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

[GWS]

In any of the states on the left coast, voting Libertarian for POTUS doesn't hurt the chances of any GOP candidate one iota.

Oregon, Washington, California all are 'winner take all' states with regards to the electoral college. They all went to Obama and they all went to Clinton. Voting for the GOP POTUS candidate is a wasted vote if you were voting Republican to vote against the Democratic candidate, because your vote didn't count.

Great
So what is your solution?

 

[The Heretic]

You guys are really smart! Lets split the vote and get a AOC Type person in there good thinking. Maybe that's why we have the problem we have now? Lets just not vote because everyone is anti gun. Great idea smart guys.

What part about 'winner take all' do you not understand??

 

[The Heretic]

Great
So what is your solution?

What you do is up to you but I have this really truly totally weird philosophy; I vote for the person that I actually want to be in office.

Strange I know - but it works for me.

You can go ahead and keep voting for the lesser of two evils, or voting against someone else, or whatever you want to call it. Keep voting for someone who tells you the same old lies.

But when they turn around and forget their promises, or worse stab you in the back, or make really stupid moves, like Trump has (more than once), then don't try to make excuses for him.

And don't try to say our votes were wasted or split the vote. As I pointed out, in this thread and many others (including before the election), Oregon, Washington and California - all three states on the west coast - ALL of the electoral votes for those states went to Clinton. So anybody who voted for Trump in those states wasted their vote - not me.

I voted for the Libertarian candidate and by doing so I (and everybody else who voted Libertarian) got that candidate over the 5% necessary to receive public funding. Public funding of presidential elections - FEC.gov

It also made other candidates for any office take notice when the Libertarian party increased their share of the popular vote.

 

[NW Backpacker]

Even Mr. Mayors Against Gun/Anti-Gun Zealot Rudolph Giuliani (a good buddy of Trump) magically became pro-gun when running for President when he found out that Republicans wanted a pro-gun candidate and Democrats were calling for gun bans.

By your own words they are pro-gun NOW. I don't care what he believed in the past. I don't even care what he believes NOW, as long as he keeps putting in pro-2A judges, particularly on the Supreme Court. Care to argue against THAT?

On the North Korean Dictator, I don't care what he does to his people. Not my problem. Many governments are crapping on their people. Ted Bundy was, by many accounts, a "nice guy". I'll bet OJ was too. So, maybe the dictator IS a nice guy on the surface. Trump is attempting to talk with NK to get them to give up nukes. If, by showing him some respect, he gets the nukes removed, then it would probably be worth it. I doubt it will work, but it's worth a shot. Nobody else has made any effort at all to improve the situation.

My guess is the never-Trumpers will get their wish. Then the crying will start.

 

[Hayharnel]

Great job voting libertarian, where did that get us?

 

[Hayharnel]

By your own words they are pro-gun NOW. I don't care what he believed in the past. I don't even care what he believes NOW, as long as he keeps putting in pro-2A judges, particularly on the Supreme Court. Care to argue against THAT?

On the North Korean Dictator, I don't care what he does to his people. Not my problem. Many governments are crapping on their people. Ted Bundy was, by many accounts, a "nice guy". I'll bet OJ was too. So, maybe the dictator IS a nice guy on the surface. Trump is attempting to talk with NK to get them to give up nukes. If, by showing him some respect, he gets the nukes removed, then it would probably be worth it. I doubt it will work, but it's worth a shot. Nobody else has made any effort at all to improve the situation.

My guess is the never-Trumpers will get their wish. Then the crying will start.

I wish I could like your post more than once. But let's get back to bad mouthing everybody and everything and voting like idiots!

 

[Hayharnel]

What you do is up to you but I have this really truly totally weird philosophy; I vote for the person that I actually want to be in office.

Strange I know - but it works for me.

You can go ahead and keep voting for the lesser of two evils, or voting against someone else, or whatever you want to call it. Keep voting for someone who tells you the same old lies.

But when they turn around and forget their promises, or worse stab you in the back, or make really stupid moves, like Trump has (more than once), then don't try to make excuses for him.

And don't try to say our votes were wasted or split the vote. As I pointed out, in this thread and many others (including before the election), Oregon, Washington and California - all three states on the west coast - ALL of the electoral votes for those states went to Clinton. So anybody who voted for Trump in those states wasted their vote - not me.

I voted for the Libertarian candidate and by doing so I (and everybody else who voted Libertarian) got that candidate over the 5% necessary to receive public funding. Public funding of presidential elections - FEC.gov

It also made other candidates for any office take notice when the Libertarian party increased their share of the popular vote.

I know it works for you, so why are you complaining about OUR sitting President?

 

[4Freedom]

Seriously, if Trump wants to ban suppressors you really think he is any better than the Democrat candidates? What is more dangerous, the enemy across the battlefield who you are trying to kill or the enemy you invite into your home and trust with your life?

If Trump doesn't attempt any more anti-2A legislation outside of his Bump Stock Ban, I could probably live with him if no other viable choice is presented in the 2020 elections.

Do I like Trump? No, I could only hope of having someone like Rand Paul and would have taken many other Republican candidates over him. However, as long as Trump leaves the 2nd Amendment alone, I would have no problem voting for him again, even if I don't believe in his integrity or like him personally.

If he goes after Suppressors, I am pretty confident he will go after everything else and he will do it with a mafia style kiss of death. Yeah, he and the other RINOs will confidently hug and kiss us telling us how much they love the 2nd Amendment and support our rights as they remove them one by one.

