GUNS
Sort:
But if you boys need to make up a reason to justify your killing toys that’s your prerogative. I just wish you wouldn’t hide behind ridiculous reasons for wanting to have a gun.
Baptist- um yep he did.
And made a complete donkey of himself in doing so
And made a complete donkey of himself in doing so
Ok. When you have to fight a burglar with a illegal gun we'll see how you fare with a pocket knife.
Um no he didn't. The election was so rigged that 50 DEAD people supposedly voted for biden. Just in the IL
0
#1186
TheHarbingerOfDoom wrote:
But if you boys need to make up a reason to justify your killing toys that’s your prerogative. I just wish you wouldn’t hide behind ridiculous reasons for wanting to have a gun.
The statement that you just made proves this: you obviously do not know the facts of the matter, or history well enough to even discuss the topic.
Lol. Nice one kylo. Keep the jokes coming.
0
#1188
TheHarbingerOfDoom wrote:
Baptist- um yep he did.
And made a complete donkey of himself in doing so
And made a complete donkey of himself in doing so
No he didn't. Think about it logically. The best way to try to keep power would have been to declare martial law. Did Trump do that? No. End of story.
um that's not a joke it was soooo rigged you don't even know
#1237 correct 👍👍🙂
When you filter out all the fake votes Trump won by more votes then any other president in history
Yeah baptist yeah.
One guy got away with voting Biden 25 times
Enough about stinkin' politics. This thread was not for debate, it was for gun owners to talk about whatever scopes and calibers they wanted to.
Just for Baptist
There is no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of an American election,” Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville said in a joint statement earlier this month after Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s first national security advisor, declared in an interview with Newsmax that Trump could “take military capabilities, and he could place them in those [swing states], and basically re‐run an election” in those states. Other Trump backers have suggested that he might use a declaration of martial law combined with the powers of the Insurrection Act to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the November election.
There is no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of an American election,” Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville said in a joint statement earlier this month after Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s first national security advisor, declared in an interview with Newsmax that Trump could “take military capabilities, and he could place them in those [swing states], and basically re‐run an election” in those states. Other Trump backers have suggested that he might use a declaration of martial law combined with the powers of the Insurrection Act to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the November election.
0
#1196
TheHarbingerOfDoom wrote:
Just for Baptist
There is no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of an American election,” Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville said in a joint statement earlier this month after Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s first national security advisor, declared in an interview with Newsmax that Trump could “take military capabilities, and he could place them in those [swing states], and basically re‐run an election” in those states. Other Trump backers have suggested that he might use a declaration of martial law combined with the powers of the Insurrection Act to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the November election.
There is no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of an American election,” Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville said in a joint statement earlier this month after Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s first national security advisor, declared in an interview with Newsmax that Trump could “take military capabilities, and he could place them in those [swing states], and basically re‐run an election” in those states. Other Trump backers have suggested that he might use a declaration of martial law combined with the powers of the Insurrection Act to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the November election.
We are talking about a pre-election declaration of martial law, not a post-election one. That nullifies your argument.
“Bearing in mind a tyrant being classified as an unelected official trying to take power or keep power possibly after being voted out.”
Hitler, Castro, Mao, Putin are NONE of these things
Hitler, Castro, Mao, Putin are NONE of these things
Not really Baptist, here’s the rest of it. Why didn’t he declare martial law? Simple answer: Because he couldn’t.
But in Ex parte Milligan (1866), the Supreme Court ruled Lincoln had overstepped his legitimate bounds. This ruling is “key” to understanding the president’s martial law powers today, Olson said. It means “the president cannot simply declare martial law at his whim. There must be a state of invasion or insurrection such that ground is actually contested, and resort to conventional civil courts and authority must have collapsed.” Absent those conditions, the court said in Milligan, martial law is “a gross usurpation of power,” and in fact “can never exist where the courts are open.”
The courts are open now, which means any declaration of martial law — including in the six states Flynn targeted — would be illegal. “Courts would not be afraid to recognize this as reason to strike down acts pretending to martial law authority,” Olson said, just as they haven’t been afraid to smack down specious election challenges. That might not stop Trump, Olson allowed, but it would stop many of the people he’d need to execute this plan. And even if their constitutional oaths did not constrain them, there would be “very real personal consequences for both civilian and military administrators should they go along” with such an unlawful proposal, Olson noted, as career bureaucrats and officers undoubtedly realize. (The Army statement is an indicator of this very understanding.)
But in Ex parte Milligan (1866), the Supreme Court ruled Lincoln had overstepped his legitimate bounds. This ruling is “key” to understanding the president’s martial law powers today, Olson said. It means “the president cannot simply declare martial law at his whim. There must be a state of invasion or insurrection such that ground is actually contested, and resort to conventional civil courts and authority must have collapsed.” Absent those conditions, the court said in Milligan, martial law is “a gross usurpation of power,” and in fact “can never exist where the courts are open.”
The courts are open now, which means any declaration of martial law — including in the six states Flynn targeted — would be illegal. “Courts would not be afraid to recognize this as reason to strike down acts pretending to martial law authority,” Olson said, just as they haven’t been afraid to smack down specious election challenges. That might not stop Trump, Olson allowed, but it would stop many of the people he’d need to execute this plan. And even if their constitutional oaths did not constrain them, there would be “very real personal consequences for both civilian and military administrators should they go along” with such an unlawful proposal, Olson noted, as career bureaucrats and officers undoubtedly realize. (The Army statement is an indicator of this very understanding.)
you just don't get it do you
and this is getting political