Posted on 03/29/2021 7:44:40 AM PDT by Navy Patriot
Americans are breaking with Joe Biden over key issues within his administration. An ABC News/ISPOS poll released Sunday found a majority of Americans disapprove of Biden’s handling gun violence nationwide.
The poll found more than 57 percent of participants did not approve of Biden’s plan to lower gun violence. This comes as Biden has said his administration is looking into ways to restrict gun ownership. However, several lawmakers have said his plans for gun ownership are far too selective.
(Excerpt) Read more at oann.com ...
Wonder how many gun grabbers will be shot before they decide to stop?
Asking for a friend.
“Wonder how many gun grabbers will be shot before they decide to stop?”
In the articles I’ve seen from the states where they send a dozen cops to confiscate someone’s guns, the owner of the guns has been killed. That’s probably why an article was written. No data on how many where they just break down the door and get the guns without shooting anyone. The problem from the perspective of the gun owners is, if they’re just garden variety conservatives, they believe in law and order. That means only the state can kill someone. They are not of the psychology to kill someone because their rights are being violated. The courts are where they’d take the complaint. Assuming, of course, they aren’t shot before they get there. Also, the typical person simply can’t afford to file a lawsuit. It’s about ten thousand dollars down and the lawyer will burn through it at hundreds of dollars per hour.
The legal system is a business. Complainants are like a natural resources to lawyers. You exploit natural resources.
Poll could be reflecting the increase in gun ownership.
If 57% disapprove of Biden’s stance they should have known his position on guns before the election. If they were so poorly informed they should not have voted. However, what if 57% did know and voted for Trump? Makes one wonder.
Did they vote for him? If so, they can STFU!
More that 57% of people disapprove of Biden and his stance on gun control.
I will remind the Freeper community that it was Biden that as a senator, sponsered the gun free school zone law that resulted in a 300% (yes, 3x) school shooting rate.
I’m pretty sure his handlers would have him sign a firearms confiscation executive order even if 99% of voters opposed it.
For the good of the country, don’t you know . . .
This is why they will go after guns individually, and not as a mass event. A mass event would be a warning to the masses, and there would be much push-back and death involved.
Instead, with the disarming of “one here, and one over there, and another one way over there” approach, if there is a shoot-out, our enemedia will simply describe the dead homeowner as a mentally deranged, gun-nut who was being disarmed for the good of society when he “attacked” the police.
Most Americans will roll over and go back to sleep, figuring that everything was for a good intention and then the police and government will continue their march to the removal of the 2nd Amendment.
The number means there are a ton more that disapprove
What do illegal aliens think. No one cares what Americans think
"Poll: 57% of Americans disapprove of Biden’s handling of gun laws"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
In preparation for the 2022 midterm primaries, patriots need to be asking all federal and state candidates to publicly agree that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the unconstitutionally big federal government the specific power to make peacetime restrictive gun laws.
Hopefully, patriots will then start pulling other loose threads, checking what other federal laws, including federal spending programs, are constitutionally indefensible.
From related threads…
To start this 2nd Amendment (2A) discussion, please consider this. Regarding recent gun violence, the main option that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention gave to the feds to address domestic violence in a state is to wait for that state to formally request help from the feds.
"Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence [emphasis added]."
As a side note to federal involvement in violence, note that although a state is not obligated to request help from the feds for domestic violence, consider that the feds also have the express power to interfere with possibly nationally-related violence in a state imo.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions [emphasis added];"
Otherwise, let’s examine major constitutional problems (imo) with so-called federal peacetime gun control laws and executive orders.
Patriots, in addition to continuing to defend 2A, also argue that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to make peacetime gun control laws.
More specifically, since the federal government has only those powers that the states expressly constitutionally give to it, some of the drafters of the Bill of Rights (BoR) had expressed the following concern.
The drafters had feared that patriots would eventually develop tunnel vision (my words) for BoR protections and forget that the BoR was redundant in the context that powers that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds to regulate our basic protections are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
In fact, the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified that, until the 14th Amendment (14A) was ratified was ratified, the states hadn’t expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to make peacetime penal laws, not even for murder.
"Our Constitution never conferred upon the Congress of the United States the power - sacred as life is, first as it is before all other rights which pertain to man on this side of the grave - to protect it in time of peace by the terrors of the penal code within organized states; and Congress has never attempted to do it. There never was a law upon the United States statute-book to punish the murderer for taking away in time of peace the life of the noblest, and the most unoffending, as well, of your citizens, within the limits of any State of the Union. The protection of the citizen in that respect was left to the respective States, and there the power is to-day [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column.)
The great irony of 14A where today’s unconstitutional (imo) peacetime federal gun control laws are concerned is this. That amendment gives Congress the specific power only to make penal laws that STRENGTHEN constitutionally enumerated rights, including 2A, from abridgment by state actors, still no express power for Congress to make peacetime gun control laws.
“The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had [emphasis added].” —Minor v. Happersett, 1874.
Unfortunately, today’s generation is proof that patriots have long-forgotten the significance of constitutionally enumerated federal government powers as the drafters of the BoR had feared, particularly the lack of such powers in the context of peacetime gun rights.
In fact, it is disturbing that peacetime restrictive federal gun laws seem to have started appearing in the books during FDR Administration, FDR and the Congress at that time infamous for making laws which they had no express constitutional authority to make imo.
Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control
Even the post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated Supreme Court is glaring evidence that top legal professionals don’t bother to check if a contested federal law is reasonably justified under a constitutionally enumerated power.
Finally, citizens need to start working with their federal lawmakers to demand the following. When the federal government accuses someone of violating a federal law, the accused also needs to be informed of at least the common name of the constitutional clause that arguably justifies the law for further scrutiny of the constitutionality of that law, especially where our 2A safety net is concerned.
Corrections, insights welcome.
Joseph Stolen is an idiot
“Poll: 57% of Americans disapprove of Biden’s handling of gun laws”
The other 43% just disapprove of Biden.
...as if our vote counts for anything
"...one here, and one there, and another one way over there..."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.