-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
NO NEW GUN LEGISLATION
- Thread starter SFC13557
- Start date
TheGreekFreak
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2015
- Messages
- 2,457
- Likes
- 3,403
No homo, I envy this muffin baking sissy's hip flexibility.....
beaker
NES Member
The Bump stock thing happened because LaPierre recommended it to Trump.
Trump isnt stupid, he actually talks to people to get educated like any good executive leader should do. He gets stuff fast. And he decides then he sticks to it. I have been quite concerned about some of his off the cuff comments about gun stuff, but i have to say also he doesnt make knee jerk decisions, and he does listen to his base. This is how a representitive republic is supposed to work.
Trump isnt stupid, he actually talks to people to get educated like any good executive leader should do. He gets stuff fast. And he decides then he sticks to it. I have been quite concerned about some of his off the cuff comments about gun stuff, but i have to say also he doesnt make knee jerk decisions, and he does listen to his base. This is how a representitive republic is supposed to work.
Whutmeworry
NES Member
Not spreading gloom and doom, just want us all to consider what a post-2020 election, lame duck President Trump might be willing to sign vs. now. I’m also not saying we have a better option. The fight will NEVER be over.
EVER.
EVER.
beaker
NES Member
I think he would be less likely to sign bad gun legislation after 2020. At his core he loves the idea of the USA, and freedom. That is why he is putting up with all this tidal wave of leftist shit propaganda, including the attacks on him and his family. He has virtue, and principles, and i think those are becoming more developed and shiney, like a lump of coal under pressure.
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.
Agnotology
NES Member
Wonder if we could get Trump to Executive order Healey's doctrine to be ignored. God that would be glorious.
SFC13557
NES Member
*******
Journalism is dead thanks to our leftist/Socialist Universities. These kids are brainwashed during freshman orientation to believe the USA is a racist, capitalist country and all elements of white, conservative power must be not only defeated but crushed. Make no mistake about it, they are coming after US. WE are the enemy in their minds and they are taking no prisoners.
Agnotology
NES Member
So its outside his authority? Didn't stop Maura. My coffee deprived brain should have mentioned that was the glorious I was speaking of.
It's just apples and oranges. An executive order is basically the president giving a direction to "his employees" in the executive branch.
The MA Attorney General has nothing to do with the executive branch of the federal government.
Regardless of whoever the president is at any given moment, I'm not sure we should be encouraging executive orders as a panacea. The executive branch--regardless of any particular occupant--has grown far outside of its original Constitutional structure.
SFC13557
NES Member
"Just be mindful that Trump in his second term will be a far graver threat to us when he is not facing re-election"
******
I disagree, he will have nothing to worry about as long as R's keep the Senate. He will have 4 yrs. to put his stamp/brand on the country and pay back the media and the leftists.
******
I disagree, he will have nothing to worry about as long as R's keep the Senate. He will have 4 yrs. to put his stamp/brand on the country and pay back the media and the leftists.
Agnotology
NES Member
I agree. It was more a comical knee-slap thought exercise than an actual solution.
M60
NES Member
Your glass is half empty, rather than half full. What would Hillary's second term look like for you?
GLOCK-22
NES Member
The best and only way to solve all the corruption in politics is to make tier limits for all branches of government.
8 years for President
6 years for Senator
6 years for House Rep
8 years for Govonor
6 years for Mayor
And a total of 12 years in any office combined total.
And once there out of office they don't get any special privileges they go back to being regular citizens like the rest of us.
That will cut down on the corruption and if those loosers have to become regular civilians again and peons like the rest of us they might think twice about trying to screw us peons.
8 years for President
6 years for Senator
6 years for House Rep
8 years for Govonor
6 years for Mayor
And a total of 12 years in any office combined total.
And once there out of office they don't get any special privileges they go back to being regular citizens like the rest of us.
That will cut down on the corruption and if those loosers have to become regular civilians again and peons like the rest of us they might think twice about trying to screw us peons.
One thing's for sure, if Trump wins a second term, we'll find out who he truly is.
Will he take the gloves off and go no holds barred against the left?
Or, having secured a second term and no longer needing their vote, will he feel no longer shackled to his base?
Will he take the gloves off and go no holds barred against the left?
Or, having secured a second term and no longer needing their vote, will he feel no longer shackled to his base?
SFC13557
NES Member
From a NYT's story, I guess Wayne and the NRA still have MAJOR clout.
"
President Trump spent at least 30 minutes on the phone Tuesday with Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive of the National Rifle Association, the latest conversation in an aggressive campaign by gun rights advocates to influence the White House in the weeks since the back-to-back mass shootings in Texas and Ohio.
The call ended the way that Mr. LaPierre had hoped it would: with Mr. Trump espousing N.R.A. talking points in the Oval Office and warning of the radical steps he said Democrats wanted to take in violation of the Second Amendment…
Mr. Trump — who did most of the talking on the call with Mr. LaPierre, according to those briefed on the conversation — made it clear that he believes there are ways to scrutinize people’s fitness for gun ownership other than the current proposals. But his latest comments on guns were the strongest sign to date that he is unlikely to make bipartisan gun legislation a priority this fall, when Congress returns from its summer recess. Without his backing, congressional Republicans said, any chance of a bipartisan bill passing the Senate is likely to be dead on arrival."
