Trump: "Take the guns first, follow due process second"

[gabosaurus]

Interesting development... http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second

[Elessar]

Interesting development... http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second

I am not sure of your objection.

Because Obama did not voice this?

Where is your AK-47 owner now?

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Interesting development... http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second
Sounds good to me... had the democrat sheriff in FL done his job and taken action against the last NUT CASE that they ALLOWED to buy a gun, we wouldn't have 17 dead people.

This IS about NOT allowing a CRAZY person to buy a gun, nothing more, even though you would LOVE it to be.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

We're you expecting us conservatives to object to this?

Aaaah, no.

[hjmick]

We're you expecting us conservatives to object to this?

Aaaah, no.


While I am not the most conservative member of this board, though I am probably the most conservative moderate, I absolutely object to this idea.

The confiscation and denial of a constitutional right without due process? What criteria determines whether or not someone is dangerous? Who makes the determination?

You may as well reinstate the Obama rule prohibiting people who can't manage their money from buying guns. That one made the Social Security Agency judge and jury.

I don't want crazy fucks getting their hands on guns any more than the next guy, but more than that, I don't want the government to start whittling away at any of our Constitutional rights.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

While I am not the most conservative member of this board, though I am probably the most conservative moderate, I absolutely object to this idea.

The confiscation and denial of a constitutional right without due process? What criteria determines whether or not someone is dangerous? Who makes the determination?

You may as well reinstate the Obama rule prohibiting people who can't manage their money from buying guns. That one made the Social Security Agency judge and jury.

I don't want crazy fucks getting their hands on guns any more than the next guy, but more than that, I don't want the government to start whittling away at any of our Constitutional rights.
I agree 100%, but I think if the entire clip of that exchange was played, we'd hear that president Trump was referring to the obvious nut case like the one in FL, one that said he was going shoot up a school, had the cops at his house 30 some times, was expelled, etc. I highly doubt he meant that just willy nilly start confiscating guns from anybody and everybody without due cause.

[hjmick]

I agree 100%, but I think if the entire clip of that exchange was played, we'd hear that president Trump was referring to the obvious nut case like the one in FL, one that said he was going shoot up a school, had the cops at his house 30 some times, was expelled, etc. I highly doubt he meant that just willy nilly start confiscating guns from anybody and everybody without due cause.


I don't think so...

According to the article:

Trump was responding to comments from Vice President Pence that families and local law enforcement should have more tools to report potentially dangerous individuals with weapons.

“Allow due process so no one’s rights are trampled, but the ability to go to court, obtain an order and then collect not only the firearms but any weapons,” Pence said.

"Or, Mike, take the firearms first, and then go to court," Trump responded


Now, I suppose that a limit could be set for the number visits by law enforcement before your firearms and other weapons are confiscated, but I would suggest that a court issued search warrant must accompany any such action...

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I don't think so...

According to the article:

Trump was responding to comments from Vice President Pence that families and local law enforcement should have more tools to report potentially dangerous individuals with weapons.

“Allow due process so no one’s rights are trampled, but the ability to go to court, obtain an order and then collect not only the firearms but any weapons,” Pence said.

"Or, Mike, take the firearms first, and then go to court," Trump responded


Now, I suppose that a limit could be set for the number visits by law enforcement before your firearms and other weapons are confiscated, but I would suggest that a court issued search warrant must accompany any such action...
I don't like Trump's comment... it ain't right.

But this nut case in FL should never been allowed to own a gun. It's entirely on the failure of the Broward county sheriff for dropping the ball on that one. When you can get a search warrant or whatever with a quick visit to a judge, they should have done that. If you threaten to kill people on social media like the idiot did, no way in hell should you have a firearm in your possession, and if it takes a new law to do that, then I'd say that's a good law.

It's hard to believe even now with the laws on the books that someone can threaten, publically, to go kill people, that L.E. can't take that person's guns away. If I did that, I'd expect my local sheriff to kick down my front door and take everything I have and throw me in jail.

[Abbey Marie]

While I am not the most conservative member of this board, though I am probably the most conservative moderate, I absolutely object to this idea.

The confiscation and denial of a constitutional right without due process? What criteria determines whether or not someone is dangerous? Who makes the determination?

You may as well reinstate the Obama rule prohibiting people who can't manage their money from buying guns. That one made the Social Security Agency judge and jury.

I don't want crazy fucks getting their hands on guns any more than the next guy, but more than that, I don't want the government to start whittling away at any of our Constitutional rights.

This is the argument pro-abortion folks make when we try to pass any restrictions on "choice"; even partial birth abortion and short waiting periods. It is the slippery slope argument. And I see it is a significant cause of the absolute paralysis we see in Congress. Why we get nowhere.

Your question about who determines who is dangerous and what are the criteria, are legit, but should not be stoppers. These things can be dealt with. I am not in favor of confiscating guns, but I am also not wholesale against lawmakers looking into issues and making adjustments. Subject to judicial review.

[Gunny]

I don't like Trump's comment... it ain't right.

But this nut case in FL should never been allowed to own a gun. It's entirely on the failure of the Broward county sheriff for dropping the ball on that one. When you can get a search warrant or whatever with a quick visit to a judge, they should have done that. If you threaten to kill people on social media like the idiot did, no way in hell should you have a firearm in your possession, and if it takes a new law to do that, then I'd say that's a good law.

It's hard to believe even now with the laws on the books that someone can threaten, publically, to go kill people, that L.E. can't take that person's guns away. If I did that, I'd expect my local sheriff to kick down my front door and take everything I have and throw me in jail.Deterrence is not the same as arbitrary confiscation. All a cop's got to do is say "he's acting crazy" and your home gets raided and your firearms taken. Then YOU have to PAY to go through all the legal BS to get them back.

I agree with mick. A warrant with justification. There was ample time and numerous occasions to obtain a warrant WAY before this fruitloop acted.

[Abbey Marie]

Deterrence is not the same as arbitrary confiscation. All a cop's got to do is say "he's acting crazy" and your home gets raided and your firearms taken. Then YOU have to PAY to go through all the legal BS to get them back.

I agree with mick. A warrant with justification. There was ample time and numerous occasions to obtain a warrant WAY before this fruitloop acted.

You know that Trump speaks impetuously. I don't believe for a second that he supports knee-jerk gun confiscation based on one cop saying someone is crazy. As I said in more detail above, this should not be an all or nothing situation.

[Gunny]

You know that Trump speaks impetuously. I don't believe for a second that he supports knee-jerk gun confiscation based on one cop saying someone is crazy. As I said in more detail above, this should not be an all or nothing situation.I'm not as concerned with what he meant as much as which way the left is going to run with it.

[Abbey Marie]

I'm not as concerned with what he meant as much as which way the left is going to run with it.

