NM Governor bans guns in Albuquerque

fencer said:
Please. No one is going to prison in Albuquerque for carrying a firearm, whether they are alone or with a few hundred others.
It is exactly this kind of pantshitting nonsense the liberals are counting on to keep the sheep afraid of their own shadow. No one is going to be prosecuted in NM for this just like no one is going to be prosecuted for buying an AR in Massachusetts.
Just because some liberal twat thinks something is a good idea, doesn't make it law
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head..
While god says though shall not kill… you have a right to defend… I don’t even mind going to hell for that reason. This country’s f***ed.
 
Parker Schreiber said:
Really? Care to tell me who the High Sheriff of Massachusetts is? Or some other states, perhaps? Perhaps a state charter or statute? Plymouth County has a High Sheriff, true, but I see no special powers which would allow him to arrest Healey.

School me.
Click to expand...
The 14 Sheriff's of Massachusetts get together and nominate the high sheriff of the state. "Usually" The Sheriff of Suffolk County is nominated.
I know when Sheriff Robert Rufo was sheriff, he was always nominated. So was Sheriff Rouse. The current Sheriff of Suffolk County is Steve Tompkins, to which I believe he was nominated, but I am not sure. Although the stature gives the high sheriff the authority to arrest the governor; it doesn't mean that they would (because it would be career suicide, to utilize a law that was put on the books a very long time ago). If you go by the laws and statures of the commonwealth the sheriff and his deputies actually have a great deal of authority. Sheriff's deputies can arrest for certain civil infractions that police do not have the authority to do so. Originally Suffolk County Sheriff's Department was in charge of coverage for Logan Airport, later it was negotiated to turn it over to the state police due to staff shortages and budget issues. As the years went by the Sheriff's Department within Massachusetts became more political and because of that the sheriff's have "highly recommended" that its staff not use its authority, unless absolutely necessary. If you go to other states; the Sheriff's are often a higher level of authority, that police (such as in Florida, as explained to me by a Highway Patrol Sergeant).
 
First, crime is rising across the nation, predominantly in Democrat controlled cities.

Albuquerque has a Democrat mayor and New Mexico is a Democrat run state. If crime is rising, it is the fault of Democrats. But instead of taking responsibility for their terrible planning and policies, Democrat leaders are once again blaming inanimate objects (guns) and using mass punishment of people who lawfully carry (primarily conservatives). In other words, Dems are ruining the country and creating a national crime wave, and then making conservatives pay for it with their rights.

Second, restrictions on open carry and conceal carry are not going to reduce the crime rate because criminals don't care about laws or emergency powers.

If anything, the violent crime rate will rise as criminals feel emboldened knowing that most citizens are now disarmed.

Third, Grisham has presented no evidence of a legitimate emergency other than “crime is bad right now.”

The emergency is ambiguous rather than defined. Meaning, emergency restrictions could be renewed over and over again, unless citizens step up and do something about them.

Fourth, the focus on open carry and conceal carry seems to be an attempt at a totalitarian tip-toe.

A large number of gun owners do not carry regularly so they may not feel personally affected by the rules. Meaning, the governor has reduced the level of opposition by attacking just one aspect of gun rights. This is usually how authoritarians institute control – They don't remove your rights all at once, they do it a piece at a time.

Fifth, gun carry laws are generally a legislative decision that usually requires a public vote.

Grisham is attempting to bypass all checks and balances as if the legislative process does not matter.

Sixth, emergency powers are often declared unconstitutional by courts after the fact.

For example, the Michigan Supreme Court held that the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act (EPGA), which Governor Whitmer used to justify her draconian COVID-19 executive orders, was unconstitutional because it delegated legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Michigan Constitution. But these court decisions often come well after the damage has already been done. It is up to the citizenry to defy such orders when necessary and let the courts sort out the aftermath later.

Seventh, Grisham argues that rising crime is a “public health emergency,” using the same language relegated to the covid response.

Crime has nothing to do with public health and is a legal concern handled through either social programs or increased police presence. Disarming the public is not within the purview of a health emergency – Grisham has greatly overstepped her bounds.

Are Emergency Powers A Test To See What Americans Will Put Up With? | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com www.zerohedge.com

Her, and we should have a vigorous debate on all of the other constitutional rights, sums up her long-game.
 
