NO NEW GUN LEGISLATION

[beaker]

So where did you get your MD Psych, and when did you personally evaluate Trump? Seriously, how do you make such definitive statements about someone you have never met, and has never ehibited any of the behaviors you are acusing him of? Everyone reacts emotionally to horribke situations, but disciplined people move beyond that to fact finding and understanding before making important decisions. Leftists never move beyond emotional response because they manipulate they dont want facts and objective truth. I have seen no situation with Trump where he didnt do a rational think through of his open kimono style and come back on the appropriate side of the fence other than bump stocks. And the NRA gave him bad advice on that one.

Just be mindful that Trump in his second term will be a far graver threat to us when he is not facing re-election. Let's face it, Trump is like many a liberal where his initial reactions to events are based on feelings and often reveal his own personal views on things. Of course, while facing re-election, Trump the pragmatist eventually wins out and recants the statements reflecting Trump's personal views. I have little doubt that Trump personally supports and would be just fine enacting UBG, AWB, and ERPO if he didn't have to face his core supporters again. Instead, he has to suppress his basest instincts in these issues and protect the support of his base and not endanger the Republican majority in the Senate.

I am actually quite concerned about what we might be subjected to if Trump wins a second term and has Democrat majorities in both chambers of Congress. What happens when Trump is no longer accountable to us and only beholden to his own vision for his legacy? If Trump gets to make any more SCOTUS appointments, I certainly hope they happen in his first term. Come his second term, we have to hope any appointments are to replace liberal justices so we can at least maintain the status quo.

If anyone here doesn't understand that Trump is exclusively driven by his own ego and he thinks other people perceive him, you are in for a rude surprise if there is a second term.

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

I certainly hope Mitch and The President stand strong, however...

Congress returns to session September 9, 2019

>The Democrats can't talk about the economy.
>They can no longer talk about Russian, and if a couple reports drop they are going to wish they never engineered it.
>"The Squad" have 9%-20% approval ratings with folks the Dems need in 2020 so they have to be distracted from.
>Establishment Dems know outright supporting open boarders is a third rail in swing states.
>Talk of climate change has to overcome the discredited fantasy of the "Green New Deal" and a robust domestic energy industry.
> Every single Democrat 2020 candidate sucks and they know it.

So, Nancy needs something to keep all of that from sucking the air out of the room.

That something is likely to be gun control legislation and lots of it orchestrated through an epic media propaganda campaign.

I see that New York Times article quoting anonymous inside sources that Trump will block gun control as a call to stir the prohibitionists to action rather than something that should assuage the fears of gun owners.

I hope folks will forgive me if I do not take this news as a cue to relax. There are 11 business days till congress returns, I'm going to write The White House (again) even if it is a grain of sand on the beach.

:emoji_tiger:

 

[zboys]

• "Other advisers, like his daughter Ivanka, are encouraging the President and others to push Gun Registration and Gun Confiscation in a misguided effort to pick up Democrat voters?"

Trump could sign a complete firearms confiscation law and he would not gain 1 Democrat voter, they'd still want him gone.

 

[m_n_x]

• "Other advisers, like his daughter Ivanka, are encouraging the President and others to push Gun Registration and Gun Confiscation in a misguided effort to pick up Democrat voters?"

Trump could sign a complete firearms confiscation law and he would not gain 1 Democrat voter, they'd still want him gone.

So true. My hope is he will eventually just announce some grant money to states to enhance background checks and announce a Presidential commission to study the roots of gun violence or something like that. Then we can go back to our regularly scheduled programming until after the election.

 

[SFC13557]

If you don't cherry pick and instead read all, you'll see that I have. We can all see by your post hear that bump stocks are near and dear to your heart. Please tell us, how many bump stocks did you lose in the recent bump stock trajedy?

******
A bump stock(never heard of them until Vegas) is NOT a firearm, it's an accessory.

The concept of the government "letting" you keep your rights or promising not to take anything else for now is completely antithetical to the second amendment.
My rights weren't given to me by the government and I wont thank someone who clearly doesn't understand that and who would "take the guns first and then do the due process" in a heartbeat if it didn't suit him politically. It's also not "only bumpstocks" its a dangerous precedent of the executive illegally redefining laws by bureaucracy. If that doesn't make your skin crawl, wait till some one with a (D) after their name is in the oval office and see how much mileage they get out of that trick.
Sure it could always be worse, and it will probably get much worse soon, but dont piss on my head and tell me its just a little rain.

*****
A bump stock(never heard of them until Vegas) is NOT a firearm, it's an accessory. Do I agree they should have been banned, NO, but I can't categorize the EO as gun control.