They're going to be complete jerks whatever he says. It's the nature of the lib beast. You wouldn't guess the R's have a majority and the Oval Office.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I agree with mick. A warrant with justification. There was ample time and numerous occasions to obtain a warrant WAY before this fruitloop acted.
That's what I was saying.

[gabosaurus]

I agree 100%, but I think if the entire clip of that exchange was played, we'd hear that president Trump was referring to the obvious nut case like the one in FL, one that said he was going shoot up a school, had the cops at his house 30 some times, was expelled, etc. I highly doubt he meant that just willy nilly start confiscating guns from anybody and everybody without due cause.

Actually, no. If you listen to the entire conversion (not just the clip), Trump is obviously yanking the NRA's chain. White House insiders have stated that Trump was quite upset at allegations that NRA "owned him" because of their massive contributions to his campaign. Trump was also said to be "very affected" by private conversations he had with some of the Parkland shooting survivors.
Listen to the entire public meeting that Trump had with legislators today. He is actually considering reviving part of the Obama assault rifle ban. He wants to ban bump stocks and "everything that can turn a legal gun into an illegal gun" as well as raising the age for buying and owning all guns from 18 to 21.

[Kathianne]

While I am not the most conservative member of this board, though I am probably the most conservative moderate, I absolutely object to this idea.

The confiscation and denial of a constitutional right without due process? What criteria determines whether or not someone is dangerous? Who makes the determination?

You may as well reinstate the Obama rule prohibiting people who can't manage their money from buying guns. That one made the Social Security Agency judge and jury.

I don't want crazy fucks getting their hands on guns any more than the next guy, but more than that, I don't want the government to start whittling away at any of our Constitutional rights.

Totally agree with your take. I'm probably more conservative than you, but certainly not like many others here.

We're to let the 'government' in the form of the likes of Sheriff Israel's deputies decide whom is 'sick' before any hearings? The idiots didn't charge the kid even once, in over 30 responses to calls about him.

How about vets? They should prove negative for PTSD before being allowed to carry?

[Gunny]

Totally agree with your take. I'm probably more conservative than you, but certainly not like many others here.

We're to let the 'government' in the form of the likes of Sheriff Israel's deputies decide whom is 'sick' before any hearings? The idiots didn't charge the kid even once, in over 30 responses to calls about him.

How about vets? They should prove negative for PTSD before being allowed to carry?Out of curiosity, why? Cops and firefighters get/have PTSD. I don't think in and of itself it's a factor worthy of being singled out.

More importantly, look at where this is going. I'd say of you voted for Obama you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Once we start, where does it end? Or, it has already started and look where it has led us thus far.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Actually, no. If you listen to the entire conversion (not just the clip), Trump is obviously yanking the NRA's chain. White House insiders have stated that Trump was quite upset at allegations that NRA "owned him" because of their massive contributions to his campaign. Trump was also said to be "very affected" by private conversations he had with some of the Parkland shooting survivors.
Listen to the entire public meeting that Trump had with legislators today. He is actually considering reviving part of the Obama assault rifle ban. He wants to ban bump stocks and "everything that can turn a legal gun into an illegal gun" as well as raising the age for buying and owning all guns from 18 to 21.
His comments are disturbing... and just from my point of view... it surely didn't earn him any cool points.

I still say that his comments were in direct reference to a case such as what happened in FL, where someone PUBLICLY stated, on OPEN SOCIAL MEDIA, that he was going BE THE NEXT SCHOOL SHOOTER. I don't believe he means just go around and inadvertently start confiscating guns from people without due process... but... I guess we'll see. I'm sure there's more to follow. I'm sure people will be expecting him to "clarify" exactly what he meant.

As far as bump stocks... ban 'em. I couldn't care less.

But up the age limit to 21 to buy a gun, then they better up the age limit of those who can enlist also.

[aboutime]

My wife and I listened to the President speaking about this..Live. Of course, gabby, and other Trump hating, gun hating control freaks took what he actually said...AS USUAL, out of context. When he said that. He wasn't saying TAKE ALL THE GUNS FROM EVERYONE. He was speaking about those who have been identified by law enforcement....as possible threats.

Just like the murderer Did in Florida two weeks ago.

Truth is. EVERY DEMOCRAT who listened to the President ABSOLUTELY HEARD TOTALLY DIFFERENT, WELCOME WORDS....Only they could hear.

[gabosaurus]

Out of curiosity, why? Cops and firefighters get/have PTSD. I don't think in and of itself it's a factor worthy of being singled out.

More importantly, look at where this is going. I'd say of you voted for Obama you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Once we start, where does it end? Or, it has already started and look where it has led us thus far.

From what I understand, this is where Trump is going. If you are a vet or retired police/fire and have been diagnosed with PTSD, you are wide brushed as "dangerous."
My question is, would they use military records to come after you? How far will Trump bend over to cover all his basis.
I'd say if you voted Republican in 2016, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. :cool:

[Gunny]

From what I understand, this is where Trump is going. If you are a vet or retired police/fire and have been diagnosed with PTSD, you are wide brushed as "dangerous."
My question is, would they use military records to come after you? How far will Trump bend over to cover all his basis.
I'd say if you voted Republican in 2016, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. :cool:Nice try. They aren't going to go after vets. If you have PTSD, you are already judged at what level by the military.

Anybody that voted against the Democratic party has MY thanks. You voted for a KNOWN criminal just to be a party faithful. Shows where your integrity sits.

[pete311]

This is not a conservative or liberal issue. Due process is always first. End of story. This is an example of the dangerous naivety of businessman Trump.

[Gunny]

This is not a conservative or liberal issue. Due process is always first. End of story. This is an example of the dangerous naivety of businessman Trump.I don't care much for the kneejerk reaction running on pure emotion period. It's juvenile and being spearheaded by juveniles. How far we have come as a country that our whiny ass brat children are dictating to us.

THAT is dangerous.

[pete311]

I don't care much for the kneejerk reaction running on pure emotion period. It's juvenile and being spearheaded by juveniles. How far we have come as a country that our whiny ass brat children are dictating to us.

THAT is dangerous.

No, that is inspiring rather than listening to some jaded crusty old dudes.

[aboutime]

From what I understand, this is where Trump is going. If you are a vet or retired police/fire and have been diagnosed with PTSD, you are wide brushed as "dangerous."
My question is, would they use military records to come after you? How far will Trump bend over to cover all his basis.
I'd say if you voted Republican in 2016, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. :cool:


Say whatever you want oh, angry old woman. Let's see how your theory works since you are a hypocrite who is telling us...you, the liberal, would enjoy the Socialism way. And oh, by the way. By telling us that. You are also admitting that everything YOU, and YOUR FAMILY owns...would soon become Public Property because there would be no opposition to your IGNORANCE.

[Gunny]

No, that is inspiring rather than listening to some jaded crusty old dudes.I disagree. One simple reason: these kids now are the most immature for their ages I've seen in my lifetime. If they were capable of anything but whining, that would be one thing. All they do is cry like the little brats they are for someone to come "fix it" for them.