Last edited:
Retired-LEO said:
The 14 Sheriff's of Massachusetts get together and nominate the high sheriff of the state. "Usually" The Sheriff of Suffolk County is nominated.
I know when Sheriff Robert Rufo was sheriff, he was always nominated. So was Sheriff Rouse. The current Sheriff of Suffolk County is Steve Tompkins, to which I believe he was nominated, but I am not sure. Although the stature gives the high sheriff the authority to arrest the governor; it doesn't mean that they would (because it would be career suicide, to utilize a law that was put on the books a very long time ago). If you go by the laws and statures of the commonwealth the sheriff and his deputies actually have a great deal of authority. Sheriff's deputies can arrest for certain civil infractions that police do not have the authority to do so. Originally Suffolk County Sheriff's Department was in charge of coverage for Logan Airport, later it was negotiated to turn it over to the state police due to staff shortages and budget issues. As the years went by the Sheriff's Department within Massachusetts became more political and because of that the sheriff's have "highly recommended" that its staff not use its authority, unless absolutely necessary. If you go to other states; the Sheriff's are often a higher level of authority, that police (such as in Florida, as explained to me by a Highway Patrol Sergeant).
Click to expand...
So who is it now? You didn't answer the question. Nor did you cite any statutes or give examples from other states. I also reviewed Judge Rufo's biography, and it does not include any mention of being "high sheriff."

Sheriff Tompkins was the President of the Massachusetts Sheriff’s Association. Not surprisingly, his bio also does not mention any such title as High Sheriff, nor did he gain additional arrest powers as a result. Nor do I see any legislative powers granted to Sheriffs to "arrest for certain civil infractions" under Massachusetts law.
 
Why an EO? New Mexico’s governor says of criminals “we can’t arrest them all” and “we can’t lock them all up” as a justification.

Well, yes, you can arrest them all and lock them all up. Saying you can’t only encourages criminals, right?

And of those newly created criminals who are legally qualified to carry despite her EO, she can arrest them all and lock them all up?
 
MaverickNH said:
Why an EO? New Mexico’s governor says of criminals “we can’t arrest them all” and “we can’t lock them all up” as a justification.

Well, yes, you can arrest them all and lock them all up. Saying you can’t only encourages criminals, right?

And of those newly created criminals who are legally qualified to carry despite her EO, she can arrest them all and lock them all up?
Click to expand...
Exactly. I can’t arrest and lock up criminals so the solution is to instantly create more that I can’t arrest and lockup. The idiocy is astounding.
 
fencer said:
Please. No one is going to prison in Albuquerque for carrying a firearm, whether they are alone or with a few hundred others.
It is exactly this kind of pantshitting nonsense the liberals are counting on to keep the sheep afraid of their own shadow. No one is going to be prosecuted in NM for this just like no one is going to be prosecuted for buying an AR in Massachusetts.
Just because some liberal twat thinks something is a good idea, doesn't make it law
Click to expand...
i`ve heard same people here - may be even you - stating exactly same sentence - no one is going to prison - for jan 6 event.
it is not a pantshitting to acknowledge the fact, that, yes, there were people that did attend an event, did not kill no one, broke no real law neither and, yes, they got sent for 17 years into a federal joint by activists. if you have anything to object that statement as well - i am all ears.
 
Harry Christopher said:
The New Mexico attack on our Constitutional civil rights along with the Republic 4420 attack would seem to be prime evidence that the true underlining motive behind progressive liberal assaults on the 2-A has absolutely nothing at all to do with addressing crime and its well documented underlining causes and everything to do with a burning desire for plain old fashion institutional control of the citizenry at large.

I believe that this has always been the case in the past but this time they feel no pressing need to try and cloak the motives for their actions.....it's for the children don't you know...... from the public in general. Mr. Sowell has....once again.....distilled the political background noise down to the true essence of what is driving these politicians:

View attachment 794675
Click to expand...
I agree with Sowell, but I also see those tendencies in Republicans. It’s all about power and control.
 
Retired-LEO said:
The high Sheriff of each state is the only non federal employee who by law can arrest the Governor; of that state.

With the federal government as corrupt as it is, the High Sheriff is the only one other than the courts that can do anything.

However that would be career suicide; so now we must hope that the courts intervene. This is a very serious situation;

if this Governor is allowed to do this with our serious repercussions...

Liberal politicians will continue to declare state of emergencies, to violate our rights!
Click to expand...
Remember Katrina and New Orleans?
 
