National Trump on Gun ‘Silencers’ Like One Used in Virginia Beach Shooting: ‘I Don’t Like Them at All’

[NW Backpacker]

What happens with lesser evil voting: every cycle the evil gets more evil and the good less good.

Run as an R and win the primary. Problem solved.

 

[awshoot]

Cannot deny that but that's the nature of the beast. People vote to keep someone out of office more than anything else. Nonetheless, as I said before, unless Libertarians or other conservative 3rd party come up with a viable candidate, I will vote and support "R" because anything the "D's" offer will be worse and that has to be prevented.

In 2016 in a state like WA or CA, a vote for Trump was equal to a vote for Mickey Mouse. The results of that race were absolutely pre-determined with HRC as the victor in those states. In that scenario, voting for a candidate who is a "lesser-evil" because your favored 3d party candidate can't win, is illogical. Why not vote for the candidate you truly like who can't win rather than the one you're on the fence about who also can't win?

Also remember, supporting the victor isn't necessarily winning. In fact, if a sizable number of people start voting 3d party, the savvy politicians will pander to those people and if the politician follows through, that's a policy win (which is all that counts). There is also the fact that with enough votes, the 3d party will get on the debate stage -- this is what the DNCGOP fear the most and why the last time we saw such a thing was Ross Perot -- having the bipartisan consensus on various issues challenged on national TV is absolutely terrifying to them. Finally, what exactly do we expect if we reward bad behavior? If your kid started throwing food all over the kitchen, would you give a dollar and cookie and expect better behavior? Of course not. But that's exactly what lesser-evil voting is.

Going down the ticket, in a tight race a lesser evil vote may be good sense and you can rationally vote that way in that contest. But if you don't want to vote for someone like HRC and live in Seattle? Vote your true feelings -- at least you've expressed them through the ballot.

 

[awshoot]

...
Most reports say larger calibers are not quiet even when suppressed. I've never seen one used so I don't know.

I haven't either but I would bet that the video is not going to be informative at all on sound pressure. See the graphics I posted here: Other State - VA mass shooting

A Remington 700 .308 was tested: unsuppressed it hits 167 dB, suppressed at 133 dB. The unsuppressed level causes instant permanent hearing damage. At the suppressed sound intensity level, permanent hearing damage occurs with an exposure time of less than 1 second.

Here's a real world example to compare to the video -- an ambulance siren is 120 dB and that siren is quieter than the suppressed .308. Also note that the dB scale is logarithmic and so every 3 dB increase represents a doubling of sound intensity -- that 133 dB suppressed .308 is isn't roughly 10% more intense than a 120 dB ambulance siren, it's about 16x more intense (2*2*2*2).

 

[Member 52301]

Let's write and call Mr. T on the suppressor issue and on the red flag laws. Don't wait until Congress proposes more anti laws. Plant the seed in his brain to say NO when they propose more restrictions.
Contact the White House | The White House

Educate him by sending this NRA-ILA article:
NRA-ILA | Does a Suppressed Pistol Sound like a Nail Gun?

Call before 1 pm Pacific time - may take a while to get thru - earlier probably better:
202-456-1111

I have called and written President Trump, L. Graham, others in the District of Criminals, before, during and after the K. hearings with the 'CA woman' (Ugh.). I did not think that K. was the best man all around but I DID support him. I thought what THEY (Dems and others in Holly-weird.) did to him and his family was horrific and it was proven false as in false allegations with the other jokers who popped up in the news.

I have done this (Made calls and written.) ALL OF MY LIFE when it came to gun issues and more including the latest bs - RED FLAG laws. I will be 69 years old this summer. Local, county and on the Federal levels - I think that sometimes they listen and other times they do NOT. I know for a fact that the G. man (R) in Montana is a joke in HIM answering/receiving any letter or call but that is for another thread.

By the way, when the K. hearings went on... you couldn't mail (It was returned.) or call SOME people in D.C. because NO one was answering their telephone or their voice mail was FULL. One of many examples was Susan Collins out of Maine. I called some radio stations about that locally and TRIED to on a nationwide level but I did not get on the air. I was ON HOLD for a long, long time.

L. Graham did have someone in D.C. and in his home state (SC) ANSWER TELEPHONES and to the best of my memory and hope... they actually took down my FULL name, my city, state (Montana) and my home telephone number - land line since 'we' have no cellular telephones. I gave them my complete information. I was glad to see LG speak up to the D. sons/daughters of guns (I am trying to be polite compared to what I YELLED at them at home!) at that hearing and I personally thanked him for it. I saw/listened to ALL of the hearings off of my computer (Cspan) and on some OTA stations. I READ the transcripts too.