And you want THAT running this country/world? And when we're gone and can't fix it for them? They are not mature enough nor responsible enough to make decisions for themselves, much less any and everyone else. I hate to think THAT is what I stuck my kid with. A bunch of losers that would rather give away a country than take a stand and fight for it.

Then again, maybe if they had to, they'd quit pissing their diapers about shit they can't change and work on what they can. And no, change for the sake of change is not fixing a damned thing. And if it's change for the worse, it just screws everyone over because of the stupidity of some.

Your tyranny of the minority has gone quite far enough, thanks.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I disagree. One simple reason: these kids now are the most immature for their ages I've seen in my lifetime. If they were capable of anything but whining, that would be one thing. All they do is cry like the little brats they are for someone to come "fix it" for them.

And you want THAT running this country/world? And when we're gone and can't fix it for them? They are not mature enough nor responsible enough to make decisions for themselves, much less any and everyone else. I hate to think THAT is what I stuck my kid with. A bunch of losers that would rather give away a country than take a stand and fight for it.

Then again, maybe if they had to, they'd quit pissing their diapers about shit they can't change and work on what they can. And no, change for the sake of change is not fixing a damned thing. And if it's change for the worse, it just screws everyone over because of the stupidity of some.

Your tyranny of the minority has gone quite far enough, thanks.
Have you noticed how Pete always drops a little on liner, and then gets a whole in depth response?

Have you EVER seen Pete give an IN DEPTH response?

No.

Why?

Have you ever felt like you're wasting your time with him?

[Kathianne]

Out of curiosity, why? Cops and firefighters get/have PTSD. I don't think in and of itself it's a factor worthy of being singled out.

More importantly, look at where this is going. I'd say of you voted for Obama you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Once we start, where does it end? Or, it has already started and look where it has led us thus far.

Hey, worry about due process or free speech after arrest, I mean we all know the government would easily give people 'that deserve it' BACK the rights and liberties they curtailed.

It's not just those you disagree with today that may do you harm.

Then again, I'm just a freaky idealist.

[CSM]

Let's just ignore or even discard the 14th Amendment because the President thinks it's a good idea. While we are at it, let's discard all those nasty no good amendments that interfere with our personal emotional knee jerk reactions...

Pence talks to God and God talks back is deemed mentally ill by the oh so qualified fem fatale on the view.... clearly he needs to be incarcerated for the good of the country.

Seriously, I find it most disturbing that folks just ignore the Constitution for the sake of the crisis du jour.

[Gunny]

Hey, worry about due process or free speech after arrest, I mean we all know the government would easily give people 'that deserve it' BACK the rights and liberties they curtailed.

It's not just those you disagree with today that may do you harm.

Then again, I'm just a freaky idealist.I know you are trying to be sarcastic (I think, anyway), but the sad truth is your rights are "curtailed" the second a cop confronts you. You have none. You either do exactly as they say or you're resisting arrest, disturbing the peace or some other lame catch-all used as an excuse to put you in cuffs and haul you off. You can be 100% in the right and it is still going to cost YOU to prove it.

This is just a "rose by any other name". Don't call it gun control, just end run it. Blame something else that amounts to the same thing. You're from IL so you know the deal there. They can't register guns so they register gun owners. You cannot possess a firearm nor ammunition nor purchase either without an IL Firearms Owner ID card. The second you are detained the first thing they do is grab your firearms.

Unless you're a gang member in Chicago with an unlicensed, unregistered stolen AK-47. That's different :rolleyes:

[Kathianne]

I know you are trying to be sarcastic (I think, anyway), but the sad truth is your rights are "curtailed" the second a cop confronts you. You have none. You either do exactly as they say or you're resisting arrest, disturbing the peace or some other lame catch-all used as an excuse to put you in cuffs and haul you off. You can be 100% in the right and it is still going to cost YOU to prove it.

This is just a "rose by any other name". Don't call it gun control, just end run it. Blame something else that amounts to the same thing. You're from IL so you know the deal there. They can't register guns so they register gun owners. You cannot possess a firearm nor ammunition nor purchase either without an IL Firearms Owner ID card. The second you are detained the first thing they do is grab your firearms.

Unless you're a gang member in Chicago with an unlicensed, unregistered stolen AK-47. That's different :rolleyes:

See http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?62110-Trump-quot-Take-the-guns-first-follow-due-process-second-quot&p=898379#post898379

There are bad cops, there are bad politicians. I don't support either.

[Gunny]

See http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?62110-Trump-quot-Take-the-guns-first-follow-due-process-second-quot&p=898379#post898379

There are bad cops, there are bad politicians. I don't support either.Hey crip ... if I have to type (or attempt a close facsimilie thereof), so do you. Linking me somewhere else. That requires thinking :laugh:

Support them or not, they exist and as in all things, it's naive to plan above the lowest common denominator. In this country, it only takes one incident to change our entire law(s) based on knee jerk reaction. Trump says "arrest first, then due process" and the left is out there as we sit here scheming on how they can run with it.

[Kathianne]

Hey crip ... if I have to type (or attempt a close facsimilie thereof), so do you. Linking me somewhere else. That requires thinking :laugh:

Support them or not, they exist and as in all things, it's naive to plan above the lowest common denominator. In this country, it only takes one incident to change our entire law(s) based on knee jerk reaction. Trump says "arrest first, then due process" and the left is out there as we sit here scheming on how they can run with it.

Hey, we all say what we say, sometimes we repent after. In any case, I find the race to the bottom regarding the Constitution, education, or just about anything not a good venue to go to.

Seems I'm not alone: https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/01/trump-day-respect-2nd-amendment/

This morning even Trump woke a bit.

[Kathianne]

Gotta love when his defenders say, "Well yeah, he said it, we heard it. I don't think he meant that..." Don't believe your lyin' eyes or ears!:laugh:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/republicans-gobsmacked-by-trumps-gun-control-comments/article/2011767

No mind, everything will resume as planned, his supporters agree with all and those that oppose him on non-philosophical reasons won't ever support him. It does make much of his state-of-the-union and this latest kerfuffle sort of weird.

[Gunny]

Hey, we all say what we say, sometimes we repent after. In any case, I find the race to the bottom regarding the Constitution, education, or just about anything not a good venue to go to.

Seems I'm not alone: https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/01/trump-day-respect-2nd-amendment/

This morning even Trump woke a bit.He'd better back up. He can't afford to lose the NRA's votes; whether or not he thinks he he is beholden to them. The author is correct. He doesn't have a lot of votes to spare. And, this could impact mid terms. He need to STHU.

