Republicans should oppose Trump's power grab!!!!

Exactly: What crisis?

Trump has said it's not actually a crisis.

Plus, his argument for the existence of a crisis is so rife with out and out lies as to be embarrassing for our nation.

Anyone stating those lies in court should be charged with perjury.

 

No the Democrats do not control Congress they only control the house. Interesting that the Republicans actually did control Congress as well as the presidency and there was no emergency to build a wall and the numbers of illegals coming in was declining every year. He’s playing you for a sucker and you’re buying it hook line and sinker
Pelosi is proposing legislature and you won’t like it

 

Amen.

In fact, for two years Republicans couldn't do more than lower taxes for those with high income and for major corporations - thus benefiting share holders, who again are among the wealthiest.

And, then there were the moves to crush farmers and others by dumping our allies and entering trade wars.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/smart-guns-exist-why-arent-they-on-the-market

 

Not so fast, sport.

I was referring to the BS the left is spreading about a "Constitutional Crisis".

There most certainly is a crisis on the border. Most of your favorite dog whistle blowers in the MSM have been calling it that for years.

To suggest all is well on the border is one of the greater lies being attempted by the left.

 

none of the reasons outlined have anything to do with why I can't buy the guy if I want it. The ONLY reason the NRA could have for opposing even my ability to buy the firearm if I should want it is that they want a gun they can sell to gangs

 

Liberals should be attacking gang members instead of honest gun owners

 

From Obama's 2013 State of the Union Address:
I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future,

Who are you kidding? It's not only laughable that Pelosi threatened to amend the Constitution by executive edict, but the idea that Trump would be the first to unilaterally act is the joke of the century. Democrats applauded when Obama threatened to violate separation of powers and still defend DACA, a clear example of that violation.

In any case, the 2006 Secure Fence Act authorized the building of a barrier and the National Emergencies Act is a legitimate way to fund it, correctly using Defense funding to defend our borders and, therefore, the country.

You can find all the ways Obama and previous Presidents violated Separation of Powers, but if you'd like me to repeat them here, I will.

 

Was the article presented on the part of yourself even read prior to it being presented? It is likely not, otherwise it would not have been posted in the first place. This is a citation from the article presented on the part of yourself.

There’s a problem though: even if the gun is developed, gun shops aren’t likely to sell it. This is due to a combination of factors, namely a New Jersey law requiring that any handgun sold in the state must be a smart gun, as soon as smart guns are commercially available in the country.

The moment such a firearm is made available anywhere in the country, it will be the only type of firearm that will be legal for sale in the state of New Jersey, meaning that all other firearms will be rendered illegal by default. Even if the design does not work, even if it is unreliable, even if it cannot be afforded by those in the state of New Jersey, they will not have any other option as it will be the only firearm they can legally own. And the so-called "smart" technology is not viable, nor reliable.

 

I read the whole article, and it said that the gun worked as well as any gun did, and was not overly expensive. The gun won't jump up and shoot intruders on its own and isn't free, which is all the gunnies will accept; but it will be unable to be stolen by and/or sold to those who shouldn't have it, which is all the gunnies are really concerned about since it makes gun laws actually enforceable rather than just a money conduit for those who want to sell murder.

 

The technology is unreliable and unproven in the modern world. It has not been tested in extreme temperatures, or extreme filth that other firearms have been tested and proven in. So-called "smart" technology found on modern electronic devices is not one hundred percent reliable, and those devices are not subjected to regular exposure to oil and cleaning solutions like firearms are.

Until it can be proven that the so-called "smart" technology can withstand the concussive recoil of tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition, just like any other firearm component, and still function instantaneously with neither failure nor processing delay, the technology remains unreliable and thus useless for the intended purposes.

This same discussion was had years ago with another member. The technology is no better today than it was then.

What will become of the tens of millions of firearms currently in the market that do not employ such technology? Where is the evidence that such firearms cannot be hacked or modified and thus rendered able to be used by anyone who picks it up?

 

If that's your opinion, it's not an educated one. Congress gave away part of it's authority by passing the National Emergencies Act. So it's not a separation of powers issue, it's an issue of being fine with granting the President the authority to move funds around...unless it's Trump. If you are serious about separation of powers, you would advocate for repealing the act. My guess is, it's not about Presidential authority or separation of powers with you, it's only about Trump.

 

Is Pelosi going to propose legislation to repeal the National Emergencies Act?

 

What power do you think Trump grabs, by enforcing border security to prevent illegal border crossings??

