Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off-topic Political' started by Nemo, Nov 29, 2019.
So, that makes him anti-2A ?
What would you have done if you were in his position ?
Technically, that's not how a bump stock functions! How many times I gotta explain to you?
Well I was in the same Universe as the truth.
Trump didn’t do that?
I guess you missed the executive memorandum that Trump issued directing the justice department to direct all resources to banning devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns.
U.S. District court of Nevada ruled in Prescott v. Slide Fire Solutions that bumpstocks were firearm components and not accessories and as such are protected by the 2nd Amendment and subject to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which protects firearm manufacturers and sellers from Individuals who use their products unlawfully and in crimes.
Trump played into the anti’s hands and folded like a cheap suit.
Trump put three Justices on the Supreme Court (come Monday), that will rule for us on bump stocks.
So....like I said, what would you have done in that same situation ? He had to take some sort of action for public consumption.
I don't put a lot of reliance in SCOTUS to rule in our favor even with hand picked Justices from Trump. We all have see how Roberts has worked out towards upholding the constitution.
Well, you and I know for sure that Barrett is a good one. She is willing to let non-violent felons own firearms.
I have well-placed hopes in the other two as well. And Trump may get the chance to put a fourth on the Court if he gets reelected.
And Trump may get the chance to put a fourth on the Court when he gets reelected.
I wouldn't have done anything in respect to usurping congress or the constitution to alter the definition of the law through bureaucracy. Furthermore neither the FBI nor the ATF made any kind of conclusive statement in their reports that bump stocks had been used, only that some of the perpetrator's rifles had them installed on them. Bump stock devices had been on the market since 2002 and allegedly used in a crime only ONCE. Demanding that something "had to be done" is a kneejerk reaction from the democratic "let no crisis go to waste" play book and Trump played right into it. It's no different than the Dems demanding that something be done about those evil assault weapons everytime there is a shooting.
If Trump has been a democrat, you people would be demanding his head be on a pike for infringing on the 2A, but because he has a R next to his name and he is "your guy" he gets a pass just like Deal, Kemp, Collins, and all the other hyper-partisan nitwits.
Trump got bad advice, made a mistake, and is making up for it with great Supreme Court picks, telling the ATF to back off on arm-braced pistols, stating again he would sign a national reciprocity bill, telling COE to back off, etc.
Because my vote was for him to keep Biden and Harris from raping the Second Amendment, that does not mean I'm giving Trump "a pass".
I'm amazed at the support that Trump gets here on gun rights.
He runs supporting the hearing protection act, then does nothing to assist in in passing it while in control of the House and Senate. He then says that he doesn't like suppressors and should look into banning them.
States support for red flag laws. "Take the guns first, and have due process later".
Has the ATF ban bump stocks by executive fiat.
Attempted to nominate an antigun head to the ATF.
But listening to some Republicans he's a grand champion of the Second Amendment.
A National Reciprocity bill and a bill to regulate silencers like regular firearm components, removing them from the auspices of the NFA, were floating around in Congress during the first 2 years of Trump's administration with a Republican majority in both chambers and he did NOTHING to get either bill moving along in the legislative process. And here at election time and he finally starts giving lip service to one of the bills and now we are supposed to believe he is going to finally "do something" for 2A rights??
It's called pandering. And you're falling for it.
And he has walked back a lot of that talk, as well as actions. Has he pressured Congress lately (or ever) to pass a red flag law?
He ain't perfect, but he has been working with SAF President Alan Gottlieb, so he is on the right track now.
In Georgia you could vote Libertarian or for a write-in, I suppose. That would not hurt Trump's chances. But would you risk it in a state where that could have a critical effect on the outcome? Would you really risk Biden getting elected because Trump isn't perfect?
Here's your magic wand. Trump loses or wins Georgia - your pick.
Only statists deal in such absolutes. It doesn't matter because regardless of who wins, the 2A will still be attacked. You people will just find a way to rationalize it if it is your guy doing it.
So I guess you are voting for Biden.
I really don't give a flying fornication who you guess I'm voting for. Like I said only statists deal in such absolutes.
Yep, voted for Biden....I thought so