[Black Diamond]

He'd better back up. He can't afford to lose the NRA's votes; whether or not he thinks he he is beholden to them. The author is correct. He doesn't have a lot of votes to spare. And, this could impact mid terms. He need to STHU.
Why? His mouth got him where he is. And the midterms are an eternity away. No one will be talking about Florida in November. They'll be talking about something else.

[Elessar]

No, that is inspiring rather than listening to some jaded crusty old dudes.

You put your ass on the line some time with us 'crusty old dudes' then you have
a basis to try and put us down.

Until then, you are a worthless liberal acting tough because he has a keyboard.

Not at all impressive.

[Black Diamond]

You put your ass on the line some time with us 'crusty old dudes' then you have
a basis to try and put us down.

Until then, you are a worthless liberal acting tough because he has a keyboard.

Not at all impressive.
He prefers the younger Dudes.

[Kathianne]

Why? His mouth got him where he is. And the midterms are an eternity away. No one will be talking about Florida in November. They'll be talking about something else.

Here's where it's crazy; as I said before he won't change the minds of any of his supporters, they just don't care if he means what he says, as long as he blasts away. They will buy that he means what they want, but is playing mind games with the opposition. To them, he's the ultimate Machiavelli.

Those that hate him because he's a 'R' and so goofy, well he could give them whatever and they'd still be at 'resist' and 'impeach.'

What is missing is any attempt to appeal to those that opposed him on the issues and style. He keeps reinforcing that he's not conservative or even aware of what the Constitution says or means at all and he's beyond the goof. His supporters actually think that's a plus, even more than sticking anything to the 'resist and impeach' folks.

[Black Diamond]

Here's where it's crazy; as I said before he won't change the minds of any of his supporters, they just don't care if he means what he says, as long as he blasts away. They will buy that he means what they want, but is playing mind games with the opposition. To them, he's the ultimate Machiavelli.

Those that hate him because he's a 'R' and so goofy, well he could give them whatever and they'd still be at 'resist' and 'impeach.'

What is missing is any attempt to appeal to those that opposed him on the issues and style. He keeps reinforcing that he's not conservative or even aware of what the Constitution says or means at all and he's beyond the goof. His supporters actually think that's a plus, even more than sticking anything to the 'resist and impeach' folks.
He will change his tune or pick some other issue and get people fired up. Took 3 seconds to fire the whole nation up about NFL kneelers. Everyone had picked a side. There was no one on the fence. If he can make an election about pro America vs anti America...

His style has worked for him. Why should he change it ? Goes to your point about his supporters.

[Kathianne]

What I've been saying: https://www.redstate.com/absentee/2018/03/01/sorry-trumpists-but-we-didnt-make-trump-attack-guns-and-gun-owners-he-chose-to/


When Donald Trump says what he really thinks, all kinds of crazy things happen.First, you can be certain that what he really thinks is going to be controversial. It will. it’s not like he’s going to offer his genuine, unvarnished thoughts and everyone is going to be like “oh sure, well no, yeah that makes perfect sense.” No, it’s going to be hair-pulling time.

Take his genuine unvarnished thoughts on gun control (I say totally casually as if you didn’t know this was going there). He said yesterday that the age to be able purchase rifles should be raised to 21, he said that due process was no big deal if it was an impediment to taking away guns (https://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2018/02/28/trump-gun-betrayal-take-guns-first/), and he said that the failure of Congress to enact these ideas that he sees as obvious and reasonable is because they are “afraid” of the NRA (https://www.redstate.com/absentee/2018/02/28/betrayed-gun-meeting-trump-says-republicans-afraid-nra-video/).

After he said that, everything of course exploded. The media/left flirted with “maybe he has a great idea and will do it” while also playing “hey that’s not what you voted for is it, dumb Republican hicks?” Both intolerably annoying.

People on the right who have opposed Trump all along and who are sometimes lazily and pejoratively referred to as “nevertrump” said that this shows they were right all along and that he has always been a betrayer and DOOOOOOOM. (If you’re score-keeping: Nobody was always right all along, yes Trump is a proven betrayer, but no this probably won’t be dooooom.)

​As for Trump loyalists… well they only had a few possible routes to take. They could say “he doesn’t really mean it”, they could say “he has a point you know”, or they could say “hmm? Gun meeting? No, I didn’t hear about that, hey have you seen Black Panther?”I saw a lot of ” he didn’t mean it” yesterday. The notion here is that Trump just talks out of his ass and it doesn’t matter if he says the most heinously anti-gun thing ever and gives both aid and comfort to the left on gun control and takes a shot at the NRA right when they are under seige, essentially abandoning them to the wolves, because well gosh you guys, he just says stuff sometimes, take a chill pill and be cool.

It’s true, a lot of the crazy stuff he says never makes it to policy. That’s why I say the prophecies of DOOOOOOM are off the mark. But it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think it should. It doesn’t mean he didn’t mean it. It doesn’t mean he wouldn’t do it if he weren’t being constrained by the position he’s in. It just means that a lot of it never makes it to policy (thank God.)

But the fact that it often doesn’t become law is no reason to be sanguine about it. I really can’t even comprehend that thinking. The anti-gun rhetoric he spewed yesterday requires pushback. It would require it (and would get it) if any Democrat said that, be they an important member of congress or an anonymous person on Twitter. Conservatives never let the slightest slight againt guns go. To think that we should just smile and say “who else but Trumpmire” is an absolutely riduculous expectation.

Yet that is exactly the expectation of the Trumpian right. They would rather, in the wake of his comments, complain about people complaining about it. Trump attacks guns, so Trumpies attack … pro-gun conservatives who object? Makes perfect sense, right?

Of course it doesn’t. Nobody made Trump say or think these things. He did it all by himself. It’s not even the first time (https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2018/02/22/president-trumps-gun-control-ideas-bad-dont-think-even-believes/). Reacting is natural. Attacking the people reacting seems totally dumb.

But that’s what happened.

If your first instinct when Trump attacks the second amendment, due process, and the NRA in a single meeting is to attack the people who object to his doing so, you may have your priorities twisted.

But this twisting is not all that will happen, though. There will inevitably be (and may already be) #MAGA Tweets and posts that say “he has a point.” They’ll say the NRA *is* too influential or that the GOP *is* afraid of the org. They will say it as if it is a natural evolution of their hate for the deep state. They will say things like “I’ve always opposed lobbyists, even this one”. But none of that will be the reason. The reason will be to retroactively correct themselves to be on the same page Trump is on, whatever page it happens to be that day.

Will Trump get his anti-NRA, gun confiscation will enacted? Well he sure looks like he’s going through with his spontaneous utterance on bump stocks, even though we are all supposed to pretend his spontaneous utterances are just “Trump being Trump.” We’ll see where the rest goes.

In the meantime, if you actually do support the Second Amendment and your rights protected by it, it’s your responsibility to freak out about what Trump said. Do that. Freak out.