When did the dems become anti-border enforcement? When did they start opposing the construction of barriers at our southern border to keep out illegal border crossings by foreign citizens, drug cartels, terrorists, foreign gang members, sex trade traffickers and other criminals? The answer, as soon as Trump was sworn in as president, that's when.

The dems have no basis in claiming that to build anymore fencing is an immorality, since they have supported, endorsed and passed laws to build barriers at the southern border. Pelosi just thinks she can score political points against the hated President Trump

The same Democrats calling barriers at our southern border "an immorality" were the same ones who voted to erect the very same types of barriers under every US President

Past Congress have already past laws which gave every President the authority to use funds from executive branch agency budgets. They do this because Congress cannot predict every situation that arises, and fund every possible item, line by line with specific funding for each one.

Title 10 U.S. Code permits the Department of Defense to fund border barrier projects, such as in support of counter drug operations or national emergencies.

Why is it, when Obama used his pen and his phone to bypass Congress, you people applauded and cheered for him? And Obama was doing it so as NOT to follow the law, and in some cases to actually defy federal judges, and still you applauded him.

The TDS crowd..... what more is there to say?

 

Until smart guns are reliable enough for all U.S. police forces (local, state and federal), the U.S. military (including the SEALs and other Special forces units), and the FBI to arm themselves ONLY with smart guns, I will pass. Then I will deem them practical and reliable (unless there is a remote shutoff, in which case, I will never deem them acceptable).

 

Has the Secret Service and the FBI adopted these yet? If not, they aren't reliable enough.

 

HILARIOUS logic!! If it's not "all is well" then it must be a "crisis"??? You've totally gone over the edge.

The "crisis" meme comes from TRUMP. And, he is using lie after lie after lie to make that claim.

He's even said it isn't actually a crisis.

Trump IS hype personified.

 

The people you identify aren't the ones losing their guns or going on killing sprees.

I doubt you are advocating that anyone who buys a gun has to go through FBI and Secret Service background checks.

And, let's remember:

=> CELL PHONES have fingerprint security.

 

FBI and Secret Service agents (and other federal agents) have had their guns stolen.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/fbi-supe...-room-after-a-night-of-drinking-officials-say
https://www.cnn.com/2015/12/22/politics/secret-service-gun-badge-stolen-dc/index.html
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea...ter-seeks-to-have-gun-conviction-13536459.php


I have a phone with fingerprint security. It isn't nearly as reliable as I would want a gun to be.

 

Law enforcement officers are not the ones losing their firearms? Really now?

https://www.thetrace.org/2018/11/lost-and-stolen-police-guns/

The Glock was a big break for investigators in the case, but a check of its serial number led to a chilling revelation: The gun belonged to one of their own. Two months earlier, a Baltimore police officer had reported the pistol stolen from his car.


Such thefts are not uncommon. The Trace examined records from more than 100 law enforcement agencies and found that they had collectively reported the loss or theft of at least 1,781 guns between 2008 and 2017. The vast majority were department-issued handguns, but the count also included hundreds of rifles and shotguns, as well as four fully automatic submachine guns. The firearms were stolen out of glove boxes and closets, left in airports and on the roofs of cars, and in one case, forgotten in a high school bathroom. Some were later involved in crimes ranging from aggravated assault to homicide.


The Trace’s investigation drew on thousands of pages of police reports, internal memos, inventory logs, and policy manuals from local and state law enforcement departments in 29 states and the District of Columbia, as well as from two federal agencies: Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Drug Enforcement Administration. While the records covered just a sliver of the nearly 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States, the findings demonstrate that vague rules and haphazard security practices have resulted in guns flowing to the very criminals that officers are meant to contain.

http://extras.mercurynews.com/policeguns/

Nine-hundred and forty-four guns.

From Glocks, Sig Sauers and Remingtons to sniper and assault rifles, some equipped with grenade launchers.

They used to belong to law enforcement officers across California, but a new Bay Area News Group investigation found hundreds of police-issued weapons have been either stolen, lost or can’t be accounted for since 2010, often disappearing onto the streets without a trace.

A year after a bullet from a federal agent’s stolen gun killed 32-year-old Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier, this news organization surveyed more than 240 local, state and federal law enforcement agencies and discovered an alarming disregard for the way many officers — from police chiefs to cadets to FBI agents — safeguard their weapons.


Their guns have been stolen from behind car seats and glove boxes, swiped from gym bags, dresser drawers and under beds. They have been left on tailgates, car roofs and even atop a toilet paper dispenser in a car dealership’s bathroom. One officer forgot a high-powered assault rifle in the trunk of a taxi.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...but-its-still-a-worry/?utm_term=.10e337488073

Gun control is a never-ending argument in American politics, but it should not be an issue within U.S. law enforcement agencies.