United States Senator Lindsey Graham

Office Locations - United States Senator Lindsey Graham

Obviously LG did NOT do what I wanted HIM to do when it came to the Red Flag laws and in other matters. MOST OF US HERE and elsewhere know this already. It has been posted here too.

But I made my voice heard.

The White House

Contact the White House | The White House

They should make it EASIER to get silencers/suppressors, same as when you buy a gun from a FFL dealer and walk out the door with NONE of the waiting periods like some states/cities have put into law, AND there should be NO extra fees, tax stamps, etc. for them in my NOT so humble opinion.

Would you do this deal for a freaking scope? WAIT and pay extra taxes for it? NO, I don't think so!

And I say this even though I have NEVER HAD A SCOPE on any of my former or present firearms since I USE IRON SIGHTS ONLY. I have tried scopes on guns that did NOT belong to me and I personally did not care for them. My MT husband uses some scopes on a few of his hunting rifles.

A scope does not and should have NO extra cost in fees/taxes or wait times in buying it and that is how I feel silencers/suppressors should be handled even though we do not own any.

Cate
Typo!

 

[Member 52301]

I vote for the person not the party especially when it comes to the RKBA issue.

I have voted for Rs, small l and Large L Libertarians, and one D who was the BEST candidate for township clerk in my former state - rural area.

WE are going to have one big cluster you know what in 2020. On the federal, state and local levels when it comes to GUN RIGHTS and in many other issues.

WE have a bunch of people who want us to turn into a S hole country NOW and they are winning with their socialist ideas. It will get WORSE in my NOT so humble opinion.

WE already have one big cluster you know what in many, many issues RIGHT NOW and in gun rights right NOW.

LOOK WHAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED IN SOME STATES, NOT JUST THE WESTERN STATES, but in some so called SAFE (LOL-Not!) pro gun states ALL across this country.

LOOK at how ALL or many laws that used to be obeyed in this sovereign nation have been totally or mostly ignored and it was CAUSED by BOTH PARTIES.

I would throw in some more vital details but it is NOT allowed here so I am really BITING MY TONGUE HERE.

I was not for the last two top presidential candidates and I make no bones about it. I absolutely detested and still detest the female one and I saw what the male one was all about at townhalls, the clown circus - debates, and within the last few years. So I was not for them.

But even though I was not for him - he is the President and he won the EC. He is in there now even though I thought that some other people in the R party were much better. RAND PAUL even though he is not his Dad - Ron Paul. I liked one Libertarian too. The name escapes me now.

So some of us who were not for him because we thought that we had him figured out from the gitgo - that does NOT mean that we were for HC or we have TDS or some other nasty name. I respect the office of the President. I want the office to be respected but it was hard to do in the PAST for some OTHER people and it is hard to do now with the constant CHAOS/CONFUSION and continued flip flopping in ALL issues.

I made one mistake voting for the lesser of the evil candidates in one final election in the past (Years ago.) and I am still upset over that one. I SAW WHAT HAPPENED THERE! But such is life.

What concerned me several years ago, 2016, was that we did have some people who could have done a very good job without all of the CONTINUED CHAOS AND CONFUSION and a TOTAL LACK OF RESPECT for a to z people in office caused by BOTH or more parties involved.

The bitterness and hatred coming from the LEFT is pretty strange yet the idol worship coming from the RIGHT is pretty strange too. They sure seem to ignore a whole lot of things but if the OTHER SIDE did it - they would be on it like stink on dung especially when it came to GUN ISSUES, promises made about GUN issues, and so many other things that concern THIS sovereign nation.

The top two candidates were NOT and are NOT pro gun people and they did not/do not have the basic understanding of the SECOND AMENDMENT, the Constitution, etc.

They do NOT have the foundation, the basic understanding and actual respect for the little people and their GUNS and gun acc. parts. In other things too even though they SAY that THEY DO!

The Clintons and many others in office (BOTH parties - past and present!) have NO respect for the rule of law and they have done and continue to do SEVERE damage to this Republic in gun issues and in MANY, many and many other issues. In national and foreign policies and tons more!

Do you honestly think that we are respected as a nation Now or in the Past by our own people worse off overseas?! They or most of them HATE US, want to disarm us, talk sweet and laugh at us with their HANDS OUT, and some of them want us DEAD. So why the heck do we continue to FUND them, give them arms, goods, aid and money? WHY do we continue to guard their sorry butts? I know some people will tell me why because it is a standard reply (The PNAC crowd and the D/R neo cons LOVE this stuff.) but I still believe that we do NOT belong in many countries and we SHOULD NOT be the world's cop on the beat or some 'savior'.