He and his administration need to know that it freaks you out and is not okay. This should be obvious. The worst possible thing you can do is follow the advice of those tamed and broken members of the conservative media telling you to just nod and smile. They’ll do or write anything to maintain that one precious thing that keeps them warm: their absolute belief that they are morally superior to anyone who differs from them on Trump.

Don’t be that. Be a person who says “I believe in this, and when you attack it, I will stand against you, no matter who you are.” That’s American.



BD is right, this will blow over, another 'crisis of philosophy' will occur and likewise be ignored.

The very fact that those most in support of Trump truly save their venom for those who find and always found that his core beliefs are the antithesis of conservatism this is mindboggling to me. I don't get it, considering those folks for the most part have pretty much withdrawn from political arguments and looking for anything or anyone that will play on those ideas that he's put forth that make sense, but also build on the moral grounds and principles of what the Constitution has meant. They aren't part of the resist and impeach movement, they are just watching the trainwreck of principles, now that the right has joined the left.

[Black Diamond]

What I've been saying: https://www.redstate.com/absentee/2018/03/01/sorry-trumpists-but-we-didnt-make-trump-attack-guns-and-gun-owners-he-chose-to/



BD is right, this will blow over, another 'crisis of philosophy' will occur and likewise be ignored.

The very fact that those most in support of Trump truly save their venom for those who find and always found that his core beliefs are the antithesis of conservatism this is mindboggling to me. I don't get it, considering those folks for the most part have pretty much withdrawn from political arguments and looking for anything or anyone that will play on those ideas that he's put forth that make sense, but also build on the moral grounds and principles of what the Constitution has meant. They aren't part of the resist and impeach movement, they are just watching the trainwreck of principles, now that the right has joined the left.
How do you feel about Medicare part D and farm subsidies? FJ had a point.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Here's where it's crazy; as I said before he won't change the minds of any of his supporters, they just don't care if he means what he says, as long as he blasts away. They will buy that he means what they want, but is playing mind games with the opposition. To them, he's the ultimate Machiavelli.

Those that hate him because he's a 'R' and so goofy, well he could give them whatever and they'd still be at 'resist' and 'impeach.'

What is missing is any attempt to appeal to those that opposed him on the issues and style. He keeps reinforcing that he's not conservative or even aware of what the Constitution says or means at all and he's beyond the goof. His supporters actually think that's a plus, even more than sticking anything to the 'resist and impeach' folks.

I have never and will never say that Trump is perfect. Those of us that know and hate dem party for the unpatriotic and totally corrupt, filthy beast it is have no other choice..
No other choice because the Republican leaders are not brave enough to do even a tenth of what Trump has done.--and Trump hasnt done nearly enough , IMHO.
We should have had major action to remove countless obamites and dem corrupt officials that infest the Federal government.
Instead we have a damn circus controlled by dem party and the liberal/socialist media.
Trump should have had hundreds of the vermin arrested and jailed by now, IMHO..
AND THAT INCLUDES MANY/MOST OF THE DEM PARTY'S TOP LEADERS!!!
Many of which should be judged in a court of law and face firing squads for their treason...-TYR

[LongTermGuy]

Gotta love when his defenders say, "Well yeah, he said it, we heard it. I don't think he meant that..." Don't believe your lyin' eyes or ears!:laugh:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/republicans-gobsmacked-by-trumps-gun-control-comments/article/2011767

No mind, everything will resume as planned, his supporters agree with all and those that oppose him on non-philosophical reasons won't ever support him. It does make much of his state-of-the-union and this latest kerfuffle sort of weird.


**Gotta love how ..to this day his haters STILL DONT GET IT:laugh:....he is talking... throwing ideas around > `Intentionally` < ...working both sides...working emotions in a "discussion" ...The man has been with "Americans" (who voted for Trump) over a year...has done well and hasn't hurt "Americans" yet....Trump knows how to "work" everybody....and...in the end..everything works out fine....unless something drastic changes (in writing... new law not liked by Americans...)...stay calm...:salute:


:cool:

[Kathianne]

How do you feel about Medicare part D and farm subsidies? FJ had a point.

FJ had many good points on why he found Trump unacceptable, I agreed at the time, still do. Why do you think I brought up the SOTU address? I enjoyed watching the Dems squirm as he proposed time and again so many of their proposals. The bottom line though are those proposals are wrong from the get go, if one believes in limited government. Most don't. Not on the right, not on the left-they just disagree with where the government should spend.

At this point in time, I see no purpose to harp on these things, it only alienates many folks that I like, though was surprised to find out after a decade plus, that there were so many issues we did disagree agree with regarding politics. Oh well, luckily I've never chosen family or friends on political ideological grounds. I'm not one to get into arguments at a get together, though I've been known to roll my eyes or lol at some things said.

During the election, moreso the primaries, I went into great details on issues and why I couldn't vote for Trump, nor Hillary. November mooted the need to focus on those for me. I've not changed my mind, though that doesn't stand in the way of my being happy for things I'm in favor of that have come to pass. Nor has it convinced me to jump on everything he does or says that is 'way out there.'

The only reason I chose to participate in this thread probably has to do with the very fact that I was reading posts that reflected so much of the media, (alternative or not), coverage and responses to the gun issues. It so reminds me of when the Dreamers showed up in Trump's office early in the primaries and he was all agog by them-then the response of those border hawks and he turned on a dime. We'll see the same with this, but there will be the next thing.

None of it will make a difference in anyone's stands from where they've been.

I truly don't know if folks like FJ, hjmick, myself could ever have been 'brought into the fold' with Trump, but he's never tried to normalize any of his behaviors, so that too is a moot point.

[Black Diamond]

FJ had many good points on why he found Trump unacceptable, I agreed at the time, still do. Why do you think I brought up the SOTU address? I enjoyed watching the Dems squirm as he proposed time and again so many of their proposals. The bottom line though are those proposals are wrong from the get go, if one believes in limited government. Most don't. Not on the right, not on the left-they just disagree with where the government should spend.

At this point in time, I see no purpose to harp on these things, it only alienates many folks that I like, though was surprised to find out after a decade plus, that there were so many issues we did disagree agree with regarding politics. Oh well, luckily I've never chosen family or friends on political ideological grounds. I'm not one to get into arguments at a get together, though I've been known to roll my eyes or lol at some things said.

During the election, moreso the primaries, I went into great details on issues and why I couldn't vote for Trump, nor Hillary. November mooted the need to focus on those for me. I've not changed my mind, though that doesn't stand in the way of my being happy for things I'm in favor of that have come to pass. Nor has it convinced me to jump on everything he does or says that is 'way out there.'

The only reason I chose to participate in this thread probably has to do with the very fact that I was reading posts that reflected so much of the media, (alternative or not), coverage and responses to the gun issues. It so reminds me of when the Dreamers showed up in Trump's office early in the primaries and he was all agog by them-then the response of those border hawks and he turned on a dime. We'll see the same with this, but there will be the next thing.