 

[wahsben]

Since the bump stock ban is being discussed in here the reason that it's bad is not because of bump stocks alone but because of how it may and probably will be used to ban more things in the future. Here's some good articles about that: Problems with Banning Bump Stocks If you don't want to read the whole thing the last paragraph sums it up. Not that cut-n-dry, is it? Bottom line, such a ban will likely have little impact on the real issues, but it will set precedent that gun-control activists would be able to use in their efforts to shred 2nd Amendment rights. And that would not be good for our nation’s future and the freedoms of young and old alike.
The BIG Problem with the Bump-Stock Ban | The Firearms Coalition

 

[wahsben]

Something else I've got questions about. Does anyone know for sure that Bump stocks were used in Vegas or we've only got what they've told us. Does anyone really know if a suppressor/silencer was actually used in Virginia or we've only got what they've told us. Does anyone really know that body armor and drum magazines were actually used in these latest shootings or again we've only got what they've told us. There should be no infringements but it sure seems someones not satisfied with all the ones we've got and is looking to get more added on.

 

[SFC13557]

Something else I've got questions about. Does anyone know for sure that Bump stocks were used in Vegas or we've only got what they've told us. Does anyone really know if a suppressor/silencer was actually used in Virginia or we've only got what they've told us. Does anyone really know that body armor and drum magazines were actually used in these latest shooting or again we've only got what they've told us. There should be no infringements but it sure seems someones not satisfied with all the ones we've got and is looking to get more added on.

******
The Vegas massacre is still a mystery and the lack of info is very alarming. Motive? The Dayton shooting is being down played by the lamestram media because the shooter was a leftist Warren supporter so who knows..

 

[wahsben]

******
The Vegas massacre is still a mystery and the lack of info is very alarming. Motive? The Dayton shooting is being down played by the lamestram media because the shooter was a leftist Warren supporter so who knows..

The MSM does all it can not only to control the narrative but to create the narrative they want. It's pretty much impossible to know exactly what the truth is anymore and even if they gave us the truth would we be able to recognize it and believe it. Truly disgusting what the MSM is doing.

 

[E.Stoner]

******
A bump stock(never heard of them until Vegas) is NOT a firearm, it's an accessory.

*****
A bump stock(never heard of them until Vegas) is NOT a firearm, it's an accessory. Do I agree they should have been banned, NO, but I can't categorize the EO as gun control.

A bumpstock is a gun part (albeit a stupid one). A gun is composed of lots of parts like roll-pins, screws, barrels, triggers, a grip, a magazine etc... It needs these parts to run. If you take away the right part it can't run. Do you see where this is going?

A machine gun is a word, but that word means something very specific, it has a technical definition. The bumpstock was reviewed twice and ATF said it was not a machine gun.
Overnight the bureaucrats at the president's directions said that word meant something different (not based on technical definitions) and that part became illegal. Do you see where this is going?

Remember when the AG got up in the morning and decided to change her interpretation of the law? How is this any different?
(Spoiler: It's not any different.)
I support Trump because the alternative is insane and I agree with 95% of his policy, but his stance on 2A is questionable at best and in reality I don't think he gives one damn about it. We could have gotten so much back in the first two years, but we ended up losing more than 8 years of Obama.
When I hear "compromise", I ask myself "well what do we get in return?"
Getting to keep something is not getting anything, it's just losing by a smaller amount.
Sooner or later we wont have anything left.

 

[SFC13557]

A bumpstock is a gun part (albeit a stupid one). A gun is composed of lots of parts like roll-pins, screws, barrels, triggers, a grip, a magazine etc... It needs these parts to run. If you take away the right part it can't run. Do you see where this is going?

A machine gun is a word, but that word means something very specific, it has a technical definition. The bumpstock was reviewed twice and ATF said it was not a machine gun.
Overnight the bureaucrats at the president's directions said that word meant something different (not based on technical definitions) and that part became illegal. Do you see where this is going?

Remember when the AG got up in the morning and decided to change her interpretation of the law? How is this any different?
(Spoiler: It's not any different.)
I support Trump because the alternative is insane and I agree with 95% of his policy, but his stance on 2A is questionable at best and in reality I don't think he gives one damn about it. We could have gotten so much back in the first two years, but we ended up losing more than 8 years of Obama.
When I hear "compromise", I ask myself "well what do we get in return?"
Getting to keep something is not getting anything, it's just losing by a smaller amount.
Sooner or later we wont have anything left.

******
I'm pretty sure the President heard our message and he's smart enough to know who his base is. I highly doubt anyone who favors more useless "background checks" and an AWB won't be voting for Trump.