In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Done with Trump?
Had enough yet?
Comments
"Never do wrong to make a friend----or to keep one".....Robert E. Lee
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From what I've noticed about the "Trump haters" is they are unwilling and unable to comprehend good old common sense.
We have enough gun laws, what we need is IDIOT control.
Blood makes you related. Loyalty makes you family.
I thought getting old would take longer. :shock:
Imagine being surrounded by demonized rats 24/7 every day while in office. God please bless the USA -
AND hats off to President Trump who has the gonads to soldier on in the fray and blast back at those who demean him 24/7/365.
We have enough gun laws, what we need is IDIOT control.
Blood makes you related. Loyalty makes you family.
I thought getting old would take longer. :shock:
I have never been a real Trump fan. That being said, do you have a better option? Both parties have devolved into school yard histrionics. No middle ground and no common sense on either side. Then you have the media dissecting every word said and somehow distorting the words to bolster their point of view. Did Trump call out Baltimore because of its black population or because it is a crap hole? Until we can criticize without the distortion of fake racial bias nothing will get fixed. At least Trump brought wider attention to the problem. The democrat response is Trumps a racist and give us more money. Bob
Those who support a man who advocates for, supports and/or advances gun control is in fact a supporter of gun control himself.
No running from it.
"We cannot let those killed in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, die in vain. Likewise for those so seriously wounded. We can never forget them, and those many who came before them. Republicans and Democrats must come together and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying....
....this legislation with desperately needed immigration reform. We must have something good, if not GREAT, come out of these two tragic events!"
https://mises.org/wire/brief-history-repressive-regimes-and-their-gun-laws
More feel good legislation for the masses. Won't accomplish a thing. I suppose a criminal won't sell another criminal a gun without a background check. How many current laws were broken during the two recent mass shootings. Since 1968 the politicians have saddled us with thousand of firearms laws, rules and regulations. I'm sure just one more useless law forced on the law abiding public will solve the problem - NOT. Bob
Being supportive of gun control does not necessarily equate to being anti-gun. Nor are a man's children a carbon copy of the man.
There are millions of Fuddites who own and like certain guns and want to continue to have access to those guns (hunters and sportsmen) but who are also supportive of various forms of gun-control.
Perhaps a gander and ponder into a mirror will drive this point home for you.
Trump ordered the the ATF to enact the Trump-stock ban and Trump also advocates for and supports 'red-flag' gun seizure 'laws', both of which are forms of gun control. He has openly said that he is open to and will consider a silencer/suppressor ban.
The Trump-stock ban, via executive fiat and regulatory fiat, criminalizes and bans private property and requires its destruction and or turn-in without compensation (as if compensation would make it constitutional). The red-flag seizures textually violate Amendment II and also other amendments of the BORs. Did you not hear Trump's previous gun control blather about 'let's seize the guns now, due process later' ? He has also been in support of an 'assault weapons ban' along with various other gun control laws in the recent past.
His latest 'created crisis' blather today reiterated his support for unconstitutional gun seizures and touted his Trump-stock ban, along with specifically opening the door to working with Congress (and who else I wonder) to come up with further gun control laws.
He will, without doubt on my part, advance, advocate and/or sign more gun control soon.
Do you even have a clue about Trump's whole history of being a democrat and gun control supporter?
If not it would pay to educate yourself. If so, why would anyone give him a pass or make excuses for that history and the clear indications that he remains a gun controller who claims to support the 2A?
Oh, wait...it's different when 'your guy' does it, huh?
MASS SHOOTINGS
Relying on the Same Illogic That Trump Used to Ban Bump Stocks, a New Lawsuit Argues That Customizable Rifles Are IllegalThe plaintiffs say manufacturers broke the law by producing rifles that were compatible with accessories that facilitate rapid firing.
JACOB SULLUM?|?7.3.2019 4:15 PM
(Slide Fire Solutions)
A?new lawsuit?against the manufacturers of guns used in the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting claims that AR-15-style rifles are illegal because they are compatible with bump stocks, which increase their rate of fire. The plaintiffs, parents of a woman who was murdered in the Las Vegas massacre, argue that bump stocks like the ones used in that attack convert semi-automatic rifles into illegal machine guns?a position that has been endorsed by the Trump administration. Therefore, they argue, AR-15s are themselves illegal, since the?federal definition?of machine guns includes firearms that "can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."
That claim is important, since?the 2005?Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which generally shields gun makers from liability for crimes committed with their products, includes?an exception for "an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product." And while the?complaint?(for reasons that will become clear) does not mention the Trump administration's extralegal administrative?ban on bump stocks, the logic of that policy reinforces the plaintiffs' central argument.
