook with a capital K.

  3. Not to mention the delicious irony that the Dems are up in arms about the president declaring a national emergency to build a wall then want to go and do exactly the same thing…

  4. Couple of things.

    Bans suppress use even if they’re not enforced door-to-door. I like going to the range and making holes in paper; if I can’t do that out of fear of being collared, it’s much harder to maintain proficiency let alone do things like sight in scopes.

    Re the 80 million gun owners and 300m guns … I can’t really use more than one at once, and as I’m not Keanu Reeves carrying more than 2 at a time is awkward. All of those spares could go to neighbors who aren’t armed yet – although in my town I suspect I’m one of the more lightly armed denizens.

    Anyway, what fraction of that 80M are going to actively resist? Anything under 10% and it starts looking much more like even odds, especially given much better organization, communication and planning on the part of the confiscators. In particular it’s easier for them to set up and execute local attacks and ambushes with overwhelming force.

    Not trying to be a Debbie downer here, but the raw numbers aren’t the whole.of the story.

    1. Boris, you’re assuming that the few percent doing the resisting would use their resistance against the minions doing the confiscating. Why would they do that? Far more effective to apply it against the evil bosses giving the illegal orders.

      1. Any 4g war like that would get ugly. How willing are cops to go to work when their families are being murdered while they are away? George Washington et al did exactly that. They murdered the families and burned the houses of British collaborators.

  5. I never grin because they’re capable of doing just that, and they did it in Cuba and Venezuela. It happen here, I cannot stress that enough.

  6. Pelosi: “Next president could declare a national emergency on guns”

    Way to show where your priorities are, Nan.

    Except that, no, the next president can’t. Not with any lasting effect, anyway; it’d be laughed out of the courtroom.

    Trump can declare a national emergency at the border, partially because Obama already did and Trump is going to borrow some of that same language, and partially because human and drug traffickers violating our sovereign border — and committing heinous crimes that lead to the deaths of thousands of Americans every year — actually is a national emergency…

    … whereas citizens lawfully exercising their Constitutionally-protected rights is … well … not.

    If “guns” are a national emergency, then so is free speech, and due process, and every other item in the Bill of Rights.

    Ergo, if that’s the way she wants to play, then Trump can declare partisan libel, slander, and drive to restrict the rights of the U.S. citizenry is a national emergency, and use that declaration to direct the DOJ to investigate and enforce 18 U.S.C. 241 and 242 to the letter. Votes in favor of “gun control” bills can be presented as evidence at the trials, and we can toss Schumer and Pelosi both (among many, many others) in federal prison for a very long time.

    It’s hard to cast votes in Congress from behind bars, Nan.

Only one rule: Don't be a dick. Also, You can use html code to decorate your comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.