Trump calls for background checks

[shibbershabber]

Waiting for all the gung ho trumpers to explain why this is actually him fighting FOR us.

I'm not saying there was any better option but blind support for any politician is toxic and destructive.

These people want to rule over you.

I certainly liked Trump over all the rest...

I never really had any illusions about his true dedication to the 2nd Amendment..... However, he struck me as a person who wanted to have power and wanted to be liked.... and those forces would be enough for him to do what his base wants ... but I really dont know.

My vote for president doesnt really count... so it wont matter if I get pissed and dont vote, he loses WA pretty much any way you spin it.
I personally think that this election is lost already... maybe he knows that and isnt real concerned with what the people in his base want anymore.

Whatever it is, wont be huge... most of these things cannot be done without Congress... so his EO powers are somewhat limited as it relates to the 2A.

 

[nick1980]

Here is my opinion, Obama was in office for eight years and didn't pass one gun control act. Republicans would have never let it happen. We now have a republican who has already passed gun control acts and is wanting to add more. Remember there were just as many mass shootings during Obama as Trump so he hasn't been forced to do anything. Now when we get another democrat in office they will feel free to add even more gun control cause "hey why not a republican can do it and get away with it."
I honestly think when Trump is finished he will have passed more gun control then Hillary ever could have.

 

[bbbass]

@ARFrog While I'm not a big fan of NRA, I do appreciate their past role in protecting our rights. Once upon a time, they were primarily about hunting and firearms articles and promotion.... then they were forced into the political arena... many years ago.

We, you and I, were discussing spokespersons... I will agree that there is not a single spokesperson, not since Charlton Heston, but there are a number of people out there trying to get airtime. Dana Loesch of the NRA appeared at a BS Town Hall meeting after Parkland and was verbally abused. She was interviewed on Tucker Carlson last night and said that while she is still giving talks, she has no intention of being set up in another of those kind of venues.

Then there's this from Tomi Lahren this morning:

In the newest episode of "No Interruption," Fox Nation host Tomi Lahren sat down with NRA Social Media Director Billy Mclaughlin to discuss gun violence in America and his commitment to protecting the Second Amendment.

Lahren explained that it was Mclaughlin's recently published op-ed in the Washington Post that caught her attention.


In his article titled "I wish the gay community were more accepting of gun supporters. I should know," Mclaughlin, a member of the LGBTQ community himself, explained the NRA is an "inclusive" organization and questioned the "hostility" other members of his community have towards the Second Amendment.

Mclaughlin also said he's often attacked for representing the NRA, but that he thinks the "hatred" stems from "ignorance" about what the organization actually stands for.

TOMI LAHREN SITS DOWN WITH FORMER NFL STAR ARIAN FOSTER

"It doesn't matter if you're black, white, rich, poor, gay, straight - you have a right to defend your life and the National Rifle Association is proud to represent you," he said.

Depending on where you get your news and opinion shows, you may not be seeing these spokespeople... certainly not on the alphabet networks or CNN.

 

[jimmy r]

He also said we need more "Red Flag Laws".....

Red flag laws are dangerous to the law abiding citizen. they are used to retaliate not to help. . We need people who interact with these people day to day bases, to report them to authorities. this will help to cut down on the problem a bit but families need to do their part in bringing up strong kids with the knowledge of right and wrong, and of strong character.

 

[jimmy r]

Here is my opinion, Obama was in office for eight years and didn't pass one gun control act. Republicans would have never let it happen. We now have a republican who has already passed gun control acts and is wanting to add more. Remember there were just as many mass shootings during Obama as Trump so he hasn't been forced to do anything. Now when we get another democrat in office they will feel free to add even more gun control cause "hey why not a republican can do it and get away with it."
I honestly think when Trump is finished he will have passed more gun control then Hillary ever could have.

more gun laws aren't going to do anything. we have background checks up the bubblegum as it is , we need morals and people who interact with sick people to alert authorities of the potential danger. and to have the authorities do something , and not just watch.

