Popular Posts

Sunday, December 13, 2015

Maryland man suggests confiscating scary looking guns via executive order

As Twitchy reported, following the gun massacre at the Inland Region Center in San Bernardino, Calif., the New York Times published its first front-page editorial since 1920, arguing for a ban on certain guns that would “require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.” Confiscation would have sufficed, but “for the good of their fellow citizens” has such a non-fascist ring to it.

Martin O’Malley, who really should drop out of the race for president for the good of his fellow citizens, decided to sign on publicly with the New York Times, declaring in a tweet Friday night that an executive order was the way to go — once he’s president, that is.

More 

18 comments:

  1. I hope everyone sees this for what it is. A move toward totalitarianism. This is what the libs want. This would totally circumvent one branch of the government and the constitution that lays out the three branch system. Can anyone make a legitimate argument against this observation? How much more will people take? We simply can't let this happen!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This man should be drug tested along with Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I expect Obama to threaten the American people with this tonite. If he tries this, martial law will be a real possibility as people resist attempts by the government to collect their guns.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 12:29
    The government is counting on the fact that NOT everyone will see this as what it is - totalitarianism. The American Sheeple are completely stupid and asleep.

    Go Ravens!

    ReplyDelete
  5. And corking cows' butts will stop global warming.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Aiding terrorism is what the Democrat party is now.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Civil war would break out

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes I'll give my guns up over my cold dead body , you idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. There would be plenty of idiots who would give up their guns even if it is a forced buy-back. In order to get my guns they will have to kill me first but I'll take a few of them with me. The real shame is the them is most likely the local cops who won't stand up for the 2nd ammendment. They'll say I'm just doing my job. BS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No you won't. Your the type that swings a big stick until it's time to swing it. Blah blah blah.

      Delete
  10. If confiscation is the route they choose many of us will choose to fight because i would rather die fighting for rights than to live on knees.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Can he be confiscated????

    ReplyDelete
  12. Come get them. I just hope owemalley is out front.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Remember when they come for the guns, band together and kill them. Do not stand around with your thumb in your rectum wondering when that time comes. When you see the confiscation process/group manifest it has reached that point.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Want some guns?
    I have a few.
    Come and get them.
    Send the single men first.
    Don't EVER think you need a politician or a cop to give you their PERMISSION to carry a weapon.
    Don't be afraid to use it.
    And don't let any prancing, afraid of the dark, cross dressing simpleton sissies tell you that an "executive order" can override the U.S. Constitution.
    As the lady said, "I think you've forgotten your place.".
    Keep cheering.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Confiscation would have sufficed, but “for the good of their fellow citizens” has such a non-fascist ring to it."


    Hey Douche Bags!! Those two terrorist are not my fellow citizens! As for that matter no Muslim in this country is my fellow citizen.

    "Fellow citzens" How convenient stealing Obama phrase(who stole it from real presidents). Did you feel a trickle run down your leg when he said that.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.