Who here still trusts Trump when it comes to guns?

If Donnie Jr. didn't love his rifles so much, I think we'd be alot more screwed than we are because Donnie Sr. couldn't give two turds about firearms
 
The 5-4 SCOTUS? The one where even Scalia stated in Hella that "some" gun regulations are acceptable? I have about as much faith in the SCOTUS as I do in believing my hair will come back.


Gorsuch is an unknown wrt gun rights (at the SCOTUS level), but he is supposed to be a constitutionalist. With Hillary being president, SCOTUS would definitely be a 4-5 now, which would not be good news for us considering the anti-gun drama going on in the US right now. You can nitpick on statements Scalia made in Heller, but we probably wouldn't even be discussing this if Heller (and McDonald) weren't ruled in our favor.
 
Not sure who that is. I'm an independent libertarian. It's realpolitik.

People should vote for whoever gets us what we want in the long term, not whoever makes us feel warm and fuzzy. We may or may not like Trump, but there's no question he's energizing the enemy. Hillary would have energized our allies and she would have accomplished nothing against our interests.

I'm watching my generation (millenials) go off the deep end because of this guy. It's scary. He's breeding a generation of socialists.

[rofl]
Your generation needs to treat The Blame Complex first. It starts in the school when you start blaming the entire country for not providing enough high paying jobs for political science graduates. Independent libertarian? LOL! Good luck with "Independent Weld"!
 
Gorsuch is an unknown wrt gun rights (at the SCOTUS level), but he is supposed to be a constitutionalist. With Hillary being president, SCOTUS would definitely be a 4-5 now, which would not be good news for us considering the anti-gun drama going on in the US right now. You can nitpick on statements Scalia made in Heller, but we probably wouldn't even be discussing this if Heller (and McDonald) weren't ruled in our favor.
If you want to call one of the strongest SC Justices of all time comments, made during Hella, nitpicking then go for it. Besides, the point of my comment sailed over your head.
 
I wonder if all the major federal gun laws were listed chronologically and who was POTUS at the time,what percentage of laws that are still on the books would be enacted by Democrat president vs a Republican president.

FDR (probably) signed NFA34.
LBJ signed GCA68,
Hughes Amendment was signed by Reagan
Bill Clinton signed the 1994 AWB.
Bill Clinton (likely) signed whatever package had the Lautenberg amendment in it

So that's like what, 4 democrap and 1 republicant....

But then there are the shitty mc shit executive orders...

1989 import ban - George HW Bush (and no president since then has had the balls to ever rescind it, republican or otherwise).
ome other stupid f***ing import ban - Clinton (basically he tacked shit onto the earlier 89 ban).

Only like three significant pro gun things ever happened legislatively, whoopy faekin doo....

-FOPA 86 (meh, cause this is what caused the f***ing hughes amendment!)
-Manufacturer protection bill
-National Park carry ban rescinded by Obama (but only because he was more or less forced into it...)

-Mike
 
1. He hasn't really done anything against the 2A. Hasn't done anything for it either but at least we're not looking at a teary-eyed POTUS calling for a new AWB.

He doesn't have to call for it, even if he did they ain't listening to him anyways. However, if one landed on his desk, Trump would throw us squarely under the wheels of the bus. I can't see him vetoing that on principle. The only thing this guys good for is getting maybe another justice or two out of the deal. Other than that for gun owners he's
nearly worthless.

-Mike
 
Not sure who that is. I'm an independent libertarian. It's realpolitik.

If you knew the definition of either of those party and designations, you would not combine the two into one.

If you even are a registered voter, what party or designation are you registered as?

Thanks
 
1. He hasn't really done anything against the 2A. Hasn't done anything for it either but at least we're not looking at a teary-eyed POTUS calling for a new AWB.

2. The SCOTUS is far more important than the POTUS for us and I think we can trust Trump to pick Justices who are pro-2A.

3. I can overlook inaction on the 2A when unemployment is below 4%, the market is booming, I'm paying less taxes, NK is at the negotiations table, SA is pushing the Palestinians away, China is lifting tariffs, etc. Trump is doing an awesome job overall (yes, I realize that he's far from perfect).
********
My sentiments exactly.
 
Aw jeez. Not this s#$% again. LOL

Trump is on Trump's side. Period. Plus his obfuscates. You can NEVER go by what he says but only by what the outcome is - which is why he is so disruptive.
 
I've said it before... Voting is like picking between a turd taco and a shit sammich... Neither choice is actually good, but one is worse than the other. Pretty typical when a pol gets into office and does a 180 on things he/she said to get into office.

I doubt there's actually been more than a handful of 'good' presidents in office since the 1800's.

IMO, the only 'honest' politicians are [some of] the ones that only last a single term before getting out. Which is extremely rare.
 
Remember, The President speaks at the NRA convention and this makes him Satan to the leftists, The Globe, NYT,CNN, MSNBC, etc. which warms my heart. If Hillary had won we'd already have a AWB, a far left SJC judge, background checks on all firearm transactions, more pressure on financial institutions to refuse to do business with the firearms industry, MIke Bloomberg in some cabinet position, etc.
 
Is it though? Hillary wouldn't have been able to pass anything because of Congress. No one likes Hillary. She would have been so unpopular that Republicans would gain in Congress in 2018, and probably regain the presidency in 2020.

So with either Trump or Hillary, nothing gun control related would be passing right now. But with Trump you have someone so polarizing that 2018 and potentially 2020 being set up for liberal wave elections. And then you have Congressional districts being redrawn after the 2020 Census, and you'll have liberal wave majorities gerrymandering in their favor across the country, and those new maps last 10 years.

If you were playing chess, looking 5 years or a decade ahead, I think Hillary would have been (much) better for our side in the long run.

Nothing motivates more than hate, and I'd rather have our side revved up against Hillary than their side against Trump, given the stakes and that her power would have been neutralized by the existing Republican majorities in Congress.
Supreme Court would now have a lib majority if not for Trump
 
If you knew the definition of either of those party and designations, you would not combine the two into one.

If you even are a registered voter, what party or designation are you registered as?

Thanks
I pick my words carefully. I'm registered independent, but ideologically libertarian-leaning. I vote only for major party candidates because voting for third parties in our system is pointless. I don't believe in the Libertarian Party for that reason.

I've said it before... Voting is like picking between a turd taco and a shit sammich... Neither choice is actually good, but one is worse than the other. Pretty typical when a pol gets into office and does a 180 on things he/she said to get into office.

0*TRvdtVVN9egpvxBS.jpg
 
Supreme Court.
Supreme Court would now have a lib majority if not for Trump

That's a good point. By far the best counterpoint to what I said.

Gorsuch is an unknown wrt gun rights (at the SCOTUS level), but he is supposed to be a constitutionalist. With Hillary being president, SCOTUS would definitely be a 4-5 now, which would not be good news for us considering the anti-gun drama going on in the US right now. You can nitpick on statements Scalia made in Heller, but we probably wouldn't even be discussing this if Heller (and McDonald) weren't ruled in our favor.

Gorsuch is almost certainly as solid as it gets on 2A. He's an originalist and his judicial philosophy leans libertarian. Expect him to be on the side of individual rights in most cases.
 
Trump seems to be tackling his campaign promises when the time is right. He waited til NK cooled off before going after China. If the timing is right he may focus on 2A, but he’s busy with trade and warmongering at the moment.
 
Back
Top Bottom