MANY AMERICANS ARE A BUNCH OF CLUELESS PEOPLE WHO CONTINUE TO VOTE FOR DUMB @@@es and their control freak - power hungry - money hungry - ANTI GUN ideas in both parties because IT IS FOR THE CHILDREN. We have a bunch of 'children in power' who want to control us in gun rights and BOTH PARTIES CAVE IN. Does one side make no bones about it? YES - the Dems. But don't trust the other side either.

The children in power were there in the PAST and they are in there NOW.

When it comes down to it most of them are THERE for themselves and even though they SAY that they are working for us and OUR sovereign nation... it is just a bunch of TALK coming from both or more sides. YOU tell me how they MAKE THEIR MONEY - before and after leaving their life long or shorter careers in POWER with their golden parachute packages and MONEY TIES all over the world! Save your breath - I already know NOW as I did in the past and will know in the future.

Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Yours in liberty,

Cate

 

[The Heretic]

End result: the law on suppressors does not change.

The issue is that if Trump is such a friend to gun owners, all he had to do was not do anything on this issue.

But what did he do? He had his admin tell the SCOTUS to NOT take up the issue. The SCOTUS had the chance to do something about the NFA registration of a gun accessory (suppressors are NOT firearms), but because Trump didn't want them to, they didn't. This an important issue; bumpstocks are accessories, triggers are accessories, suppressors are accessories - but they are each treated as a firearm by the ATF. How much longer before a 'high capacity" magazine becomes a firearm? Then will you care?

People are not looking at the big picture here.

I'm OK with that - if you want one, get the license. If you want to relax gun laws, timing will matter - don't go after suppressors immediately after a high profile suppressor mass shooting!!!!!

Trump and the GOP had perfect timing early in his reign. But as usual, they turned their back on us. The spent all their political capital on fighting the ACA, and failed, when all they had to do was repeal the mandate to make it mandatory to have insurance or be fined by the IRS. Something that was very easy to do and they wound up doing anyway - and the ACA would go into a death spiral. They could have passed the HPA and reciprocity, but they didn't want to. Do you get it now? Trump and the GOP are not our friends!

Sheesh! Wake up and smell the coffee people!

 

[awshoot]

... How much longer before a 'high capacity" magazine becomes a firearm? Then will you care? ...

In the CA mag ban case, Judge Benitez ruled that because magazines are firearms, they are protected by the 2A. That's a double edged sword of course -- if they are considered arms, then they can be subjected to background checks but cannot be banned so long as the 2A is around. If they are not arms, they can be banned with simple legislation as CA did.

 

[The Heretic]

In the CA mag ban case, Judge Benitez ruled that because magazines are firearms, they are protected by the 2A. That's a double edged sword of course -- if they are considered arms, then they can be subjected to background checks but cannot be banned so long as the 2A is around. If they are not arms, they can be banned with simple legislation as CA did.

California has banned certain firearms.

Or at least, they can't be imported and sold anymore.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Why not vote for the candidate you truly like who can't win rather than the one you're on the fence about who also can't win?

Because of the "Popular Vote" initiative. If enough states sign on then EVERY vote for the top two candidates will be vital. Somebody like Trump might not win in Oregon, but votes for him would count toward giving him Oregon's EC votes if he wins the national popular vote.

Along this line, I have left several gun groups in the last few weeks due to the lynch mob mentality that wants to bash Trump for any moderation in his stance on firearms. This attitude is short-sighted and destructive exactly for the reason stated above. The coming choice will be Biden versus Trump. You WILL get one of those two. Which one do you want? We have to work with reality, not fantasy. The chest thumpers talking about blood in the streets are in fantasy land (for now). When the SWAT team is at the front door asking where the guns are stored most of those chest thumpers will willingly hand over their guns rather than lose jobs, family, home, and their lives.

We need to stop the Trump bashing right now. Yes, I understand that you're disappointed in his stances on some things. But you didn't hire him personally to be your president. He is responsible to a lot of other people who voted for him who don't see things exactly like you do. Do you really look back on the Obama administration with nostalgia because he was "better on guns than Trump"? Really?

What he has done is nominate and confirm several very good federal court judges who will make a difference for decades to come. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh might not be perfect in every respect, but I suspect they are MUCH better than what Hillary would have appointed. If Trump never does anything else that is enough.

We were given a gift of a shiny new bicycle when we expected rocks, ashes, and onions, and all we can do is complain that it's not the right color. I'm done with that kind of thinking. It's childish, and it only serves to divide us when we need to be united behind our best choice (least evil) candidate. Think about how we just elected Brown in Oregon. Half the gun owners voted for Carpenter (even when he told them not to) over Buehler just to spite the Republicans for nominating Buehler. Where did that get us? Is Brown somehow better than Buehler would have been?

