View Full Version : Trump: NO New Assault Weapons Ban
Doc Safari
08-09-19, 13:27
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation-world/ct-nw-trump-background-checks-20190809-nnwggu3l6jc3vh5pp6ul4vz2p4-story.html
Trump says he wants ‘very meaningful’ background checks, but is not considering assault weapons ban
He said Friday he now is looking for "very meaningful background checks" but is not considering a resurrection of an assault weapons ban.
My take: Boom Chaka Laka Boom.
Glad that he says this.
It was discouraging to see how compliant most people were with the Clinton era ban. Pathetic, really.
"He said he was hopeful the NRA would not be an obstacle to strengthening the nation’s gun laws."
Shouldn't be much of a problem.
Glad that he says this.
It was discouraging to see how compliant most people were with the Clinton era ban. Pathetic, really.
Glad that says what? That he’s still going to screw us?
Yes lovely
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
WickedWillis
08-09-19, 14:21
I don't think that he can be trusted at all when it comes to his hot and cold takes on the 2nd.
Glad that says what? That he’s still going to screw us?
Yes lovely
Not sure how... "meaningful BG checks"?
The comment about no chance on bans will hopefully dash the hopes of the moron masses.
I don't think that he can be trusted at all when it comes to his hot and cold takes on the 2nd.
True.
If there to be a background check bill we need to get something in our side. This should be a true compromise where both parties come away with something . We just seem to always be giving up crap.
I agree. Select fire and over-the-counter suppressors is what I propose for a compromise. Asking too much?
I agree. Select fire and over-the-counter suppressors is what I propose for a compromise. Asking too much?
I hate replies like this, but LOL!
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-09-19, 16:03
Just the left one in our position, they would go after money and resources. The left would ask for money for gun ranges. That way people have a way to responsibly learn how to use their firearms.
Just the left one in our position, they would go after money and resources. The left would ask for money for gun ranges. That way people have a way to responsibly learn how to use their firearms.
I want UBCs for alcohol purchases and mandatory drivers ed training nationwide
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A thought that just crossed my mind. The left is always clamoring on about UBCs, Would couldn't a LiveScan be sufficient? It's been about a decade since I had one done, but LiveScans are used for a ton of different things, job applications being one of them. Why couldn't it be where you go and get a LiveScan done, you bring the printout to the LGS that says you're gtg, or a printout that has a code and phone number that they LGS calls and they are told that you're gtg, that way the Gov doesn't know if you're getting the LiveScan done for a job, a gun, or some other reason. I don't know the limitations of the system but this idea just popped into my head.
I've done a few FTF sales when and where it was legal, and I honestly prefer it, no paper trail at all, but if the UBC must be implemented, why not use a system already in place being used for multiple things so as not to be a back door registration?
turnburglar
08-09-19, 16:49
I want UBCs for alcohol purchases and mandatory drivers ed training nationwide
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
... and to buy any product with more than 30 grams of sugar; you must use one of those BMI machines to prove you are under 15%. Right on the spot at the register. We cant just let the fatties keep hurting themselves right???
I agree. Select fire and over-the-counter suppressors is what I propose for a compromise. Asking too much?
Rule #1 if negotiation- ask for too much.
Anyone who thinks this is a win is an imbecile. A NICS check would not have stopped a single mass shooting. When it doesn’t stop the next one, what will they take next?
As a veteran who was diagnosed with “PTSD” and had depression in the past, I’m concerned with the red flag laws and background checks as they get more and more in depth.
Anyone who thinks this is a win is an imbecile. A NICS check would not have stopped a single mass shooting. When it doesn’t stop the next one, what will they take next?
As a veteran who was diagnosed with “PTSD” and had depression in the past, I’m concerned with the red flag laws and background checks as they get more and more in depth.
They know it won’t stop anything......it’s all part of the plan. Every restriction conditions the public for more restrictions
See here
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html
Maybe no AWB, but wait for the pistol brace to be done away with via executive fiat ala bump stocks.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
If there to be a background check bill we need to get something in our side. This should be a true compromise where both parties come away with something . We just seem to always be giving up crap.
That, brother, is how compromise goes when it comes to the RKBA.
You have a nice sandwich. A lib walks up and says "Gimme your sammich." You say "Get fvcked." He says "Okay, just gimme half then." You give him half. What just happened here?
Anyone who thinks this is a win is an imbecile. A NICS check would not have stopped a single mass shooting. When it doesn’t stop the next one, what will they take next?