None of it will make a difference in anyone's stands from where they've been.

I truly don't know if folks like FJ, hjmick, myself could ever have been 'brought into the fold' with Trump, but he's never tried to normalize any of his behaviors, so that too is a moot point.
FJs point was conservatism has never been tried. Had nothing to do with finding trump unacceptable.

[Kathianne]

I have never and will never say that Trump is perfect. Those of us that know and hate dem party for the unpatriotic and totally corrupt, filthy beast it is have no other choice..
No other choice because the Republican leaders are not brave enough to do even a tenth of what Trump has done.--and Trump hasnt done nearly enough , IMHO.
We should have had major action to remove countless obamites and dem corrupt officials that infest the Federal government.
Instead we have a damn circus controlled by dem party and the liberal/socialist media.
Trump should have had hundreds of the vermin arrested and jailed by now, IMHO..
AND THAT INCLUDES MANY/MOST OF THE DEM PARTY'S TOP LEADERS!!!
Many of which should be judged in a court of law and face firing squads for their treason...-TYR

Very few here have said that Trump is perfect, just the best this lowly country has to offer. Some fault him on tweets, some for diarrhea of the mouth, and then there's the fact that he isn't jailing those who don't agree with him.

At least so far today, everyone has the right to their opinions. ;)

[Kathianne]

FJs point was conservatism has never been tried. Had nothing to do with finding trump unacceptable.

:laugh2: Then you missed a few of his posts.

There's reasons he left, which I can understand. I have found it's best to just stfu when my opinions start alienating those that I like for different reasons than their political opinions.

You may have missed some that just started hating on those who disagreed with them, I pretty much just scroll past those folks. Luckily there's few that are of that ilk.

[Black Diamond]

:laugh2: Then you missed a few of his posts.

There's reasons he left, which I can understand. I have found it's best to just stfu when my opinions start alienating those that I like for different reasons than their political opinions.

You may have missed some that just started hating on those who disagreed with them, I pretty much just scroll past those folks. Luckily there's few that are of that ilk.
I didn't miss his posts. I know he voted third party. I also know he liked to poke the bear. I usually had good convos with him. In that particular conversation, though, he said conservatism has never been tried.

[Gunny]

Why? His mouth got him where he is. And the midterms are an eternity away. No one will be talking about Florida in November. They'll be talking about something else.Because he is wrong on this issue. He is appeasing squalling brats and frothing-at-the-mouth lefties with knee jerk reactions.

I expected him to take a deal on DACA. Not the budget, and definitely not the Second Amendment. The latter is a deal-breaker with me. So, he better rethink his stance. Want to tighten up on obvious fruitloops and the laws already in place to purchase and posses firearms? Fine. Want to step on the Second Amendment, and the 5th for that matter, more than it already is walked all over and used for TP? Nope. Not an inch.

[Kathianne]

I didn't miss his posts. I know he voted third party. I also know he liked to poke the bear. I usually had good convos with him. In that particular conversation, though, he said conservatism has never been tried.

Yes, I remember that, though I'm not going to rehash that or the whole of the very basic disagreements that many of us have regarding 'conservatism.' I've no doubt that those who are in agreement here, care about the country.

FJ and I agreed on many things, still we disagreed on more than a few too. He may well be more of a libertarian than I am, though I am more than most. ;)

The one thing I agree with Reagan on was the truth of the worst words to hear, "I'm from the government and am here to help..."

I really believe the federal government needs strong restraints, that is where I differ from most.

[Kathianne]

Because he is wrong on this issue. He is appeasing squalling brats and frothing-at-the-mouth lefties with knee jerk reactions.

I expected him to take a deal on DACA. Not the budget, and definitely not the Second Amendment. The latter is a deal-breaker with me. So, he better rethink his stance. Want to tighten up on obvious fruitloops and the laws already in place to purchase and posses firearms? Fine. Want to step on the Second Amendment, and the 5th for that matter, more than it already is walked all over and used for TP? Nope. Not an inch.

He's already walking it back and my guess is there won't be an 'acceptable' challenge to him in 2020 for those that voted for him in 2016. Any challengers for the primary would be 'haters' and no one from the 'D' would be acceptable. There will be no 'deal breakers' that would change minds, imo.

[Black Diamond]

Because he is wrong on this issue. He is appeasing squalling brats and frothing-at-the-mouth lefties with knee jerk reactions.

I expected him to take a deal on DACA. Not the budget, and definitely not the Second Amendment. The latter is a deal-breaker with me. So, he better rethink his stance. Want to tighten up on obvious fruitloops and the laws already in place to purchase and posses firearms? Fine. Want to step on the Second Amendment, and the 5th for that matter, more than it already is walked all over and used for TP? Nope. Not an inch.
In six months, very few people will care what he said yesterday.

[Kathianne]

Hopefully this will be my last post on the thread, I just came across the link. The writer is not a Trump supporter, though he often points out the nonsense from the media regarding jumping on all things that can be seen as 'anti-Trump,' especially when there's no facts there or what was said could be easily construed as being good for the country.

The only reason I'm linking is for this: https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/01/another-leak-kushners-business-got-500-million-loans-met-banks-white-house/


...As I say, all of this would be instantly apparent to Republicans if Chelsea Clinton were the beneficiary instead of Jared Kushner. Trump himself would be doing entire “Crooked Hillary” riffs about it on Twitter, and rightly so...

With all the talk of 'the swamp' and the calls for investigations-rightly in my opinion-regarding Clintons possible crimes and the Foundations financial shenanigans, it is stunning the hypocrisy regarding nepotism and questionable financials on many levels of Trump's family and election staff from the right.

Yes, I'm aware of the delays in getting approvals on nominees and such for the administration, as well as their own failure to submit names and do the necessary vetting of those they are putting forth.

[Black Diamond]

Should Bobby Kennedy not have been attorney general?

[Kathianne]

Should Bobby Kennedy not have been attorney general?


Many at the time thought he shouldn't, again the reeks of nepotism. He did have experience in conducting investigations and had been in the Justice Department and served on Senate inquiries.

I started kindergarten the year JFK was elected, so really can't speak with authority on it. I will say though, I don't like when relatives are serving someone elected, especially when there's no experience or one has to stretch to find any qualifications. Same holds true for local and state officials.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Rush Limbaugh is having a real hard time explaining Trump's recent comments about gun control, and I have to admit, after further review of this, I'm a little more than just unsettled about it myself, when Trump accuses republican senators of being "afraid of the NRA," and yes he did say grab the guns first and then go through the due process, those are the types of comments I WON'T forget, and like Gunny, they're deal breakers for me. Apparently there has been some "walking back" of comments on Trump's twitter this morning.

