National Donald Trump: "I’ll Sign National Reciprocity if It Reaches My Desk"

[EHJ]

Donald Trump: I'll Sign National Reciprocity if It Reaches My Desk

President Donald Trump said he would sign national reciprocity legislation for concealed carry if it reaches his desk.

www.breitbart.com

Read More

 

[Member 5605]

Nothing but a political carrot.

 

[HB of CJ]

I suppose it also depends upon how the exact gun training language will come out. Will some states have to up their training? Will other states not have too? The right of liberty, (travel) is part of our heritage; so is the right to keep and bear arms.

Somehow my feelings are Trump MAY horse trade AWAY this National Reciprocity if it suits him.

Just me.

 

[Jonnyuma]

Flip the House and it will happen.

 

[Kruel J]

Executive Order or it won't happen. He COULD do it, but he won't. Nothing in it for him.

 

[44Brent]

Executive Order or it won't happen. He COULD do it, but he won't. Nothing in it for him.

Executive order issued to WHOM? Presidents can order agencies under them to take certain actions, but they have no authority to force states to do anything. Show me the part of the constitution that gives presidents the authority to issue orders to state governments.

As a practical matter, I don't see any evidence that even the people who report directly to him follow his orders. Have you seen the Attorney General or Secretary of Defense follow any of his orders?

One time that an agency under him DID follow was an order was when the BATFE made bump stocks illegal to own.

-----------------
On the other hand, promises from Trump to sign bills have no meaning because he has shown that he will sign ALL bills that come to him. I don't believe there is a single bill that he has vetoed.

 

[Kruel J]

Executive order issued to WHOM? Presidents can order agencies under them to take certain actions, but they have no authority to force states to do anything. Show me the part of the constitution that gives presidents the authority to issue orders to state governments.

As a practical matter, I don't see any evidence that even the people who report directly to him follow his orders. Have you seen the Attorney General or Secretary of Defense follow any of his orders?

-----------------
On the other hand, promises from Trump to sign bills have no meaning because he has shown that he will sign ALL bills that come to him. I don't believe there is a single bill that he has vetoed.

You are correct sir. I posted without really thinking about it. I'd like to see him be more proactive towards our 2A rights, I guess that's where I was going.

 

[44Brent]

Here's some things Trump could do that are pretty much symbolic: possibly order government employees in federally owned properties such as parks and military bases to recognize state carry licenses, although Bob Ferguson would immediately sue and get an injunction from one of his friendly judges in the 9th Circuit Court.

 

[CountryGent]

This would have been a hell of a lot more helpful in the first two years of his administration when the bill made it out of the House. Now it is too little, too late, and ain't going to happen.

 

[CountryGent]

Since Executive Orders were raised, there is one thing he could have done with a single stroke of the pen, without getting legislation through the thoroughly dysfunctional and incompetent Congress: resend the 1989 Bush, Sr. EO banning the importation of so called "assault weapons". But he hasn't and won't, of course. (Neither did any of his predecessors, for that matter.)

 

[Andy54Hawken]

As much as I like the idea of National Reciprocity...
I do wonder if that would also mean some sort of national standard one would have to meet...?
My issue with standards is , Just who do you think you are telling me , what my standards should be and why are yours better than mine....?

Also President Trump saying this now....this close to the election , just seems like a play for votes , in my mind.
Andy

 

[CountryGent]

Some years back I read the reciprocity bill that made it out of the House. (It also had, as recall, the Fix NICS bill amended to it at that point.) I don't recall there being any issue with standards, training, etc. Though what future bill would have is anyone's guess and, as always, the Devil's in the details.

And, agreed, with more than one more comment above that this appears to be nothing but last minute pandering, and pretty weak tea at that.

 

[Enginerd]

Nothing but a political carrot.

I think he genuinely would like to see it on his desk. Him having a CCW speaks to that. But I do not see him burning the necessary political capital to make it that far.

Executive Order or it won't happen. He COULD do it, but he won't. Nothing in it for him.

We have seen this time and time again where Republican politicians are branded as pro-2nd only because they get money from the NRA or are pandering for votes, when in fact they may care about the issue just as much as you and I do. Inaction is more often than not due to improbability of legislative success rather than disinterest in gun rights. Don't buy into the Democrat talking points that Republicans are only pro-2nd for the NRA money.

 

[The Heretic]

Mexico will pay for the wall.

China will pay for the vaccine and testing.

If you believe anything Trump says, then he has other lies to sell/tell you.

 

[RedRover]

"...take the guns first, go through due process second."

BATFE has done more to threaten the 2A under Trump in 4 years, than all 8 years of the Obama administration. A person doesn't need to look through red or blue glasses to recognize that undeniable fact. The Dems have been quite vocal and honest about their desire for gun-control. The reality is, that the Republican establishment also doesn't give two craps about the 2A, they're simply better at lying about it to pander to their base.

Both parties belong to their masters - The Top-5%. They offer mere tidbits to the other 95%(be they ignorant right-wingers or naive left-wingers), in the form of bread to the left and circuses to the right.

I'll take another BETTER-BE(fingers-crossed) friendly-to-upholding-the-2A SCOTUS Judge in trade for Trump to be gone.

He's got to go. He's an absolute danger to the safety and security of our nation.

Stuck with only two viable choices... I'm a firm believer in checks and balances. I've found that the country has historically done better both w/ economic sustainability, and regarding personal freedoms (which includes the 2A) with a (D) controlled Executive Branch, an evenly controlled Legislative Branch(Ie. one party controls the Senate and the other the House), and a strict Constitutionalist Supreme Court.

Your mileage may vary.

One party(political ideology) with too much control is when things tend to go bad.

The country is in desperate need to reteach their elected representatives the art of compromise. This all-or-none("I'm taking my ball home") crap needs to go. The country is too divided right now. Americans ought to recognize that we have much more in common with each other instead of focusing on differences. First and foremost -- Liberty>Authority.

 

[CountryGent]

We have seen this time and time again where Republican politicians are branded as pro-2nd only because they get money from the NRA or are pandering for votes, when in fact they may care about the issue just as much as you and I do. Inaction is more often than not due to improbability of legislative success rather than disinterest in gun rights. Don't buy into the Democrat talking points that Republicans are only pro-2nd for the NRA money.

Perhaps so, but a review of recent history is telling. Trump campaigned as a, quote, "big Second Amendment guy", which was a self-applied sobriquet he employed many times. With his victory, his party also had the House and the Senate firmly in their control.

Since the 2016 election:

• Was the National Firearms Act of 1934 repealed or modified? No.
• Was the Gun Control Act of 1968 repealed or modified? No.
• Was the Hughes Amendment, which banned new transferable machine-guns, to the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 repealed? No.
• Was the Bush, Sr. Executive Order banning the importation of so called "assault weapons", rescinded? No.
• Was National Reciprocity, which was a campaign promise POTUS stated both verbally and on his official site, made into law? No.
• Was the Hearing Protection Act (HPA), which would dramatically decrease the regulation of silencers, passed? No.
• Was the SHARE Act, which would do good things for hunters and anglers, and had the HPA amended to it, passed? No.
• Was there support for and a push, via rule-making, to ban bump-stocks? Yes.
• Was there support for red flags laws? Yes, while, literally, Senator Feinstein cackled next to POTUS.
• Was there support for a ban on silencers? Yes, twice in fact, POTUS stated on video an openness to that possibility.

The GOP supports 2A rights? OK, but they'd really help their case by actually doing something.

 

[Rkangel]

A lot of pro-gun things could have and should have happened the past 4 years, but didn't. Getting rid of the holdovers in the alphabet agencies would have been a good place to start. Unfortunately we got bump-stock bans, red-flag laws, and the pistol brace shenanigans instead.

 

[Enginerd]

@CountryGent I think those are fair points. But I will state that your weight on what Trump says varies greatly depending on whether it helps or hurts your argument. If you say Trump isn't pro-gun because he has only said pro-gun things but hasn't acted, you can't follow it up with saying he is anti-gun because of a off the cuff gun control statement he made.