 

[bbbass]

Red flag laws are dangerous to the law abiding citizen. they are used to retaliate not to help. . We need people who interact with these people day to day bases, to report them to authorities.

we need morals and people who interact with sick people to alert authorities of the potential danger. and to have the authorities do something , and not just watch.

I think there is probably a small percentage of cases where red flag laws are used to retaliate... the cases I've reviewed indicate that the judge was correct under the law in that the person did represent a danger. My problem is the lack of representation in the process, as well as the difficulty in getting rights restored.

In the absence of red flag laws, what mechanism exists for "authorities" to take action when people who interact report potential violent offenders to authorities? Mental institution, nope. 48hr hold, maybe. No-contact order, doesn't work. IMO "authorities" have a very poor record of preventing violence. They are much better at catching people after the act.

People develop issues. People develop problems. These people often act out. They need help, but help often doesn't really help.

 

[jimmy r]

I see kids everyday doing the right thing and knowing right from wrong, and I see kids who come from families who don't care, and the kids see this and take on this attitude. with out guidance they are left to do what they want and are influenced by others who do bad, and see that nothing is done about their actions. . Gangs and bullies are not a good influence!! games and such on video are not a good influence as well, and I have heard some kids talking about doing the video game thing for real , not a good thing to think about , but they will do as they do . Can these shooting and bad behavior be stopped , ??? not now ,, it's to far gone

 

[jimmy r]

I don't have any answers, but as a vet. and a father, and a old man, I think parents and society need to work together to bring up these kids the way we were brought up , with morals respect, and fear of the belt. Parents do your job, but don't do it to the point where its abusive and then society steps in . Me, I think this last generation is lost and out of control. and there is no turning back for them. I'm 74, raised two great kids, but their kids, are kind of unruly and rebellious, and when dad steps in they threaten him with calling the cops and so on. LOST they are , and he did a great job of raising them. somewhere society failed them.

 

[Hellingbamster]

Background checks on commercial purchases would make some sense, *IF* the "background" was all that was involved. What irks me about the process, particularly here in WA is that all the details of WHAT you are acquiring is also part of the required. If the government alleges that they do not have a gun registration there is absolutely no reason what is being acquired should be part of the process. A NFA item would of course be another issue.

Here in WA there *IS* gun registration for all transactions since the latest mob rule regulations came into force. Federally, they say they don't keep the info, which I somehow don't trust as a absolutely true statement. I have seen little or no evidence of this particular issue being addressed by anyone in the current debate on "enhanced background checks".

The system should NOT want to know what is being purchased, only who is requesting the transaction. The system should also be set up so that once a person has been given a pass by the system they should be issued a document stating that they are good to go, as with a CPL. From there is should be the governments responsibility to keep the records up to date. The process should cost the citizen nothing, as that is a self defense tax, an serious obstacle to the financially challenged. This system should also be available to the previously vetted public for private sales if so desired by the seller or buyer.

 

[CountryGent]

Trump says he is 'all in favor' of background checks

^ Includes video.

 

[bbbass]

@ARFrog Also, as spokespersons, check out Frank Miniter, a well know pollster, who has written a book on gun rights, and was interviewed on Lars Larson today. Mr. Miniter also mentioned Stephen Hunter, a well known author.

 

[jimmy r]

Background checks are a joke. Say we buy a gun pass all the bull crap, and go home with a new Glock 17 9mm then we hone our shooting skills for a year, then bang, something happens and we have an issue with some one. now this easy going guy after another year of smooth sailing has a melt down and fly's off the handle because some moron on the road cut him off, and he is stopped for following to close , and is given a ticket, bam, now this great easy going guy is pissed because the court fined him big time . goes home , stews a bit a grabs his Glock and a hand full of mags, and goes out for revenge. OK we have a situation here that no back ground check could have prevented , or foreseen. so what good is it other then the govt charging 16 bucks for the check only money is gained here. I just don't see any good to come of more govt bull bubblegum . what's the answer ,??? hell I have no Idea but society is doing it's part to screw thing s up really bad. me , i'm lofting for a hole in the wall and avoid all the social crap I can. I hope it works . lol

 

[The Heretic]

So this morning, listening to the news, Trump responding to reporters asking questions:

"I can tell you that there is no political appetite for that at this moment," Trump told reporters outside the White House of assault weapons restrictions, adding that he "will certainly bring that up" in talks with lawmakers on gun reform measures in the coming days.