 

[DuneHopper]

There was time when Trump took office to get allot of stuff done for gun owners.
But not one ever came about. We lost some rights under Trump, but gained not one firearms right. Trump wont win in 2020 because he has dropped the ball, turned his back, or what ever one wants to say. I wasn't going to vote for Hilary, but was secure in thinking Gun rights, Conceal carry and some nice additions would be secured. I was not happy anything was removed. I can see the big picture, things are often not as they appear.
The rules of the game are oppose everything you competitor is for. And once they agree with your side, switch once more and disagree with their new position, that was once yours.

The issue is that if Trump is such a friend to gun owners, all he had to do was not do anything on this issue.

But what did he do? He had his admin tell the SCOTUS to NOT take up the issue. The SCOTUS had the chance to do something about the NFA registration of a gun accessory (suppressors are NOT firearms), but because Trump didn't want them to, they didn't. This an important issue; bumpstocks are accessories, triggers are accessories, suppressors are accessories - but they are each treated as a firearm by the ATF. How much longer before a 'high capacity" magazine becomes a firearm? Then will you care?

People are not looking at the big picture here.



Trump and the GOP had perfect timing early in his reign. But as usual, they turned their back on us. The spent all their political capital on fighting the ACA, and failed, when all they had to do was repeal the mandate to make it mandatory to have insurance or be fined by the IRS. Something that was very easy to do and they wound up doing anyway - and the ACA would go into a death spiral. They could have passed the HPA and reciprocity, but they didn't want to. Do you get it now? Trump and the GOP are not our friends!

Sheesh! Wake up and smell the coffee people!

 

[awshoot]

Because of the "Popular Vote" initiative. If enough states sign on then EVERY vote for the top two candidates will be vital. Somebody like Trump might not win in Oregon, but votes for him would count toward giving him Oregon's EC votes if he wins the national popular vote. ...?

If that dreadful idea goes into effect, the calculus on lesser evil voting would change. For now though, it is still just a nightmare: Status of National Popular Vote Bill in Each State

 

[ZigZagZeke]

The issue is that if Trump is such a friend to gun owners, all he had to do was not do anything on this issue.

But what did he do? He had his admin tell the SCOTUS to NOT take up the issue. The SCOTUS had the chance to do something about the NFA registration of a gun accessory (suppressors are NOT firearms), but because Trump didn't want them to, they didn't.

Sorry, that's not how it works. The president doesn't tell SCOTUS what to do. They didn't rule on anything. They didn't take the case. Not because of anything Trump or his admin said, but for any number of reasons. The court refuses cases all the time because the facts and situations involved won't make good case law. Or because the case hasn't been thoroughly reviewed by the lower courts. Or because there's no distinct question of law to be resolved. Or because the plaintiff has no standing.

Don't lay this refusal to hear the case on Trump.

 

[4Freedom]

Along this line, I have left several gun groups in the last few weeks due to the lynch mob mentality that wants to bash Trump for any moderation in his stance on firearms. This attitude is short-sighted and destructive exactly for the reason stated above. The coming choice will be Biden versus Trump. You WILL get one of those two. Which one do you want? We have to work with reality, not fantasy. The chest thumpers talking about blood in the streets are in fantasy land (for now). When the SWAT team is at the front door asking where the guns are stored most of those chest thumpers will willingly hand over their guns rather than lose jobs, family, home, and their lives.

We need to stop the Trump bashing right now. Yes, I understand that you're disappointed in his stances on some things. But you didn't hire him personally to be your president. He is responsible to a lot of other people who voted for him who don't see things exactly like you do. Do you really look back on the Obama administration with nostalgia because he was "better on guns than Trump"? Really?

What he has done is nominate and confirm several very good federal court judges who will make a difference for decades to come. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh might not be perfect in every respect, but I suspect they are MUCH better than what Hillary would have appointed. If Trump never does anything else that is enough.

We were given a gift of a shiny new bicycle when we expected rocks, ashes, and onions, and all we can do is complain that it's not the right color. I'm done with that kind of thinking. It's childish, and it only serves to divide us when we need to be united behind our best choice (least evil) candidate. Think about how we just elected Brown in Oregon. Half the gun owners voted for Carpenter (even when he told them not to) over Buehler just to spite the Republicans for nominating Buehler. Where did that get us? Is Brown somehow better than Buehler would have been?

ZigZagZeke, I respect the rationale of what you are saying and I don't think a single person here would ever want a Gun Confiscating Democrat to get into power. But, here is a new question I will pose to you. If Trump decides to sign some Executive Order demanding the confiscation of all suppressors or pushing a Suppressor Ban, do you think a Republican ordering a Gun or Gun Component Confiscation order will flex more or less muscle than a Democrat ordering the same thing?

You seem to think only Democrats have the ability to perform gun confiscation and that SWAT teams, National Guard and our military will suddenly swear unbreakable loyalty to the Democrat government and will disarm everyone, as nobody will dare stand up to the Democrat government. Or, maybe if it is the Democrats proposing gun confiscation, it will end up where the conservatives decide to bond together and unify against what they feel is tyranny from an enemy government who they have no loyalty to?

But, what if it is a Republican president whose mental state is quite questionable, who suddenly decides to start lashing out on the NRA (Trump has done this even recently) and after the next mass shooting says that he supports more "SENSIBLE GUN LAWS". Does anyone remember what Trump said back in February:
Trump says some in Congress are petrified by NRA but 'they have less power over me'

I actually don't think the Democrats would have the backbone to declare war on even 1,000,000 gun owners. They go apesh*t crazy after a simple mass shooting. Just imagine a bunch of p*ssed off Americans declaring war on the government. Even a number of 100,000 would be a formidable force. But, a guy like Trump, I have this feeling he would feel has a Godlike complex and would deem all those who challenge his decrees as "a small extremist faction" that needs to be suppressed. Seeing he is the "Freedom Loving" Republican, he may ahve the ability to mobilize military and police to perform gun confiscation and use twisted reasoning and rationale to make people sympathetic to him.

And, why are you so terrified of what the Democrats say, but are not terrified of Donald Trump and Lindsay Graham's support for Federal Red Flag laws? Trump and Graham both said they support Red Flag Extreme Risk Protection Order Laws that would essentially dissolve our 2nd Amendment and pave the way for the Democrats to more easily perform mass gun confiscations.

The fact is that Donald Trump doesn't love the 2nd Amendment and he only became a supporter of gun rights when he got elected. But, deep in his heart, he wants Assault Weapon Bans and Magazine Bans, doesn't like the NRA and would probably perform all the various gun control measures we fear if he had the ability. He is basically being a business man and selling himself to us by telling us what we want to hear. But, for God's sake, this man wrote a book that was pretty well reputed where he condemns the NRA, talks about how America really needs sensible gun laws and Assault Weapon Ban. He wrote a freakin book about this!

Also, the people who said Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush were pro-gun while in office are seriously delusional! In fact, they did more to strip us away of our 2nd Amendment rights than many other presidents. Ronald Reagan was the one who introduced the Mulford Act and effectively banned carrying loaded firearms in California while he was Governor. Thank you Ronald Reagan for helping to strip Californians of their gun rights! He punished all Americans for the actions committed by the Black Panthers. Yet, the Black Panthers, as much as I hated them, didn't actually commit any crime by open carrying their guns at the capitol in California; he just couldn't believed in a more authoritarian approach in dealing with opposition. Punish everyone for the action of the few.


BTW, this is what Ronald Reagan wrote while he was in office, as Governor of California:

Governor Ronald Reagan, who was coincidentally present on the capitol lawn when the protesters arrived, later commented that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." In a later press conference, Reagan added that the Mulford Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."

Saying that Trump wanting to ban suppressors is like a bunch of kids who are sad about the color of the bike they received is pretty much undermining the seriousness of a very critical issue. Banning Suppressors would be the first step in banning everything else. Whereas the Democrats talk about gun confiscation, socialized medicine, 90% tax rates to save the world and open immigration for all, they are so extreme and out of touch that they probably will achieve nothing. Trump, on other hand, playing dangerous political game of being the wolf in sheep's clothing, could in fact, possibly pass much more successful gun control legislation than any Democrat could. My feelings is if we had a Democrat President in power who supported a Bump Stock ban, there may have been opposition to it and the ban would have not so easily passed unlike with Donald Trump promoting it with his stock of anti-gun RINOs like Lindsay Graham, Rick Scott, etc.

I understand we are in a pretty bad situation now, but if you think Donald Trump truly supports your gun rights and wouldn't pass anti-gun legislation you should reconsider. In fact, if Donald Trump gets re-elected and we have a Democrat ruled congress, I wouldn't be shocked if he collaborated with them and actually did start promoting gun control legislation to appease the Democrats. I wouldn't be shocked if he decides that high capacity magazines, Short barrel rifles, etc should all be banned like he did with Bump Stocks. And, my fear is if Donald Trump supports gun control he may have the ability to actually enforce confiscation, federal red flag/ERPO laws, etc in a way no degenerate, big-talking Democrat politician could.

Donald Trump is not pro-gun at all, but he is a very good businessman and good at marketing himself to the customers. People forget he is a shady businessman, not a Freedom Loving Patriot. That is my underlying feeling of him. I seriously don't know if my gun rights are more secure putting him in the White House for a Second Term. Remember, even Obama was not Anti-Gun until his second term, when he immediately tried to push an Assault Weapon Ban after he was re-elected. Will Trump stay our friend or will he have a change of heart when he gets the second term?

 

[ZigZagZeke]

ZigZagZeke, I respect the rationale of what you are saying and I don't think a single person here would ever want a Gun Confiscating Democrat to get into power. But, here is a new question I will pose to you. If Trump decides to sign some Executive Order demanding the confiscation of all suppressors or pushing a Suppressor Ban, do you think a Republican ordering a Gun Confiscation will flex more or less muscle than a Democrat ordering the same thing?

You seem to think only Democrats have the ability to perform gun confiscation and that SWAT teams, National Guard and our military will suddenly swear unbreakable loyalty to the Democrat government and will disarm everyone, as nobody will dare stand up to the Democrat government. Or, maybe if it is the Democrats proposing gun confiscation, it will end up where the conservatives decide to bond together and unify against what they feel is tyranny from an enemy government who they have no loyalty to?

But, what if it is a Republican president whose mental state is quite questionable, who suddenly decides to start lashing out on the NRA (Trump has done this even recently) and after the next mass shooting says that he supports more "SENSIBLE GUN LAWS". Does anyone remember what Trump said back in February:
Trump says some in Congress are petrified by NRA but 'they have less power over me'

I actually don't think the Democrats would have the backbone to declare war on even 1,000,000 gun owners. They go apesh*t crazy after a simple mass shooting. Just imagine a bunch of p*ssed off Americans declaring war on the government. Even a number of 100,000 would be a formidable force. But, a guy like Trump, I have this feeling he would feel has a Godlike complex and would deem all those who challenge his decrees as "a small extremist faction" that needs to be suppressed. Seeing he is the "Freedom Loving" Republican, he may ahve the ability to mobilize military and police to perform gun confiscation and use twisted reasoning and rationale to make people sympathetic to him.

And, why are you so terrified of what the Democrats say, but are not terrified of Donald Trump and Lindsay Graham's support for Federal Red Flag laws? Trump and Graham both said they support Red Flag Extreme Risk Protection Order Laws that would essentially dissolve our 2nd Amendment and pave the way for the Democrats to more easily perform mass gun confiscations.

The fact is that Donald Trump doesn't love the 2nd Amendment and he only became a supporter of gun rights when he got elected. But, deep in his heart, he wants Assault Weapon Bans and Magazine Bans, doesn't like the NRA and would probably perform all the various gun control measures we fear if he had the ability. He is basically being a business man and selling himself to us by telling us what we want to hear. But, for God's sake, this man wrote a book that was pretty well reputed where he condemns the NRA, talks about how America really needs sensible gun laws and Assault Weapon Ban. He wrote a freakin book about this!

Also, the people who said Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush were pro-gun while in office are seriously delusional! In fact, they did more to strip us away of our 2nd Amendment rights than many other presidents. Ronald Reagan was the one who introduced the Mulford Act and effectively banned carrying loaded firearms in California while he was Governor. Thank you Ronald Reagan for helping to strip Californians of their gun rights! He punished all Americans for the actions committed by the Black Panthers. Yet, the Black Panthers, as much as I hated them, didn't actually commit any crime by open carrying their guns at the capitol in California; he just couldn't believed in a more authoritarian approach in dealing with opposition. Punish everyone for the action of the few.


BTW, this is what Ronald Reagan wrote while he was in office, as Governor of California:


Saying that Trump wanting to ban suppressors is like a bunch of kids who are sad about the color of the bike they received is pretty much undermining the seriousness of a very critical issue. Banning Suppressors would be the first step in banning everything else. Whereas the Democrats talk about gun confiscation, socialized medicine, 90% tax rates to save the world and open immigration for all, they are so extreme and out of touch that they probably will achieve nothing. Trump, on other hand, playing dangerous political game of being the wolf in sheep's clothing, could in fact, possibly pass much more successful gun control legislation than any Democrat could. My feelings is if we had a Democrat President in power who supported a Bump Stock ban, there may have been opposition to it and the ban would have not so easily passed unlike with Donald Trump promoting it with his stock of anti-gun RINOs like Lindsay Graham, Rick Scott, etc.

I understand we are in a pretty bad situation now, but if you think Donald Trump truly supports your gun rights and wouldn't pass anti-gun legislation you should reconsider. In fact, if Donald Trump gets re-elected and we have a Democrat ruled congress, I wouldn't be shocked if he collaborated with them and actually did start promoting gun control legislation to appease the Democrats. I wouldn't be shocked if he decides that high capacity magazines, Short barrel rifles, etc should all be banned like he did with Bump Stocks. And, my fear is if Donald Trump supports gun control he may have the ability to actually enforce confiscation, federal red flag/ERPO laws, etc in a way no degenerate, big-talking Democrat politician could.

Donald Trump is not pro-gun at all, but he is a very good businessman and good at marketing himself to the customers. People forget he is a shady businessman, not a Freedom Loving Patriot. That is my underlying feeling of him. I seriously don't know if my gun rights are more secure putting him in the White House for a Second Term. Remember, even Obama was not Anti-Gun until his second term, when he immediately tried to push an Assault Weapon Ban after he was re-elected. Will Trump stay our friend or will he have a change of heart when he gets the second term?

So you purport to know what's in Trump's heart and mind about the 2nd Amendment because he's made some off the cuff remarks about suppressors. You predict gloom and doom if he's re-elected. OK, assuming you are right, what is your alternative. What do you propose to do to get a better president in office? Which candidate out there is not susceptible to the same wild speculation? Which Democrat would be better? The fact is that Trump will be the Republican nominee and you can have either him or Biden. Which do you want?

What Trump has demonstrated is that he is listening to conservative, constructionist voices when appointing federal judges, including appointments to SCOTUS. It matters very little what he says compared to his actions so far in appointing new judges. That is the MAJOR difference between Trump and everyone else. It doesn't matter who is in congress or in the white house. They will do whatever they feel they can get away with. It is the COURTS that will be our ultimate saviors. They are there for a reason, that precise reason being to stop congress or the executive branch from overreaching. The courts are the key to keeping our freedoms on many fronts, not just guns, and so far Trump is doing an amazingly good job with appointments to the courts. Do you want Biden or some other Democrat to appoint Ginsburg's replacement? Keep bashing Trump and that is what you will get.

 

[4Freedom]

If Trump doesn't go after suppressors, I will have no problem voting for him again to keep the National Socialists (aka Democrats) out of office. If he goes after suppressors, I wouldn't put much faith in whoever he will pick to replace Ginsburg either, as he may have a "change of heart" if he decides to go this route and secures a second term.

Remember George HW Bush's famous lines, "Read My Lips, No New Taxes".. Then he joined hands with the Democrats and shunned all his fellow Republicans and help pass the largest tax increase in modern history. Oh, but he was a Republican and we were suppose to be safe from all that. He and Ronald Reagan both said it was ludicrous people carry guns for self-defense and own horrible weapons of wars. I actually fear an anti-gun Republican more than an anti-gun Democrat.

As I said, I don't like Trump and I really wanted to like him. But, if he is just wants to mock the NRA and say how he hates certain gun components, time-to-time, yet doesn't act on it, then yes, I will reluctantly vote for him to keep the NS crew out of office.

One thing you didn't touch on was the fact that Donald Trump and Lindsay Graham are pushing for federal level Extreme Risk Protection Orders/Red Flag laws. As well, Trump wanted to pass a law stating if you are on a Terrorism Watch List you lose your gun rights. What happens when the Democrats take power and every gun owner ends up on that list?

 

[The Heretic]

Sorry, that's not how it works. The president doesn't tell SCOTUS what to do. They didn't rule on anything. They didn't take the case. Not because of anything Trump or his admin said, but for any number of reasons. The court refuses cases all the time because the facts and situations involved won't make good case law. Or because the case hasn't been thoroughly reviewed by the lower courts. Or because there's no distinct question of law to be resolved. Or because the plaintiff has no standing.

Don't lay this refusal to hear the case on Trump.

So you asked the SCOTUS why they didn't take the case?

The DOJ/et. al. has no influence with the SCOTUS when they request that the SCOTUS not take the case? None at all?

And you think the fact that the admin asked them not to is not an indicator of their stance on the issue?

Just who is drinking just what Kool-Aid around here?

 

[ZigZagZeke]

So you asked the SCOTUS why they didn't take the case?

The DOJ/et. al. has no influence with the SCOTUS when they request that the SCOTUS not take the case? None at all?

And you think the fact that the admin asked them not to is not an indicator of their stance on the issue?

Just who is drinking just what Kool-Aid around here?