"
President Trump spent at least 30 minutes on the phone Tuesday with Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive of the National Rifle Association, the latest conversation in an aggressive campaign by gun rights advocates to influence the White House in the weeks since the back-to-back mass shootings in Texas and Ohio.
The call ended the way that Mr. LaPierre had hoped it would: with Mr. Trump espousing N.R.A. talking points in the Oval Office and warning of the radical steps he said Democrats wanted to take in violation of the Second Amendment…
Mr. Trump — who did most of the talking on the call with Mr. LaPierre, according to those briefed on the conversation — made it clear that he believes there are ways to scrutinize people’s fitness for gun ownership other than the current proposals. But his latest comments on guns were the strongest sign to date that he is unlikely to make bipartisan gun legislation a priority this fall, when Congress returns from its summer recess. Without his backing, congressional Republicans said, any chance of a bipartisan bill passing the Senate is likely to be dead on arrival."
M60
NES Member
Lol. Do you really believe that there was ever a possibility of Obama doing the exact same thing as Trump, with regard to gun control? I find that I stay more focused if I deal with reality, rather than fantasy, but if fantasy, like you suggested here works for you, you should probably stick with your methodology.
M60
NES Member
I assume you are referring to the hoards of Republicans that loved and miss the bump stock. Sounds to me like it would be more akin to a NES mini rant, maybe a 1, on a scale of 1-10, than the "legislative riot", you propose it to be here.
1) I don't trust this, it's been too widely spread. This looks more like the political machine trying to get us to calm down while they work in secret, so we can be blindsided. The subtle implication/questions about whether Lapierre had any impact benefits no-one more than Lapierre.
2) Instead of just being grateful little sheep, this is precisely the time we should be pushing constitutional carry/mandatory reciprocity, repealing gun-free zones, moving the hearing protection act forward, work towards NFA repeal: literally, all of the things. This gives Senate voting blocks something to leverage, rather than 'do gun control or be seen as doing nothing' - at least if it's "You want heightened background checks? Okay, only if you do no morefree-firegun-free zones", then we could at least split the vote 3 ways and with that have a better chance at maintaining the status quo while giving people cover instead of 'doing nothing' - and we may, on the off chance, get something useful out of it.
3) I've said it before - you can't trust someone who does not hold the same principals and Trump is a New York liberal. That his and the Republican establishment's utilitarianism has worked towards the good a bit recently - and I absolutely laud Trump's hit at defunding PP in some small way, for instance - does not really mean we're not also in trouble. I mean, what happened to federal deficits? And when they start dealing with federal deficits, what happened to our gun rights? It's the constant act of being seen as firefighting that benefits nobody so much as fundraisers.
4) The leftist-media-academic axis functions on the principal of ratchet straps: never allow any clicks back. Even if the right wins Congress, the judiciary interferes. If we get the judiciary, the executive interferes. Only if we have all three branches, we will still see the executive resistance happen. Not to mention the relentless reinforcement by the msm. So, in such a regime, if we're not moving the needle forward, they are identifiably winning, it's just they are waiting for the next time around in power to make the next move.
5) To the person who said we have to focus on Maura - I think it's wrong to personalize it. It's not just Maura, but the ideology that's a problem. It's never the 'big bad tyrant' that's the source of the problems, it's all the little petty, would-be tyrants, who benefit from promogulating the damaged system.
2) Instead of just being grateful little sheep, this is precisely the time we should be pushing constitutional carry/mandatory reciprocity, repealing gun-free zones, moving the hearing protection act forward, work towards NFA repeal: literally, all of the things. This gives Senate voting blocks something to leverage, rather than 'do gun control or be seen as doing nothing' - at least if it's "You want heightened background checks? Okay, only if you do no more
3) I've said it before - you can't trust someone who does not hold the same principals and Trump is a New York liberal. That his and the Republican establishment's utilitarianism has worked towards the good a bit recently - and I absolutely laud Trump's hit at defunding PP in some small way, for instance - does not really mean we're not also in trouble. I mean, what happened to federal deficits? And when they start dealing with federal deficits, what happened to our gun rights? It's the constant act of being seen as firefighting that benefits nobody so much as fundraisers.
4) The leftist-media-academic axis functions on the principal of ratchet straps: never allow any clicks back. Even if the right wins Congress, the judiciary interferes. If we get the judiciary, the executive interferes. Only if we have all three branches, we will still see the executive resistance happen. Not to mention the relentless reinforcement by the msm. So, in such a regime, if we're not moving the needle forward, they are identifiably winning, it's just they are waiting for the next time around in power to make the next move.
5) To the person who said we have to focus on Maura - I think it's wrong to personalize it. It's not just Maura, but the ideology that's a problem. It's never the 'big bad tyrant' that's the source of the problems, it's all the little petty, would-be tyrants, who benefit from promogulating the damaged system.
BREWINZ
NES Member
"Take the guns first, go through due process second." -Trump
I think Trump is a NY liberal at the end of the day. He just happens to love money above all else. IMO, if the backlash wasn't so strong he would support lots and lots of gun control. That doesn't make him a 2A hero in my eyes.
I think Trump is a NY liberal at the end of the day. He just happens to love money above all else. IMO, if the backlash wasn't so strong he would support lots and lots of gun control. That doesn't make him a 2A hero in my eyes.