As a veteran who was diagnosed with “PTSD” and had depression in the past, I’m concerned with the red flag laws and background checks as they get more and more in depth.
Sadly, you are correct to be concerned. If you do happen to go to the VA do NOT mention firearms.
Belmont31R
08-09-19, 21:11
I was talking to a buddy earlier about RFL's and how gun owners will have to completely disassociate themselves from leftists including family members, and those laws will turn a legal act into a grey area at best and black at worst. Take for instance family gatherings around the holidays. We've already seen the past few years and all the stories about leftists getting angry at Trump voters. Say a leftist cousin or aunt or whoever shows up at a Thanksgiving dinner, they bring up politics, get angry at you, and a couple of days later the police show up at your house at 2AM to take all your guns because they filed a red flag on you. They can say they felt threatened and feared 'you' might retaliate against them. Boom your guns/rights are gone and you'll at best have to get a lawyer, take time off work, and you'll get your guns back reasonably quickly. Worst case...well you just don't ever get your rights back and maybe some court ordered anger management classes...who knows what kind of ****ed up shit these deep blue judges will do.
They already tried this bullshit with the No Fly List and no Due Process to take away rights. This is an end around to get past what the traditional meaning of Due Process is and what's actually acceptable in taking away the rights of citizens.
If there to be a background check bill we need to get something in our side. This should be a true compromise where both parties come away with something . We just seem to always be giving up crap.
SPORTER CLAUSE.
Diamondback
08-10-19, 00:05
A thought that just crossed my mind. The left is always clamoring on about UBCs, Would couldn't a LiveScan be sufficient? It's been about a decade since I had one done, but LiveScans are used for a ton of different things, job applications being one of them. Why couldn't it be where you go and get a LiveScan done, you bring the printout to the LGS that says you're gtg, or a printout that has a code and phone number that they LGS calls and they are told that you're gtg, that way the Gov doesn't know if you're getting the LiveScan done for a job, a gun, or some other reason. I don't know the limitations of the system but this idea just popped into my head.
I've done a few FTF sales when and where it was legal, and I honestly prefer it, no paper trail at all, but if the UBC must be implemented, why not use a system already in place being used for multiple things so as not to be a back door registration?
Problem is lack of LiveScan terminals--you'd need to block-grant funding to put one in every precincthouse/substation, or open it to private "BGC clinics," maybe allow gunshops to buy or lease their own terminals and do the scan right there. That's another point I'd add: "scan today, clean today, walk away with gun today, no more waiting period bullshit." Only delay would be if you get a "Delay" on the check.
Also, no more of the "backdoor registration" on 4473; just "can this person buy a gun or not?"
Diamondback
08-10-19, 00:07
SPORTER CLAUSE.
That's our other thing we need to make a Full Court Press on, if we can't kill GCA68 in toto. (And re the latter IMO we need to at least try--if the other dude doesn't laugh in your face at your opening offer you've just f*cked yourself up the ass for that negotiation.)
That's our other thing we need to make a Full Court Press on, if we can't kill GCA68 in toto. (And re the latter IMO we need to at least try--if the other dude doesn't laugh in your face at your opening offer you've just f*cked yourself up the ass for that negotiation.)
Kill the Sporter Clause and you have finished gutting the 1968 GCA. FOPA 86 eliminated some of the worst elements of the 1968 GCA, get rid of the sporter clause and you will still have a background check system which will keep those happy who think it stops criminals from getting guns when they can't buy legally. Then there is mail order guns, who cares? Nearly every zip code has a dozen FFLs who will receive for you for $10 or so.
Kill the Sporter Clause, then open the registry. Then strike all the import bans because they have no validity without the Sporter Clause. My collection will become a safe full of quaint "antiques" but I won't care because I'll be filling another safe with the newest, latest.
Diamondback
08-10-19, 01:47
Kill the Sporter Clause and you have finished gutting the 1968 GCA. FOPA 86 eliminated some of the worst elements of the 1968 GCA, get rid of the sporter clause and you will still have a background check system which will keep those happy who think it stops criminals from getting guns when they can't buy legally. Then there is mail order guns, who cares? Nearly every zip code has a dozen FFLs who will receive for you for $10 or so.
Kill the Sporter Clause, then open the registry. Then strike all the import bans because they have no validity without the Sporter Clause. My collection will become a safe full of quaint "antiques" but I won't care because I'll be filling another safe with the newest, latest.
You mean instead of trying to figure out cobbling together a mix of original Bulgarian and 922r-compliance crap I could just no-shit import my college mentor's old Bulgy AK in its as-issued configuration? Sounds good to me... (Yeah yeah, I know, Mr. Death-to-Commies war-hawk talking about an AK... my prof was a conscript who became a dissident and used his army training to exfiltrate from the Iron Curtain overland, so in a way it's a symbol of the experiences that shaped him and thus helped him to shape me. Besides, you can't talk about the Cold War or any conflict since without the Kalashnikov in one context or another.)
You mean instead of trying to figure out cobbling together a mix of original Bulgarian and 922r-compliance crap I could just no-shit import my college mentor's old Bulgy AK in its as-issued configuration? Sounds good to me... (Yeah yeah, I know, Mr. Death-to-Commies war-hawk talking about an AK... my prof was a conscript who became a dissident and used his army training to exfiltrate from the Iron Curtain overland, so in a way it's a symbol of the experiences that shaped him and thus helped him to shape me. Besides, you can't talk about the Cold War or any conflict since without the Kalashnikov in one context or another.)
Yep, AKs would become $400 again because we'd be buying surplus military gear and as a bonus it would be original select fire rifles, have to pay a $200 tax stamp but who gives a shit. 922r wouldn't even be a thing anymore.
We are tweet away from him declaring the opposite of what he said and claiming the first statement was fake news, so utterly meaningless IMHO.
Also interesting to note, eventually a ban proponent will be elected to the white house eventually, so we're only one executive order (regardless of what congress thinks) away from a ban anyway.
Good thing I stocked up years ago.
Doc Safari
08-10-19, 09:50
I was talking to a buddy earlier about RFL's and how gun owners will have to completely disassociate themselves from leftists including family members, and those laws will turn a legal act into a grey area at best and black at worst. Take for instance family gatherings around the holidays. We've already seen the past few years and all the stories about leftists getting angry at Trump voters. Say a leftist cousin or aunt or whoever shows up at a Thanksgiving dinner, they bring up politics, get angry at you, and a couple of days later the police show up at your house at 2AM to take all your guns because they filed a red flag on you. They can say they felt threatened and feared 'you' might retaliate against them. Boom your guns/rights are gone and you'll at best have to get a lawyer, take time off work, and you'll get your guns back reasonably quickly. Worst case...well you just don't ever get your rights back and maybe some court ordered anger management classes...who knows what kind of ****ed up shit these deep blue judges will do.
They already tried this bullshit with the No Fly List and no Due Process to take away rights. This is an end around to get past what the traditional meaning of Due Process is and what's actually acceptable in taking away the rights of citizens.
Excellent points. I have anti-gun inlaws. One is even a dead ringer for Diane Feinstein.
We are tweet away from him declaring the opposite of what he said and claiming the first statement was fake news, so utterly meaningless IMHO.
Also interesting to note, eventually a ban proponent will be elected to the white house eventually, so we're only one executive order (regardless of what congress thinks) away from a ban anyway.
Evil black, Semi automatic weapons have proliferated. Executive order is nothing to be afraid of as it won’t muster through any court. It’s going to take a bill getting through Congress and making it to the presidents desk.
I agree though, it’s not a matter of if but when. I’d now say 10 years or less. The first one will have a grandfather clause. A couple years afterwards they will come after the grandfathered ones.
Doc Safari
08-10-19, 11:02
The thing to avoid is registration. Registration always leads to confiscation.
ramairthree
08-10-19, 11:41
The thing to avoid is registration. Registration always leads to confiscation.
I like your simple, dead on short responses.
Your long, multi paragraph talk radio thread starters on the other hand...
It's much better than "I don't like suppressors". My hope is that he is surrounded around enough Republicans to teach him, You dont fck with the 2nd or the NRA. And I know a lot of people don't love the NRA, but they fight the good fight more than most.
PB
Doc Safari
08-10-19, 12:11
I like your simple, dead on short responses.
Your long, multi paragraph talk radio thread starters on the other hand...
Yes, I realize some of my longer posts present a challenge to people with limited reading abilities.
It's much better than "I don't like suppressors". My hope is that he is surrounded around enough Republicans to teach him, You dont fck with the 2nd or the NRA. And I know a lot of people don't love the NRA, but they fight the good fight more than most.