The wuhan virus crackdown was the kick starter for these health emergency edicts
When the people bowed to sir fauci and the cdc, They saw an opened door….::
Notice how the crypt keeper is calling for mask’s and “the jab” again
 
rogersmithiii said:
I agree with Sowell, but I also see those tendencies in Republicans. It’s all about power and control.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the problem.......the unquenchable quest for power and control is not predicated solely upon party affiliation only......today that holy pursuit appears to have become an expected inherent trait of all politicians big and small regardless of the opinions and deeply held beliefs of the party's constituents that they profess to represent in the sun blocked back alleys of government.
 
vicorjh said:
First, crime is rising across the nation, predominantly in Democrat controlled cities.

Albuquerque has a Democrat mayor and New Mexico is a Democrat run state. If crime is rising, it is the fault of Democrats. But instead of taking responsibility for their terrible planning and policies, Democrat leaders are once again blaming inanimate objects (guns) and using mass punishment of people who lawfully carry (primarily conservatives). In other words, Dems are ruining the country and creating a national crime wave, and then making conservatives pay for it with their rights.

Second, restrictions on open carry and conceal carry are not going to reduce the crime rate because criminals don't care about laws or emergency powers.

If anything, the violent crime rate will rise as criminals feel emboldened knowing that most citizens are now disarmed.

Third, Grisham has presented no evidence of a legitimate emergency other than “crime is bad right now.”

The emergency is ambiguous rather than defined. Meaning, emergency restrictions could be renewed over and over again, unless citizens step up and do something about them.

Fourth, the focus on open carry and conceal carry seems to be an attempt at a totalitarian tip-toe.

A large number of gun owners do not carry regularly so they may not feel personally affected by the rules. Meaning, the governor has reduced the level of opposition by attacking just one aspect of gun rights. This is usually how authoritarians institute control – They don't remove your rights all at once, they do it a piece at a time.

Fifth, gun carry laws are generally a legislative decision that usually requires a public vote.

Grisham is attempting to bypass all checks and balances as if the legislative process does not matter.

Sixth, emergency powers are often declared unconstitutional by courts after the fact.

For example, the Michigan Supreme Court held that the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act (EPGA), which Governor Whitmer used to justify her draconian COVID-19 executive orders, was unconstitutional because it delegated legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Michigan Constitution. But these court decisions often come well after the damage has already been done. It is up to the citizenry to defy such orders when necessary and let the courts sort out the aftermath later.

Seventh, Grisham argues that rising crime is a “public health emergency,” using the same language relegated to the covid response.

Crime has nothing to do with public health and is a legal concern handled through either social programs or increased police presence. Disarming the public is not within the purview of a health emergency – Grisham has greatly overstepped her bounds.

Are Emergency Powers A Test To See What Americans Will Put Up With? | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com www.zerohedge.com

Her, and we should have a vigorous debate on all of the other constitutional rights, sums up her long-game.
Click to expand...

This strikes me as an excellent analysis of not only the true intent of this particular gun ban but also the same sort of intent hidden in the background behind the initial 4420 proposal.

It seems that every day and, in every way, we see more and more examples of a concerted effort to implement and execute the Alinsky principals for forcing socialism upon what is left of this fair land.

1694443928750.png
 
Harry Christopher said:
The New Mexico attack on our Constitutional civil rights along with the Republic 4420 attack would seem to be prime evidence that the true underlining motive behind progressive liberal assaults on the 2-A has absolutely nothing at all to do with addressing crime and its well documented underlining causes and everything to do with a burning desire for plain old fashion institutional control of the citizenry at large.

I believe that this has always been the case in the past but this time they feel no pressing need to try and cloak the motives for their actions.....it's for the children don't you know...... from the public in general. Mr. Sowell has....once again.....distilled the political background noise down to the true essence of what is driving these politicians:

View attachment 794675
Click to expand...
You're not telling me anything that I haven't known for at least 50 years. ;)
 
Harry Christopher said:
This strikes me as an excellent analysis of not only the true intent of this particular gun ban but also the same sort of intent hidden in the background behind the initial 4420 proposal.

It seems that every day and, in every way, we see more and more examples of a concerted effort to implement and execute the Alinsky principals for forcing socialism upon what is left of this fair land.

View attachment 794962
Click to expand...
dunno who the heck mr saul is/was, but those things did not change much since times of kautsky, engels and all the rest of society architects who mastered methods of how to grow discontent and destroy countries from within. the eyes of those who see not be blinded, the ears of those who hear shall listen.

it s all about reaching the critical mass, so, keep looking at numbers of illegals poured into the local communities and status of local social services supporting them. everything has a reason of why it happens.
 