Since 1986 federal law has banned the production and sale of new machine guns, including weapons that can be readily converted into machine guns and parts used for that purpose, for civilian use. During the Obama administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF)?concluded?on?several?occasions?that bump stocks, which facilitate a firing technique in which the rifle moves back and forth, repeatedly resetting the trigger and pushing it against the shooter's stationary finger, do not turn rifles into machine guns.
The reason is clear. A rifle equipped with a bump stock does?not?automatically fire more than one shot for each function of the trigger. It fires one round each time the trigger is activated, and the process is not automatic, since the shooter has to maintain forward pressure on the weapon and keep his finger in position.
Notwithstanding that reality, Donald Trump, in response to the Las Vegas massacre,?decidedhe could ban bump stocks by administrative fiat?the approach?favored?by the National Rifle Association. He instructed the Justice Department, which includes the ATF, to come up with a rationale, which?required?defining "function of the trigger" as "pull of the trigger," defining a trigger pull so as to exclude what happens during bump firing, and treating the shooter as part of the rifle mechanism.
The Nevada lawsuit, which was filed in the District Court of Clark County, omits that part of the story, since the fact that the ATF repeatedly said bump stocks were legal before reversing itself under Trump's orders after the Las Vegas attack weakens the case that manufacturers knew before then that they were breaking the law by producing guns that could be equipped with bump stocks. Instead the plaintiffs argue that manufacturers were aware that their guns were compatible with bump stocks and should have recognized that meant they could be readily converted into machine guns, even though the ATF had concluded otherwise.
In light of the bureaucratic history that the lawsuit glides over, that argument is highly dubious. But going forward, if you accept the Trump administration's view of bump stocks, it is at least superficially plausible to maintain that AR-15s are now illegal, since they can be readily equipped with such accessories.?In an interview with?The New York Times,?Lawrence Keane, general counsel for the gun industry's National Shooting Sports Foundation,?notedthat an AR-15 is "customizable, but the underlying semiautomatic action is not altered." That's true, but it does not matter under the Trump administration's unilateral redefinition of machine guns.
Indeed, the logic of Trump's ban suggests that?any?semi-automatic rifle is now illegal, since bump firing does not require bump stocks.?The ATF?concedes?that "individuals wishing to replicate the effects of bump-stock-type devices could also use rubber bands, belt loops, or otherwise train their trigger finger to fire more rapidly."?The implication is that?any?semi-automatic rifle, if owned by someone who also has rubber bands, belt loops, or fingers, could be considered a machine gun.
None of that means this lawsuit will succeed. In addition to the problem of proving that manufacturers knowingly violated the law, based on an interpretation that was explicitly rejected by the federal agency charged with enforcing that law, there is the unexamined assumption that the Las Vegas attack would not have happened, or at least would have been less lethal, had the defendants not sold weapons that were compatible with bump stocks.
"The events of October 1 would not have occurred but for the Defendants' illegal
and wrongful conduct," the lawsuit claims. That proposition seems hard to defend, since this was the first time a mass shooter had used bump stocks, and such killers?typically use handguns, not AR-15-style rifles. For example, the perpetrator of the 1991?Killeen massacre, which killed 23 people, used pistols, as did the perpetrators of the 2007?Virginia Tech shooting, which killed 32 people, and the?Virginia Beach attack?that killed 12 people last May.
It's true that the death toll in Las Vegas, which was the?deadliest?mass shooting in recent U.S. history, was considerably higher, and people tend to assume that bump stocks?as opposed to, say, firing from a height onto a crowd with multiple weapons and lots of ammunition?explain that horrifying achievement. "It was only a question of when?not if?a gunman would take advantage of the ease of modifying AR-15s to fire automatically [sic] in order to substantially increase the body count during a mass shooting," the lawsuit says. But given the well-known?tradeoff?between speed and accuracy that bump firing entails, it's possible the perpetrator could have killed as many people without bump stocks.
According to the lawsuit, the Las Vegas shooter fired 1,049 rounds in 10 minutes, killing 58 people, or one for every 18 rounds. In the 2018 Parkland shooting, by contrast, the perpetrator fired about?150 rounds?in?six minutes,?killing 17 people, or one for every nine rounds. By that measure, the Las Vegas shooter was half as accurate as the Parkland shooter. Yet the plaintiffs in the Nevada case are implicitly arguing that their daughter would not have died if the Las Vegas shooter had taken the time to aim.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who leads the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus, argued shortly after the Las Vegas massacre that bump stocks did not necessarily make the attack more deadly. "If he had been more clear-thinking and methodical about it," Massie?said, "he could have inflicted more casualties by shooting his firearms without bump stocks." Assuming the Nevada case goes to trial, that issue will be tested in court, along with the claim that gun manufacturers violated a ban that did not exist until Trump decided to rewrite the law.
JACOB SULLUM?is a senior editor at?Reason.