Rush thinks he might be playing the democrats again exactly like he did on immigration reform. Give them the opportunity to pass a bill and then when it doesn't, blame the democrats. Rush says the democrats don't want more gun control because then they couldn't use it to further their agenda, which is total gun confiscation.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Very few here have said that Trump is perfect, just the best this lowly country has to offer. Some fault him on tweets, some for diarrhea of the mouth, and then there's the fact that he isn't jailing those who don't agree with him.

At least so far today, everyone has the right to their opinions. ;)



and then there's the fact that he isn't jailing those who don't agree with him.

My comment neither stated or implied jailings for mere political disagreements...
It clearly stated -- punishment for treason----- after being found guilty in a court of law.

I have no clue why you made that statement as I did not and would not suggest any such action.
I do know that the dem party is a corrupt sold out , anti-american entity under its current leadership and agenda.
And when compared to any of its leaders, Trump is a godsend.
I fail to see why you made that comment when replying directly to my previous post.
However, I will say this-- many of the dem leaders should be tried in court for their corruption and treason, IMHO.
You have every right to disagree with my personal opinion but no true moral right to answer in reply to a statement that I never made, IMHO. -Tyr

[Kathianne]

My comment neither stated or implied jailings for mere political disagreements...
It clearly stated -- punishment for treason----- after being found guilty in a court of law.

I have no clue why you made that statement as I did not and would not suggest any such action.
I do know that the dem party is a corrupt sold out , anti-american entity under its current leadership and agenda.
And when compared to any of its leaders, Trump is a godsend.
I fail to see why you made that comment when replying directly to my previous post.
However, I will say this-- many of the dem leaders should be tried in court for their corruption and treason, IMHO.
You have every right to disagree with my personal opinion but no true moral right to answer in reply to a statement that I never made, IMHO. -Tyr

I'm sorry it came off like that, it wasn't what I meant. I was merely attempting to show the reasons some find Trump 'not perfect,' but more than acceptable for many other reasons. I didn't mean to use your post out of context. I apologize.

[Kathianne]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11271&stc=1

Knowledge is a powerful thing.

[Abbey Marie]

Some thoughts...

If I were a child, or an alien dropped down to Earth, and only knew about Trump from his, let's say, detractors, I would wonder: How can it be that he is simultaneously a dumb *ss, crazy, and an evil genius? Hmm.

Since limited government/Conservatism came up, and I don't think I ever comment on it, here's my take:

There are many versions of Conservatism, of which believing in limited gov't is a substantial one. We all have those things that mean most to us, and whatever anyone else swears is "real Conservatism", we feel we are the real deal. Speaking for only myself, while limited gov't may be a coveted state of the union, we are so very far from it that we need to go through some tough transitions first. We are mired in liberal policies and departments that need to be excised. But in carefully crafted ways. These policies crept in, and unfortunately they need to somewhat slowly creep back out. Witness the difficulty just in unwinding Obamacare.

Enter Trump. A man who either cannot or just refuses to be pigeon-holed, at a time when this nation is polarized on a level perhaps not seen since the Civil War. The writer from (I think) RedState said Trump's words would be controversial. Well, duh.

[Kathianne]

Some thoughts...

If I were a child, or an alien dropped down to Earth, and only knew about Trump from his, let's say, detractors, I would wonder: How can it be that he is simultaneously a dumb *ss and an evil genius? Hmm.

Since limited government/Conservatism came up, and I don't think I ever comment on it, here's my take:

There are many versions of Conservatism, of which limited gov't is a substantial one. We all have those things that mean most to us, and whatever anyone else swears is "real Conservatism", we feel we are the real deal.

Speaking for only myself, while limited gov't may be a coveted state of the union, we are so very far from it that we need to go through some tough transitions first. We are mired in liberal policies that need to be excised. But in carefully crafted ways. These policies crept in, and unfortunately they need to somewhat slowly creep back out. Witness the difficulty just in unwinding Obamacare.

Enter Trump. A man who either cannot or just refuses to be pigeon-holed, at a time when this nation is polarized n a level perhaps not seen since the Civil War.


I actually agree with your take, as representative of many that count themselves as conservative.

I guess where we, not you and I, rather within the 'community of conservatives' are differing is in what we find acceptable as alternatives to the 'left.' While I tend to see it as philosophical, many instead seem to see that Trump is a practical reaction to Obama and that ilk. I just don't see taking a 'fight fire with fire,' regarding the worst of the tendencies being correct. I'm making a hash of this, but it's along the lines of my thinking. I see a commonality of the 'right' and 'left' that I never saw earlier, that is not what I can align with.

[pete311]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11271&stc=1

Knowledge is a powerful thing.

Memes are not knowledge and if we boil the debate into a meme then the human race is completely fucked.

[Kathianne]

Memes are not knowledge and if we boil the debate into a meme then the human race is completely fucked.

I am not of the mind to explain or debate with those who've closed their minds for one or many reasons, I just found it relevant to the discussion, instigated by President Trump's comments.

[Abbey Marie]

Memes are not knowledge and if we boil the debate into a meme then the human race is completely fucked.


Waaay too dramatic a take, Pete. And as memes go, this one is freaking spot-on.

[Black Diamond]

Memes are not knowledge and if we boil the debate into a meme then the human race is completely fucked.
Yeah. Let's go with CNN instead.

[pete311]

Waaay too dramatic a take, Pete. And as memes go, this one is freaking spot-on.

It's not dramatic when you guys drop memes on really complicated issues that could fill books like it's the show stopper. It's not, it's juvenile and amateurish outside of a joke thread. The meme allows you to stop thinking and pat yourself on the back.

[pete311]

Yeah. Let's go with CNN instead.

I would not reply on it, but god speed to you.

[Black Diamond]

What difference does it make if you use memes, articles, or videos to get your point across? Either they make good points or they don't.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Memes are not knowledge and if we boil the debate into a meme then the human race is completely fucked.
Demonizing replies because you can't refute the message again, Pete?

Text book "Rules For Radicals."

You people earn being called fascists.

[aboutime]

The best thing to remember about the President is....he will never say exactly what everybody thinks, or demands he should say. I believe his motto...secretly....is "Keep 'em guessing!"

Just like he has told everyone about military matters. Never announce your real plans to anyone who wants to destroy you. As he has said about THE FAKE NEWS.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

In a more blunt and provoking fashion, this *MEME* is exactly the point Kathy's *MEME* was eluding to...

https://image.ibb.co/ez68cc/6e81750cf3c55221ab621a131dd200ff.jpg

That's NOT made up... it HAPPENED... and as the old saying goes, "if you don't learn from history, you're bound to repeat it," and no one in their right mind wants to allow that sort of history to repeat itself.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

The best thing to remember about the President is....he will never say exactly what everybody thinks, or demands he should say. I believe his motto...secretly....is "Keep 'em guessing!"