There are a couple dozen standard reasons why SCOTUS refuses to hear cases. Very few of them have to do with what any other branch of government thinks about it. So accuse me of making suppositions and then suppose away yourself. Nobody knows why for sure but the LEAST likely reason would be what the president or the DOJ desires. They have ZERO leverage.

 

[NW Backpacker]

Because of the "Popular Vote" initiative. If enough states sign on then EVERY vote for the top two candidates will be vital. Somebody like Trump might not win in Oregon, but votes for him would count toward giving him Oregon's EC votes if he wins the national popular vote.

Along this line, I have left several gun groups in the last few weeks due to the lynch mob mentality that wants to bash Trump for any moderation in his stance on firearms. This attitude is short-sighted and destructive exactly for the reason stated above. The coming choice will be Biden versus Trump. You WILL get one of those two. Which one do you want? We have to work with reality, not fantasy. The chest thumpers talking about blood in the streets are in fantasy land (for now). When the SWAT team is at the front door asking where the guns are stored most of those chest thumpers will willingly hand over their guns rather than lose jobs, family, home, and their lives.

We need to stop the Trump bashing right now. Yes, I understand that you're disappointed in his stances on some things. But you didn't hire him personally to be your president. He is responsible to a lot of other people who voted for him who don't see things exactly like you do. Do you really look back on the Obama administration with nostalgia because he was "better on guns than Trump"? Really?

What he has done is nominate and confirm several very good federal court judges who will make a difference for decades to come. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh might not be perfect in every respect, but I suspect they are MUCH better than what Hillary would have appointed. If Trump never does anything else that is enough.

We were given a gift of a shiny new bicycle when we expected rocks, ashes, and onions, and all we can do is complain that it's not the right color. I'm done with that kind of thinking. It's childish, and it only serves to divide us when we need to be united behind our best choice (least evil) candidate. Think about how we just elected Brown in Oregon. Half the gun owners voted for Carpenter (even when he told them not to) over Buehler just to spite the Republicans for nominating Buehler. Where did that get us? Is Brown somehow better than Buehler would have been?

Excellent comment!

One thing you didn't touch on was the fact that Donald Trump and Lindsay Graham are pushing for federal level Extreme Risk Protection Orders/Red Flag laws.

If I threaten to harm others, I am OK with the cops doing whatever they need to do to prevent me from doing it. I have a right to own guns, but I have no right to threaten others. Better and faster due process would improve ERPOs. If someone threatens suicide, I don't think that is a police matter.

Remember George HW Bush's famous lines, "Read My Lips, No New Taxes".. Then he joined hands with the Democrats and shunned all his fellow Republicans and help pass the largest tax increase in modern history.

Were you severely hurt by those taxes? I don't remember it being a big deal.

I actually fear an anti-gun Republican more than an anti-gun Democrat.

Easy - in the general election you only get 2 choices, R or D, so vote D. Or, vote L, C, I, etc - same as voting D.

Trump and the GOP had perfect timing early in his reign. But as usual, they turned their back on us. The spent all their political capital on fighting the ACA, and failed, when all they had to do was repeal the mandate to make it mandatory to have insurance or be fined by the IRS. Something that was very easy to do and they wound up doing anyway - and the ACA would go into a death spiral. They could have passed the HPA and reciprocity, but they didn't want to. Do you get it now? Trump and the GOP are not our friends!

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh look fairly friendly to me. Can't remember the details, but I don't think the Senate had the votes to repeal the ACA due to RINOs with TDS, and it would have been a problem if they did not have some plan to replace it. Of course the best plan, and one that should be in place no matter what is: "Any insurer can offer any health insurance plan they want to any person, corporation, etc with no government mandates of any kind." If you don't like their plans, buy an ACA plan or another goobermint approved plan.

But, for God's sake, this man wrote a book that was pretty well reputed where he condemns the NRA, talks about how America really needs sensible gun laws and Assault Weapon Ban. He wrote a freakin book about this!

What year was that book written and what is the Title? You are aware that many people do change their views over time, right? Right NOW, during his presidency, he is helping us out big time with his judge appointments. Is he perfect? No, perfect does not exist.

See all you never-Trumpers in line at the Warren/Booker mandatory gun confiscation event. It's a comin'!

 

[The Heretic]

1) Musn't criticize our glorious leader? Really?

2) Trump isn't perfect? He is so far from perfect that he is on the other side of the universe. Trump will go down in history are the worst president ever and no one will argue that any other president even came close.

Keep making excuses - I am out of here.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

1) Trump will go down in history are the worst president ever and no one will argue that any other president even came close.

Only because Hillary wasn't elected. And is Obama looking THAT wonderful in the rear view mirror? And what about Carter or Ford or Nixon? Selective memory?