Trump claims 'great appetite' for background checks as GOP looks elsewhere

He also said there is "no political appetite" for an assault-weapons ban, but a new poll found that 69 percent of voters, including more than half of Republicans, support such restrictions.

www.politico.com

Not encouraging IMO.

 

[jimmy r]

Any weapon available to the police, should be available to the public. if you ban one gun then what , ban another and another , and another . society needs to stay out of raising our children it's the parents job. not one of my guns have ever killed anyone ever . it's not a gun issue, never has , never will be . it's an unstable generation issue.

 

[jimmy r]

The NRA doesn't protect out rights, the constitution does. and our so called elected officials . never have I been asked by anyone of my opinion about anything. they just do what they want . govt , for the people By the PEOPLE and OF the People .

 

[The Heretic]

Any weapon available to the police, should be available to the public. if you ban one gun then what , ban another and another , and another . society needs to stay out of raising our children it's the parents job. not one of my guns have ever killed anyone ever . it's not a gun issue, never has , never will be . it's an unstable generation issue.

Any "arm" the gov has citizenry should have.

I made that assertion of FB and someone asked me about NBC weapons. I replied out that govs should not have NBC weapons - nobody should - if for no other reason that if you leave an NBC weapon laying around it will eventually harm someone; it will leak something. If you leave a gun laying around it won't shoot someone by itself.

In a different post someone made a snide remark that we say we have guns to fight King George and that this was no longer relevant in the 20th century. I mentioned Stalin, Mao, etc., etc., including the Rohingya massacres and then pointed out that we have a would be sociopathic despot in the White House now. I then asked if he trusted Trump with all that power?

Shut him up. Maybe even made him think.

 

[csa_ap_hill]

Will the NRA save us again this time as they did last time? Who knows, but not surprised and knew he would if he does go against his probably main contributor and who helped him win. Before anyone says he/ Trump did his own. Don't be that naïve to say NRA didn't help him monetarily for even as rich Trump is he wont turn down free money I'm sure.

 

[Pandaz3]

How all these individuals like Bloomberg, Soros and the big Republican donors too, and organizations allowed to donate to these campaigns with impunity. $2800 is my limit, not that I give it, but should not that be the limit for every donor period.

The NRA did not save us. I did give to them, but I don't think they have much to offer other than votes

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

I am torn on this. Here is Oregon, Washington and California we already have unconstitutional Universal Background Checks and Red Flag Confiscation laws, so adding this nationwide does not effect me. At the moment I am worried about Oregon and Washington banning home builds by requiring 100% mandatory registration. I am still super p!ssed about Trump just giving up Bump Stocks without getting anything in return and fear that he will do the same thing again. The President KNOWS how to stop these attacks, National Concealed Carry reciprocity and eliminate Gun Free Zones, but he won't do anything about that until after the 2020 election.

 

[The Heretic]

As for BGCs, some have said 'licenses' for purchase would be a good idea in lieu of BGCs, and in some ways I agree they would be better - not good, but better (lesser of two evils for those Trump supporters). After all, for 99.9% of purchasers, this would prevent criminals/etc. people from purchasing guns, and it might prevent the gov. from secretly collecting lists of guns bought and sold - assuming any given state didn't require more info (like the left coast states do) - which is unlikely. I wouldn't like it, and there are a number of unintended consequences, but I still think it is better than BGCs.

For people who have been justifiably 'flagged', if the court could order their guns confiscated, then they can confiscate their license too (if they say they didn't 'lose' it - but then they could say their guns are lost too).

That said - anti-gun politics being what they are, I don't see a license getting any support from either side of the issue. Pro-gun wouldn't like it, and justifiably so. Anti-gun wants a registration for confiscation, plain and simple.