Just like he has told everyone about military matters. Never announce your real plans to anyone who wants to destroy you. As he has said about THE FAKE NEWS.
I think he's playing the democrats, just like he did on immigration. Give them MORE than they even want, and dare them to follow through. Well, they had no desire to give Trump anything on immigration, and they don't want to give him anything on gun control either, even if he sounds like he'll go way over the line for them, he knows they'll blink. Dems don't want more gun control, not on Trump's watch. They don't want him to get the win and the credit for it. They want another mass shooting, or two, or three, so they can rant and rave and froth at the mouth and hope it helps them at the ballot box. BUT, when they don't follow through, Trump can say... "see, the dems don't want gun control, I tried to give them more than they wanted and they backed out."

RULES FOR RADICALS: "...never let a good crisis go to waste."

[Black Diamond]

I think he's playing the democrats, just like he did on immigration. Give them MORE than they even want, and see if they follow through. Well, they had desire to give Trump anything on immigration, and they don't want to give him anything on gun control either, even if he sounds like he'll go way over the line for them, he knows they'll blink. Dems don't want more gun control, not on Trump's watch. They don't want him to get the win and the credit for it. They want another mass shooting, or two, or three, so they can rant and rave and froth at the mouth and hope it helps them at the ballot box. BUT, when they don't follow through, Trump can say... "see, the dems don't want gun control, I tried to give them more than they wanted and they backed out."

RULES FOR RADICALS: "...never let a good crisis go to waste."
Well we can all have the audacity of Hope that you're right.

[aboutime]

Well we can all have the audacity of Hope that you're right.

The best way to expose all of those Obama, and Clinton fans is to ask them: "WHAT IS YOUR HOPE? And, "WHAT IS THE CHANGE YOU GOT FROM OBAMA IN EIGHT YEARS?"
If you ask them to explain....they are Lost.

[Abbey Marie]

It's not dramatic when you guys drop memes on really complicated issues that could fill books like it's the show stopper. It's not, it's juvenile and amateurish outside of a joke thread. The meme allows you to stop thinking and pat yourself on the back.

Even the most complicated issues have foundational truths. If we are speaking Constitutionallly, and with gun issues we are, that meme illustrates beautifully the reason why our Founders made the right to bear arms the 2nd Amendment. Speak to someone raised in a dictatorship or Communist country about the difficulty of resisting their government without adequate firepower. It is incredibly naive to think that it could never come to that here.

[aboutime]

Suppose tomorrow. The Federal government announced they were coming to every citizen's home to take some of your posessions to give, and share with other Americans who don't have as much as you?
Would you welcome them into your home, and just hand them your checkbook, credit cards, let them take all of the frozen food from your freezer, take the keys to your car, your televisions, and all of your collections you may have...just to do the FAIR, EQUITABLE Socialist thing of spreading YOUR wealth to others???

UNTIL...you stopped them at the door with your Handgun, or Rifle? Which is why the Founding Fathers wanted the 2ND Amendment....to ward off, and stop Governments that get out of control?

[Gunny]

Memes are not knowledge and if we boil the debate into a meme then the human race is completely fucked.They're knowledge if they are 100% correct. As in this case.

[Black Diamond]

They're knowledge if they are 100% correct. As in this case.
Sometimes memes say more than a four page article.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Sometimes memes say more than a four page article.
Exactly... just as the old saying goes... "a picture is worth a thousand words."

[aboutime]

Now the use of memes is becoming a target, coming from the ONE LINE kiddie who complains about everything because HE IS A MEME.

meme
mēm/Submit
noun
an element of a culture or system of behavior that may be considered to be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, especially imitation.
a humorous image, video, piece of text, etc., that is copied (often with slight variations) and spread rapidly by Internet users.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

i'm sorry it came off like that, it wasn't what i meant. I was merely attempting to show the reasons some find trump 'not perfect,' but more than acceptable for many other reasons. I didn't mean to use your post out of context. I apologize.

no apology necessary. Context has now been provided and the nature of posting internet replies often leads to misunderstandings.
I am guilty of such myself, far too often my friend..-tyr

[LongTermGuy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/949983295453974529/ZYhQdKoM_bigger.jpgSebastian Gorka DrG‏Verified account @SebGorka (https://twitter.com/SebGorka) 16h16 hours ag (https://twitter.com/SebGorka/status/969237663374102528)o



Everyone who voted for @realDonaldTrump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump) and who supports him:Just REMEMBER:

Everyday the Left, the #FAKENEWS (https://twitter.com/hashtag/FAKENEWS?src=hash) Media, and "fake Conservative" NeverTrumpers wake up and want to split us from @POTUS (https://twitter.com/POTUS).Their goal is to divide the Right. He will not hurt your 2A Rights.Have faith.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXNsg_gWkAIy54J.jpg

[darin]

Liberals: Trump is a NAZI!!!

Also Liberals: TRUMP! Please confiscate all firearms and prevent words we dont like!

[Abbey Marie]

Liberals: Trump is a NAZI!!!

Also Liberals: TRUMP! Please confiscate all firearms and prevent words we dont like!

^^This^^

[Black Diamond]

Because he is wrong on this issue. He is appeasing squalling brats and frothing-at-the-mouth lefties with knee jerk reactions.

I expected him to take a deal on DACA. Not the budget, and definitely not the Second Amendment. The latter is a deal-breaker with me. So, he better rethink his stance. Want to tighten up on obvious fruitloops and the laws already in place to purchase and posses firearms? Fine. Want to step on the Second Amendment, and the 5th for that matter, more than it already is walked all over and used for TP? Nope. Not an inch.
My point wasn't that he should say it. It's that he had (and has) no incentive not to. We need the NRA to protect us from the gun grabbers. As far as the mentally ill, they used to be locked up in state hospitals. Now they have "rights". Which Is why we have the mass shootings.

[Gunny]

My point wasn't that he should say it. It's that he had (and has) no incentive not to. We need the NRA to protect us from the gun grabbers. As far as the mentally ill, they used to be locked up in state hospitals. Now they have "rights". Which Is why we have the mass shootings.Yeah, I remember the State Hospitals. Mostly because one was pretty nearby where I grew up and we'd always accuse the other guys (in Jr Hi and HS) of picking up chicks there :laugh:

Don't know why I'm laughing. Ex Father in law was the head guy at one in NC and my ex grew up on the grounds. Should have left her there. And guess where she is NOW? Freakin psycho.

The base problem is political correctness. No one will call crazy people crazy. You can't blame THEM for being a few bricks shy of a load. It doesn't really matter WHY they're crazy. Just that they are.

But these leftwing judges refuse to call them that. Might offend them. So to spare some whacko's feelings, he gets to run free without a record.

Still, crazy people are going to get firearms. That's just a fact. No law is going to stop them. The law only affects the law-abiding. "Gee, I guess I won't go shoot up the school today because I'd have to lie on the application".:rolleyes: