Only Nixon could have gone to China.
The 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban was in effect when Columbine happened.
Well he better close the door and not go near it.
POTUS is setting them up for another fail.
Hope you folks know the POTUS's sons have shot NRA Hi Power since they were teens. POTUS is a Benefactor I believe, and has been a supporter of NRA goals.
President Ivanka rules again.
When and at what press conference did she say this? Please post the exact, original source so we can listen to the exact quote as said.
Didn’t he sign a type of ban on bump stocks yesterday?
Can anyone find the press conference where this quote allegedly came from? I couldn’t and wonder if this statement was actually made.
Simon Green, the poster of this thread, only signed up in October of last year.
I would like anyone who either advocates - or is even “considering” - a ban on an entire class of weapons (which ban, BTW, is directly contrary to the “Heller” decision) to answer this question:
“Why should the rights of tens of millions, of law-abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong be subject to infringement because of the actions of a very few evil and/or insane people?”
I might add that there is a SPECIFIC prohibition on infringing the right to keep and bear “arms” - and “arms” in the Revolutionary period and through at least the War of 1812 included crew-served cannon.
My bottom line is this: no matter the legalities, my answer and the answer of MILLIONS of other gun owners to any request or demand to surrender their arms is: “NO! Your move.”
Understand Trump’s strategy & tactics.
Among other techniques, he uses “get them to say ‘no’ to ‘yes’”.
Latest example is immigration: he offered the Left everything they want, yet they’re saying “no”. They won’t take “yes” for an answer, and thus undermine their own position and reveal that they don’t actually want what they’re asking for.
Trump asking the BATFE to look into banning bump stocks is just asking the BATFE to reverse what they’ve clearly ruled, and that because there isn’t law in place to support such a ban. He’s asking for something he can’t get, but just asking for it is a win - putting the Left & news media in the awkward position of having to support him asking for what they want, yet they will have to say ‘no’ to ‘yes’ and thus show they don’t really want what they’ve been screaming for.
Trump is demonstrating that the Left is the party of opposition: they don’t actually want anything they’re demanding, they just want to oppose Trump - which is a losing position. They have to either eventually give way and actually work with him, or naysay themselves into irrelevancy.
Here is a very to-the-point blog post about this very subject (and NO, this is NOT my blog or that of any friend or family member - I don’t even know anyone who has a blog, I just read this one):
http://raconteurreport.blogspot.com/2018/02/once-and-for-all.html
The phone number for the White House Comment Line is:
202-456-1111
The WH Switchboard number is:
202-456-1414
Don’t stay silent! Part of what is necessary is to not only oppose that which you don’t like, but also to let pols know when you back them. I suspect that Trump is just throwing this out there, and is not at all seriously considering any kind of ban, but he MUST hear from us on this issue.
The White House also has an email contact (for which you don’t have to wait on hold):
https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Here is my comment:
“I am an early backer of the President, including donations to his campaign, and I strongly support him on virtually every issue. HOWEVER, the President is apparently “leaving the door open” to legislation to limit so-called “assault weapons.” I am UNALTERABLY opposed to such legislation - it is not only unconstitutional, but it is a hard slap in the face of tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners who have never hurt anyone to even discuss limiting their rights because of the actions of a handful of evil and/or crazy individuals.
Freedom is NOT negotiable, PERIOD! President Trump will lose a lot of support if he proceeds down this road any further, and I urge him to “close the door” - immediately.
The President should otherwise keep doing what he is doing - making America great again by putting America and Americans first.
Thank you very much.”
Assuming potus knows the real definition of assault rifle, he could really scam these people. Any weapon with a fully automatic capability
Talk like this really irritates me in that it buys into the logic that an item is responsible for any resulting behavior using that item. I’ve posted it before and I’ll say it again, you can create more carnage and terror with a gallon of gas in a crowded facility than a gun can create. Are we to place age limits for the purchase of gasoline or the number of gallons you can purchase? Will you nerd a permit to purchase or have to endure a waiting period to fill your lawnmower? Is gasoline availability causing bad behavior? Portray such attacks in movies or video games and my guess is that it would become a weapon of choice. My take: It’s the individual and culture, not the object used.
He had better.
If you intend, President Trump, to retire in 2018, having been impeached and convicted — because Democrats would sweep the House and the Senate (since your supporters would sit home) — then please, by all means, support a major gun ban.
That sounds like she has no idea what Trump’s position is and is just deflecting the questions.
If this is actually Trump floating a trial balloon on an assault weapons ban, then we need to make it clear that this is a nonstarter.