MASS SHOOTINGS?GUN CONTROL?LITIGATION?LAS VEGAS
https://reason.com/2019/07/03/relying-on-the-same-illogic-that-trump-used-to-ban-bump-stocks-a-new-lawsuit-argues-that-customizable-rifles-are-illegal/
The all or nothing crowd usually gets NOTHING.
We hang together or we hang separately.
See how close the last election was?
See ya all at the dnc gallows.
i'll wager $1000 within the first months of the next demonrat POTUS ....
AWB Ban Or worse.
Takers?
You 'party over principle' apparatchiks will be the death of all of us. You accept gun control and make excuses for the gun controller in chief when he is on 'your team', yet if 'the other team' did the exact same crap you'd be squealing like a stuck hog and acting all 'liberty warrior' and staunch gun control opposer.
Pfft...
I fully expect Trump to get to an AWB at some point, whether before 2020 of if reelected. He is, after all, a life-long democrat and gun control supporter, including an 'assault weapons ban' supporter.
He believes (correctly) that he has all you republican-faithful fooled and he has stated that he could shoot somebody in public and you republirubes would still vote for him. He is right about that by any objective measure.
So, with Trump at the helm dishing out, executive ordering and signing gun control you'll be a good cuckold and roll over for every single bit of it.
If the 'other team' were to be in power perhaps those like you would actually object, refuse to comply and we could set things right, finally.
With your team/guys like you in sufficient numbers, we will slow boil to death with no revolt against what is being done to us.
Congratulations.
A hint...it is never okay to enact, sign, go along with, support, enable, make excuses for, or otherwise support gun control regardless of who is doing it. Well, at least this is true as far as anyone who actually stands for individual liberty and for the Constitution and Republic.
Another one that don't get my point.
Reality:
There will be 2 viable choices for the next POTUS D or R. Have a viable alternative or just * umptions again?
Maybe someone will get the repuke nomination other than Trump.
They'll get my vote over any demonrat. Has ZERO to do with party and EVERYTHING about demonrats screwing us 24/7
Anyone with 1/2 a brain KNOWS what the rats will do to us first chance they get.
We all hang together or .......
You know the rest
See you at the dnc gallows
"I'll wager $1000 within the first months of the next demonrat POTUS ....
AWB Ban Or worse.
Takers?"
You in?
Continued support of the republican party guarantees the destruction of our system.
While the republicans are the lesser of the evils that are the 2 primary political parties in this country, they have reach an unacceptable level of big government abuse of the citizens and constitution.
Voluntarily participating in our nations destruction is just what continued backing of the republican party is. I will not do this.
Trump put in two liberals already. Both Kavanaugh and Gorsuch were highly endorsed by liberals before Trump named them. The dog and pony show continues.
Red flag laws are the most sinister. No due process. Trump is for them, and he will sign any bill that gets 1 or 2 billion for the wall, but it won't go toward the wall, but rather to feed and cloth and free medical for illegals at the border so he don't look inhumane.
Red flag laws. Think about who is going to decide to take your guns.
Not mentally ill: Thinking you were born in the wrong body.
Mentally ill: Not wanting the entire third world forcibly imported to your neighborhood.
How about it It496? Since you "know" LOL
It's tax deductible too
I'll do a lesser amount if ya want.
Damning with faint praise but I agree with your point. You would think with a population of over 300 million citizens that both parties could come up with better candidates. However until they do we are forced to vote for the least objectionable and that always seems to be a republican. Bob
President Trump needs the gun vote for reelection. But after 2020 there may an outright confiscation if He Loses and it sure looks like he may. The progressive blacks, whites, and Hispanics are all for it. Beto will run for The US senate again here in Texas if he can't clinch the Democrats president nomination. The Rhino's in the Republic party are gaining strength also on Gun bans across the board.
serf
And a quadrillion times better than any dem candidate for POTUS.
We have enough gun laws, what we need is IDIOT control.
Blood makes you related. Loyalty makes you family.
I thought getting old would take longer. :shock:
Bad Apple in the big apple?
? otherwise, you'll find an excuse.
And if not - we'll hear the crying from the "never Trump" crowd as the rats cornhole them for the 100th + time.
"I'll wager $1000 within the first months of the next demonrat POTUS ....
AWB Ban Or worse.
Takers?"
You in?
it496-- still waiting on an answer LOL
But after a look at Bill, Obama and Hillary, then the current crop of liars, commies and idiots, oh my!
They make Trump look like a choirboy.
They make Trump look like Jesus.
They make Trump look like George Washington.
They make Trump look like my grandfather.
They make Trump look like the greatest president, ever.
Wait....they have all passed....and are rolling over in their graves!
Don has a couple of flaws and is not a big gun guy , he is not anti gun, just needs some education on the subject matter.
Likend to education. Be ignorant, choose poorly or make the better choice for future.
Life and the good life is all about the choices we make.
Trump said way before he was elected that we'd get tired or winning. This thread shows that once again,, he was right. 8-)