[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Bang / Guns Title: Presidential Findings --- a moderate proposal
Search Wikipedia Presidential finding
A presidential finding is an executive directive issued by the head of the executive branch of a government, similar to the more well-known executive order. The term is mostly used by the United States Government, and in other countries may be identified by different terms. Such findings and other executive decrees are usually protocols which have evolved through the course of government and not typically established by law.
--- I, Donald Trump, find that Congress is unable or unwilling to address the pressing issue of personal defense in the United States, and thus failing to pass the necessary laws, -- do issue this temporary directive, valid until suitable legislations are enacted. Under the 2nd Amendment, citizens of the United States shall have the right to carry arms capable of concealment in any public place in the United States of America.. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest #1. To: Nolu Chan, Y'ALL, (#0) Under the 2nd Amendment, citizens of the United States shall have the right to carry arms capable of concealment in any public place in the United States of America.. Or possibly our resident expert in legal type bullshit, --- Nolu Chan, -- could fancy up the language a bit. Something like: -- As per the provisions of the 2nd Amendment, citizens of the United States shall have the right to carry arms capable of concealment in any public place in the United States of America, and nothing in State or local law shall infringe upon this directive.
#2. To: tpaine (#0) (Edited) So what you are saying is a Dump presidency will have no need of Congress, all he needs to do is find a cause, so a wall will be built by fiat, muslims will be banned by fiat, trade wars initiated by fiat, shooting wars initiated by fiat, rights denied by fiat, allies extorted by fiat
#3. To: paraclete (#2) So what you are saying is a Dump presidency will have no need of Congress, all he needs to do is find a cause, so a wall will be built by fiat, muslims will be banned by fiat, trade wars initiated by fiat, shooting wars initiated by fiat, rights denied by fiat, allies extorted by fiat If that would actually WORK, it would be expedient. But it won't.
#4. To: paraclete, Y'ALL, and in particular, the canary klan (#2) So what you are saying is a Trump presidency will have no need of Congress, all he needs to do is find a cause, -- Lighten up dumbo. I came up with this idea because the canary Klan had such a weird negative reaction to gun free zones and the fact that they are unconstitutional. I'm a bit surprised that Trump supports that fact, in fact.
--- so a wall will be built by fiat, muslims will be banned by fiat, trade wars initiated by fiat, shooting wars initiated by fiat, rights denied by fiat, allies extorted by fiat -- Get a grip. I doubt that Trump would ever attempt such a directive. -- Not that he shouldn't....
#5. To: tpaine (#4) Get a grip. I doubt that Trump would ever attempt such a directive. -- Not that he shouldn't.... You see that last qualifier is the problem. Dump is a man who reacts, he is reactionary and giving him a tool to get what he wants and fight about it later is dangerous. You already have a president who has ruled by decree, so now you want another, and one far more reactionary than BO
#6. To: tpaine, yukon (#1) [tpaine #1] Or possibly our resident expert in legal type bullshit, --- Nolu Chan, -- could fancy up the language a bit. No. As per your modus operandi as yukon, you are attempting to disrupt on as many threads as possible. I am participating on two threads only. I will not assist you with your whoring and moving to a new corner to start over again as a virgin with your tired and defeated arguments. http://www2.libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=46277
Title: Ninth Circuit: Right to Bear Arms Includes Right to Acquire Arms http://www2.libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=46639
Title: Peruta v San Diego Cty, no 2nd Amdt right to concealed Carry
#7. To: nolu chan (#6) possibly our resident expert in legal type bullshit, --- Nolu Chan, -- could fancy up the language a bit.
No. As per your modus operandi as yukon, you are attempting to disrupt on as many threads as possible. I am participating on two threads only. Weird that you imagine I'm operating like Yukon, seeing he was a member of your group, the canary Klan.
I will not assist you with your whoring and moving to a new corner to start over again as a virgin with your tired and defeated arguments. You've defeated none of my arguments, and your refusal to engage here shows that yours are tired. Give it up.. All you can do is post repetitive legal opinions, opinions that DO NOT change our Constitution.
#8. To: As per the provisions of the 2nd Amendment, citizens of the United States shall have the right to carry arms capable of concealment in any public place in the United States of America, and nothing in State or local law shall infringe upon this directive. (#1) The question remains: ---' Could President Trump issue such a finding? Should he?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|