At least with anti-gun Democrats they are very transparent about their agenda and not trying to pretend they are our friends and support our rights, when they blatantly are calling for complete gun confiscation (almost every Dem candidate).

If he keeps talking about banning suppressors and starts making more bold anti-2A statements, you can be sure I am not going to vote for him, because I don't believe he would be less evil than the Democrat who would be elected. Like I said people keep forgetting how virulently anti-gun Ronald Reagan and George HW BUsh were. Yet, the same people who curse anti-gun Democrats glorify these guys. And, I have no clue why.

Also, there is nothing a politician loves more than for you to feel helpless and like you have no other choice but to support him. Once you put a politician in that position of power there is no telling how destructive their ego can become if you truly do not believe they are an honorable person and a person of integrity.

 

[Jcon268]

One question. Why doesn't Trump like suppressors at all? What should give him any reason not to? It seemed as if he had his mind made up already. Sure maybe he was just talking in front of the camera. But what halfway decent reason would he have to not like them? Did someone attack him with one once before? Or does he buy into the Hollywood hype that they make bad guys undetectable as they sneak up on their victims? If it's the latter, then it seems as though he is rather gullible to sensationalism. Remember that he once stated he was in favor of an AWB. Long before he became president.

 

[nammac]

Woah, this could be big, either in a good or bad way. Imagine if by some miracle NFA34 was ruled unconstitutional?

Then I better start rollin my quarters for a real '27 Thompson...

 

[NW Backpacker]

Like I said people keep forgetting how virulently anti-gun Ronald Reagan and George HW BUsh were. Yet, the same people who curse anti-gun Democrats glorify these guys. And, I have no clue why.

During his term in office, the only time that matters, Reagan was PRO-2A.
How a Pro-2nd Amendment President Supported Gun Control

While in office, the only time that matters, George HW Bush, wasn't perfect, but he was not even in the ballpark of "virulently anti-gun". I suspect he imposed the AW import ban to help US manufacturers, and to make antis think he was doing something significant.
Import Ban on Assault Rifles Becomes Permanent

Article on "Gun control by executive order":
Gun Control by Executive Order? | National Review

Someone asked what did voting Libertarian get us. Voting 3rd party got us 8 years of Hillbillary, and 8 years of W, and in Oregon seems like I remember that Dudley (R) lost due to 3rd parties. I think T lost some states due to 3rd party votes, but I will not take the time to do the math. Doesn't matter now.

 

[The Heretic]

I know it works for you, so why are you complaining about OUR sitting President?

Because he is an idiot?

I can do both you know - I can vote for who I want and complain about the POTUS who got elected by the electoral votes and not by the majority vote, because of his actions.

 

[GWS]

I can do both you know - I can vote for who I want and complain about the POTUS who got elected by the electoral votes and not by the majority vote, because of his actions.

Neither of which solves the problem of how do we keep Anti-gun Democrats out of the oval office. Yes, my vote for Trump may be "wasted " here in WA, but the money I donated wasn't. It helped get him elected and more importantly, it kept Hilary out of the presidency. Yeah, the lesser of two evils but that's politics AND reality. If you want to vote for an independent, fine. Vote your heart's desire but realize that unless, by some miracle the Libertarians can actually get a candidate that mainstream people will vote for, they will remain an exercise in futility whose primary function will be to get Democrats elected.

 

[awshoot]

... You can go ahead and keep voting for the lesser of two evils, or voting against someone else, or whatever you want to call it. Keep voting for someone who tells you the same old lies. ...

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

 

[awshoot]

... If he keeps talking about banning suppressors and starts making more bold anti-2A statements, you can be sure I am not going to vote for him, because I don't believe he would be less evil than the Democrat who would be elected. Like I said people keep forgetting how virulently anti-gun Ronald Reagan and George HW BUsh were. Yet, the same people who curse anti-gun Democrats glorify these guys. And, I have no clue why. ....

Supreme Court rejects challenge to regulation of gun silencers

The justices did not comment Monday in turning away appeals from two Kansas men who were convicted of violating federal law regulating silencers. ... President Trump's administration asked the court to stay out of the case and leave the convictions in place.

 

[spectre1986]

^ beat me to it. Just came in to post it.

 

[GWS]

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

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.

 

[nammac]

Supreme Court rejects challenge to regulation of gun silencers

So much for that hope... seems to me the SCOTUS isn't interested in the least in setting precedent regarding the Secind Amendment. Too bad, they could make a definitive swipe at it and clear all this state level noise and babble... I guess there's just not enough constitutionalist on the Supreme Court... Hangs head, sooo sad....

 

[The Heretic]

Supreme Court rejects challenge to regulation of gun silencers

And there you go.

More evidence that Trump is no friend of gun owners.

How many more times does he have to stab us in the back for us to say "et tu Brute?"

 

[NW Backpacker]

And there you go.

More evidence that Trump is no friend of gun owners.

How many more times does he have to stab us in the back for us to say "et tu Brute?"

End result: the law on suppressors does not change. 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!!!!!

I did watch this video on shooting a suppressed .22 and it sounded like it was about as loud as a BB gun, although it's hard to tell from a video. If so, I can see where there could be additional law enforcement/safety concerns if in the wrong hands, although this would be great for plinking.

Even this .308 sounds quiet: (scroll to 4:20 for the start of shooting)

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