Executive Orders V. Guns: How The Second Amendment May Be In Peril

GOPUSA ^ | February 19, 2021 | Human Events Staff

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

It is no secret that the democrats want to strip Americans of their Second Amendment right.

And though it hasn’t happened thus far, Joe Biden apparently isn’t ruling out using executive orders to crackdown on the right to bear arms.

The topic was discussed during a White House press briefing on Tuesday, in response to a statement that Biden put out last week calling to ban semi-automatic firearms, along with other gun control measures.

When asked for a time-frame on when action will be taken, to no surprise Jen Psaki did not have a straightforward answer.

“Well, we haven’t proposed a package at this point,” Psaki said. “So it’s hard for me to make a prediction about its likelihood of passing. But I will say that the president is somebody throughout his career who has advocated for smart gun safety measures. He is not afraid of standing up to the NRA. He’s done it multiple times and won on background checks and a range of issues. And it is a priority to him on a personal level, but I don’t have a prediction for you, or preview for you on a timeline of a package, and certainly not what it will look like and how it goes through Congress.”

Later in the press conference, a reporter asked Psaki about whether or not Biden plans to take executive action on gun control.

[knarf]

The second amendment isn't "in peril"

It may be temporarily threatened by an EO, but the next Republican President can and will undo any damage Joe an' th' Ho commit

[Elsie]

Not to pick nits, but only one comma...

Have you two met?

[old curmudgeon]

All it takes is a governor of a large state saying No You Won’t Enforce That Here and calling up their state militia to prevent federal law enforcement from doing so.

Then it isn’t the fed moving against individuals, but against a state government.

---

A very good post.

However in my state, like so many others, the governor is a dim and a sneak at that. The state in total went for Trump.

There are many counties and small towns that are models of conservatism.

That was why I got the idea that laws could be enacted at the local level.

Your post modifies that to the point that states lucky enough to have republican governors should make it a state issue but those like this state that have a dim governor but a citizen majority that is conservative should pass laws on the local level that protect the 2Nd Amendment.

[Elsie]

Obviously; you've not been on the Faith or Trust thread...

 

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3934058/posts

[Elsie]

...who have the right...

HMMMmmm...

[unread]

"How The Second Amendment May Be In Peril."

Inalienable: unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.

synonyms:
inviolable · absolute · sacrosanct · unchallengeable · unassailable · untransferable · nontransferable · nonnegotiable · inherent · imprescriptible · indefeasible..

What part of this does the federal government NOT understand.??

[qaz123]

Ammo and the ability to use any type of financial transaction card for any gun related purchases.

[Elsie]

If the state is a Florida, Texas or Ohio a militia callup could bring out MILLIONS of volunteers to support the governor.

Beware of Death From Above.

[Elsie]

Avoid being found in a target rich environment.

[Elsie]

Perhaps we’d better keep some (LOTS!) of that old fashioned MONEY in reserve.

[myerson]

In my view, the only reasonable reading of the 2nd Amendment has the 2 comma clauses acting in unison, not limiting one another. I agree with that Penn and Teller video, up to a point. Sorry, I wasn’t clear. I’m just saying that armed ordinary citizens joining together to protect themselves and to oppose tyranny are a “militia” (”unorganized militia” per the Common Law and later the Federal Militia Act, not a standing regular or formal militia force under central state command). I say that the 2nd Amendment’s first comma clause recognizes the reality that arms in the people’s hands are not very effective without some sort of preexisting organization, a Militia, all of the members of whom are ready, trained and can be coordinated to act together. The 2nd Amendment recognizes the right to the armed citizen militia, as well as the general right of citizens to keep and bear arms—per Penn and Teller.

[old curmudgeon]

Of course you are correct and I was attempting to make the same point.

I guess I have seen too many of the “They will never take my guns. Better dead than....”

That makes us look like idiots.

[myerson]

You know Capt. John Parker didn’t just go into a tavern and ask a bunch of untrained armed citizens to stand against the British.

[farming pharmer]

That is a hill that many will be willing to die on. Better to die free than live a slave!

Better that the other guy dies. That's how you win wars.

[sarge83]

You gather up and you’ll be torn apart. Think sons of Liberty and study tactics used in 20th century wars of attrition. If you have ex military in your area pick their brains they will know what’s coming. Don’t react on their terms unless you absolutely have too. Make them react on your terms. No electronic communication. God I hope these leftist fools are not totally dead bat crap crazy too try and openly gut the Bill of Rights.

[Bonemaker]

"If it is a federal law or EO by the pres, it matters not what state you are from. The ATF Marshals, Home Security....whatever will be ordered to carry it out."

Good point but there are nowhere near enough of them. However, take note of how successful illegal alien sanctuary cities/states have been in total non-cooperation with Lincoln's Central Government. No reason the same principle can't apply to 2nd amendment issues. Hell, even in filthynois at least 62 of 102 counties are sanctuaries!

And...there are a whole hell of a lot of other counties/states that will do it in a heartbeat if the need arises so take heart..the will is there but it will be the execution that matters.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Not likely.

[antidemoncrat]

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

So maybe governors of red states ought to begin sending National Guard trainers out to help towns and villages form well regulated Militias of 2nd Amendment supporters.

[oldenuff35]

In DC v Heller SCOTUS found that the right to keep and bear arms is an “INDIVIDUAL’ right.

In the Miller case that followed the next year SCOTUS found that this individual right was valid in all 50 states.

Now china joe thinks he is just going to say differently via and EO and that changes the constitution and two SCOTUS rulings?

He thinks a lot of himself.

[myerson]

I don’t disagree with you, But, “militias” don’t have to, and probably shouldn’t, fight en masse.They do need organization, training, leadership and arms. If you have a bunch of unorganized uncoordinated individuals running around with arms, they’re sitting ducks and are not much of a threat to anyone.