Yet, here comes another report about loose controls leading to government firearms getting lost or being stolen.


The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives “generally has strong physical controls.” But a report by an internal watchdog also found record-keeping deficiencies, storage shortcomings and just plain sloppiness with guns.


The Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General determined that the ATF, responsible for tracking stolen weapons, had “26 instances of lost, stolen, or missing firearms” between fiscal 2014 and 2017. Although that is not much compared with the organization’s more than 35,500 firearms, stun guns and silencers, it is disturbing, particularly because one of the stolen guns was later used in a crime. Presumably, silencers are used for training because police are not in the ambush business.


This report also is troubling because it is not the only one about police losing guns.


“Our findings are particularly concerning,” Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz said last week, “because prior audits identified similar issues and recommended corrective action.”

https://abc7ny.com/news/investigato...s-lose-their-guns-or-have-them-stolen/688854/

NEW JERSEY (WABC) --
An Eyewitness News exclusive investigation has uncovered a disturbing secret involving New Jersey state troopers -- an alarming number of trooper weapons are missing.

But where they might have ended up is the frightening part.

Unlike New York, New Jersey State Police deserves credit for providing some information about how many service weapons have been lost or stolen in recent years. And while New Jersey officials insist this is not a problem, the agency refused to provide details about how the guns were stolen and whether any have been recovered or used in a crime.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/inves...From-DC-Area-Police-Since-2011-459196943.html

More than 350 firearms have been lost or stolen from local and federal police agencies headquartered in the Washington, D.C., area since 2011, according to an investigation by the News4 I-Team.

In many cases, the firearms have not yet been recovered.

A compilation of police records obtained under the Freedom of Information Act reveals a series stolen or lost firearms at large and small police agencies. At least 35 of them were taken or lost from the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, D.C., since 2011. Twenty-eight others were lost or stolen from Prince George’s County Police. Ten were reported missing or stolen from Alexandria police, while eight were lost or stolen from Virginia State Police during the time period.

In a rising number of cases, the firearms were stolen from police vehicles. Six of the seven firearms taken from Fairfax County Police were listed as taken from cruisers or officers’ personal vehicles. A firearm stolen from the car of an off-duty Rockville police officer was later seized from a teenager on campus at Albert Einstein High School in Kensington, according to police reports.

And they still do not work one hundred percent of the time with one hundred percent accuracy.

 

Yeh they lose them.

 

True. But, guns stolen from the Secret Service and FBI are not a significant source of the guns found at crime scenes.

Our system tends not to supply features that people don't particularly want. So, I'm not surprised that the first guns with fingerprint ID are less than perfect.

If this feature became something closer to a requirement, there would be competition between manufacturers in supplying the most reliable weapon with ID protection - with fingerprint ID as perhaps only one of the options.

What gun do you have that has fingerprint ID?

I'm really curious as to how it works. For example, can you give your fingerprint in the morning when you strap it on and then have the gun work for, say, 24 or 36 hours after the last time you gave your fingerprint? If all guns went dead in 24 or 36 hours after theft I would think that would be huge.

 

Every year around 240,000 guns get stolen.

And, you are talking about a couple thousand every 5 years, or whatever.

Sorry. You are not even CLOSE to understanding this issue.

And, your comment on cell phones isn't good enough, either. Fingerprint id is only one method. Cell phones have multiple methods of security. And, the cell phone market isn't really seeing this as a serious feature - while if some form of ID protection were required for firearms it would be seen as a VERY serious issue - NOT one that could fail sometimes.

 

OK - not sure who you mean by "they" and "them".

If you are talking about the number of guns lost or stolen per year, that's about 240,000.

So, if you want to discuss a specific type of owner that is responsible for losing guns:

Please first find the number of thefts or losses you're talking about and then divide by 240,000 to see the percent of the problem you identified.

 

Law enforcement officers should not be experiencing any firearms lost due to theft or negligence. Absolutely none.

Are celluar phones needed to be unlocked and operational the moment they are used in order to avoid a potentially fatal incident? Firearms are. Unlike electronic communication devices, firearms must be functional in an instantaneous manner with absolutely no delay between when the trigger is pulled, and when the round is discharged.

If such technology is not considered reliable enough for law enforcement and the military to use on its own firearms, it is not acceptable for the general public to be the test case to prove the viability of such technology.