1694451805362.png

1694451726880.png

Gov. Grisham speaking about Constitutional rights is like an eight year old taking apart a nuclear bomb. She has no idea what each part does, how it was designed, or what its purpose is. She’s simply shoving her sausage fingers into the machinery, poking and prodding and tinkering around, with absolutely no understanding of what the potential consequences are.
...
Gov. Grisham is a prime example of one of the most dangerous people in politics. She’s incredibly stupid, to be sure, but even worse, she’s utterly convinced she not only has the power to do what she’s doing but that it’s somehow heroic. She’s the epitome of what the brains of late 50’s suburban wine moms devolves into. She sees herself as the stereotypical “girlboss”, rising up to take action – just like she saw in the movies!

We are going to flood her state with ammo like she’s never seen before and there isn’t a single thing she can do to stop us.

via: Ammunition Manufacturer Fires Back at Gov. Grisham: Offers Free Deliveries to all New Mexico Customers with Special Promo Code, "F*ck Off, Gov. Grisham" | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft
 
MGnoob said:
You hit the nail on the head..
While god says though shall not kill… you have a right to defend… I don’t even mind going to hell for that reason. This country’s f***ed.
Click to expand...

Murder. Except the King James Version, every translation of the Bible says thou shall not MURDER.

The Bible and its Laws are full of instances where people killed righteously. Be it in war, self defense or as a blood redeemer of a victim - killing by itself is not biblically wrong. The intent behind the killing is what makes it the sin.


Sorry - I get irritated at this being overly misunderstood. A woman at church won't kill a bug if she can help it because "thou shall not kill". Yes, she eats meat. Yes she wears a mask and think she's helping. Yes, I'm trying to bring her around to normalcy. No, she isn't hot.
 
Both David Hogg and Ted Lieu say "I support gun safety but there is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution,"

Where was this epiphany when the Covid response was rammed down out throats?

Will they keep this attitude when the Covid mandates ramp up shortly (and they will)? I think not....
 
alan226 said:
Where was this epiphany when the Covid response was rammed down out throats?
Click to expand...

They don't like it because it's what they were planning ... via the health emergency thing. Governor Bimbo is creating an obstacle to their plans.
 
Uzi2 said:
It's Saturday. The courts are closed. She just made the dictate yesterday afternoon. How about we give it until Monday or Tuesday to allow the suits to be filed? 🤔
Click to expand...

Nearly noon in New Mexico. Let's get it on!
 
Picton said:
Nearly noon in New Mexico. Let's get it on!
Click to expand...
no one will get arrested while the topic is still new and fresh. like no one used 9/11 laws against american citizens right away, it took some time to mature.
all they do now is tracing faces and locking individuals to a location. to arrest them all and charge with an intent to commit an intent of insurrection or something - who cares what - arrests are made at night when all is calm and resting quietly.

all in all it is all meaningless. the only part that matters is using 'public health emergency' for anything, then using emergency status for a factual enforcement of terror.

using a state of emergency to suspend constitution is all what this is about, and it will probably take 2-3 more times done until it will be indeed used for punishment of the populous.
 
paul73 said:
no one will get arrested while the topic is still new and fresh. like no one used 9/11 laws against american citizens right away, it took some time to mature.
all they do now is tracing faces and locking individuals to a location. to arrest them all and charge with an intent to commit an intent of insurrection or something - who cares what - arrests are made at night when all is calm and resting quietly.

all in all it is all meaningless. the only part that matters is using 'public health emergency' for anything, then using emergency status for a factual enforcement of terror.

using a state of emergency to suspend constitution is all what this is about, and it will probably take 2-3 more times done until it will be indeed used for punishment of the populous.
Click to expand...

I'm on record as saying nobody will ever get arrested for this.

I'm talking about filing the TRO. They should have been at the courthouse the moment it opened, fee in hand.
 
Picton said:
I'm on record as saying nobody will ever get arrested for this.
Click to expand...
it depends upon what 'this' will be declared to be. you may be right, or may be not, time will tell.

the only fact is - her edict so far does not seem to have produced any factual resistance.
 

Similar threads

Up Next - Going after Police Trade-In guns.
2
Replies
40
Views
1K
MAGA99
MAGA99
30 arrested in New York after Jamaican food truck found selling guns and drugs
2
Replies
32
Views
828
alx
alx
Guns mailed into Worcester
Replies
4
Views
579
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
An interesting take on guns from the other side.
Replies
17
Views
705
MAGA99
MAGA99
About that “cleaning guns” thing.
Replies
4
Views
403
allen-1
allen-1
Back
Top Bottom