PB
Yeah, that one really had me in a state of unrest for a few days. There will be no non-compliance option there given how few are out there and how conveniently registered all of them are.
Voodoochild
08-10-19, 14:25
Play nice!!
The Supreme Court is the only surefire way to not have to worry about this garbage in perpetuity. Hopefully they won’t have to vote in a ban to get a case and for the court to speak.
Clarence Thomas seems very interested in making a statement and I’m hoping he can convince 4 others.......That any law that would infringe on a basic human right protected by the BORs must pass an extremely high threshold and can not be arbitrary. I’m hoping they can squeeze something out if the NYC case but it may take a direct suit related to a ban
ramairthree
08-11-19, 01:51
Yes, I realize some of my longer posts present a challenge to people with limited reading abilities.
It’s more just trying to sort out what is legit information, paranoid schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s, garden variety senile dementia, or drunken confabulation.
Diamondback
08-11-19, 02:06
The Supreme Court is the only surefire way to not have to worry about this garbage in perpetuity. Hopefully they won’t have to vote in a ban to get a case and for the court to speak.
Clarence Thomas seems very interested in making a statement and I’m hoping he can convince 4 others.......That any law that would infringe on a basic human right protected by the BORs must pass an extremely high threshold and can not be arbitrary. I’m hoping they can squeeze something out if the NYC case but it may take a direct suit related to a ban
If only Dubya had named that man Chief instead of that spineless sissycuck bitchboy Roberts...
https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article233630997.html
"Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, under severe pressure from Democrats and a growing number of Republicans, suggested Thursday that the Senate could look at a ban on assault weapons and that there’s Senate support for a move to expand background checks to nearly all gun sales."
https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article233630997.html
"Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, under severe pressure from Democrats and a growing number of Republicans, suggested Thursday that the Senate could look at a ban on assault weapons and that there’s Senate support for a move to expand background checks to nearly all gun sales."
Its ok guys I’m told in confidence that law and constitution protects us against such actions
[emoji849]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh good, I was starting to get nervous there.
Doc Safari
08-11-19, 11:23
It’s more just trying to sort out what is legit information, paranoid schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s, garden variety senile dementia, or drunken confabulation.
You're hilarious.
I just dont understand why you, jpmuscle, and 26inf delight in trolling my posts instead of just being mature enough to ignore them.
If you dont like what I write, why do you read it?
I will keep complaining to the mods about you until I get you banned before I change one thing for your sake.
I’m not sure that any of it is worth wasting the mods’ time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doc Safari
08-11-19, 12:07
I’m not sure that any of it is worth wasting the mods’ time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any forum that tolerates its members being harassed by other members doesn't deserve to prosper in my book. As much as people here criticize TOS they don't even tolerate it.
Any forum that tolerates its members being harassed by other members doesn't deserve to prosper in my book. As much as people here criticize TOS they don't even tolerate it.
Man, it’s just the internet. People can stop using it at any time they wish.
Just put them on your ignore list.
Doc Safari
08-11-19, 12:14
Man, it’s just the internet. People can stop using it at any time they wish.
Just put them on your ignore list.
Good point.
Dr. Bullseye
08-11-19, 12:55
I don't know where to post this so I'll post it here. Friday I called my Congressman Kevin McCarthy's Wash. D.C. office and commented on gun control. I got an assistant and he listened. I said no gun control, no red flag, no more background, nothing. I told him if you want to change the 2A, amend the Constitution. Further, I told him we are going to regain the House next cycle and Kevin could be Speaker if he simply moves from the caboose to the front of the Trump Train. Just let the current hysteria blow over.
This assistant totally agreed with everything I said. I was shocked and expecting an argument. He did not want to change gun laws at all. He asked me where I lived (in McCarthy's district) and told me he would pass on the views to the Congressman. Of course this will be some sort of digital summary of caller views but it is something.
Can we all call our congressmen and senators (I have none) and urge them to secure our rights? It takes only a minute and you can get the phone number by googling your congressman's name, Wash.D.C. office and telephone number.
SeriousStudent
08-11-19, 15:54
Any forum that tolerates its members being harassed by other members doesn't deserve to prosper in my book. As much as people here criticize TOS they don't even tolerate it.
So feel free to insult other member's ability to read, but get pissy when people insult you in return.
Gotcha. Have you ever thought about getting a blog instead of burning someone else's bandwidth for free? You're not a site supporter, but by all means feel free to criticize the mods/staff that volunteer their time here.
We're done here.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.