Your first three wish list items are politically impossible short of a super majority or end of the fillibuster, and even then it would be tantamount to Obamacare in the number of seats R would lose following it. Trust me, I want those things too but it isn't going to happen.

Republicans had a two year window to push pro-gun legislation and HPA was well on track during that time. But one singular event derailed that. I am speaking about when a progressive nut job shot up the Republican congressional softball team and put the head of the committee responsible for the HPA, Steve Scalise in the hospital with life threatening injuries.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the only thing anti-gun thing Trump has done is banning bump stocks. Which I genuinely don't care about but that is an argument for another thread, I am just mad he didn't leverage it to pass reciprocity.

 

[madladchad]

Trump-O-Meter: | PolitiFact

www.politifact.com

Pretty much the only thing I can find that's positive for 2A by Trump.

I would say that it's interesting to see the list of promises he made vs delivered on. According to politifact, he's at:
24% kept
20% compromise
5% stalled
49% broken

Trump-O-Meter : Tracking Trump's Campaign Promises | PolitiFact

PolitiFact is a fact-checking website that rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials and others on its Truth-O-Meter.

www.politifact.com

I've seen more favorable lists, but none that have been quite as vetted. This seems to be a decent estimate. It seems to me that Trump focuses a lot more on symbolism rather than effectiveness. Take that how you will, voting either way in OR/WA won't change the outcome of the election. All we can do at this point is focus on making our local communities and states better. Hopefully that will help on a cultural level.

 

[Free_Patriot]

We had this discussion in Nevada regarding reciprocity. Big can of worms. If I live in one of the dozen or so states that honor permitless (constitutional) carry, will that be honored? Should be. Then the cry is by everyone else, aka New York and California, screaming about why outsiders are allowed to carry in their state while they can't even get a CCW/CPL/CHL license of their own.

The next thing, most important, is that if Congress can GIVE 'reciprocity', then they can also take it away. The argument is that constitutionally the fed can't make such a law. I'm sure Trump's lawyers have advised him of this. States have chosen their own reciprocity, based on what standards they choose to inflict.

This is clearly a political 'dog whistle' statement directed precisely at the Democrats who of course will never support such a law. Trumps attempt at educating the public.

Donald Trump Jr. is no different than any of us regarding the 2A, a massive enthusiast. You can bet he's educated his father. I honestly don't think Trump gave any of this a lot of thought prior to running for office, other than carrying himself for his own protection. A lot of these issues are complex and take a long time to soak in. Not to mention a hostile MSM that continues to blanket-bomb with every anti-2A sentiment possible any time there's a mass shooting. Bump stocks are still in the courts, btw.

And I was living only a few miles from the scene of the Mandalay Bay shooting in Las Vegas when it went down. As a former firefighter, it truly hurt knowing that I wasn't there to help.

The second term will bring a lot of these factors to life. No worries about reelection at that point in time, nor for anyone else if done early enough. Someone like John Lott, or a group like ours with our massive numbers, needs to do a study of the permitless carry states and present that to Congress and POTUS.

I think the NEW SCOTUS with ACB will start to invite some of these 2A issues in and rule positively in our favor, totally upsetting the apple cart in doing so. I'm waiting for the 9th to strike down the latest Hawaii case and declare that daily carry is a RIGHT and not a privilege, contrary to Hawaii's 100+ year practice. That case has been heard and a ruling is pending. I think they'll go the cowardly route and kick it back down to Hawaii County for revision rather than make a sweeping decision, however. More cases lined up for the 9th behind that one.

'More than meets the eye' would be the best way to describe what's going on. Fingers crossed for what a second term may bring. However I believe one thing will bear itself out should R's retake the house. The gloves will be off, and just like with this SCOTUS confirmation, R's and Trump will realize that they need only fear the NEXT election if they DON'T fight to the core and get these issues dealt with as they've been elected to do.

We won't know until sometime after the election.