“I think that we’ve come to the conclusion that Fix NICS alone would be a mockery of the magnitude of the problem and also the seismic shift in public opinion around this issue.” Connecticut Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal quoted in N.R.A. Suggests Trump May Retreat From Gun Control [via nytimes.com]

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

65 COMMENTS

  1. Please keep pushing gun control democommies… please give us a nice repeat of 1994. Give us enough of a majority in both houses to start passing constitutional amendments,

    • Holy…Shit….

      They’re starting the overreach exactly like you predicted…

      Maybe Trump IS playing 4D holographic explosive chess…

      • Trump may be exercising an excellent strategy here:

        (1) Trump offers a good chunk of what Democrats CLAIM to want — KNOWING that Democrats will refuse anyway because they actually want much more, they must oppose Trump on “principle”, and/or because Democrats do not want to help Trump look good with a victory.
        (2) There are no new gun owner control laws and his base that supports our right to keep and bear arms stays happy.
        (3) Some Democrats and people in the middle who wanted some gun owner control laws support Trump for offering what they wanted.

        In other words Trump is playing Democrats like a banjo at an Ozark hoedown! We shall see.

        • I dunno. I hope y’all are right. This makes me cautiously optimistic but I swear I remember the democrats being against a “fix NICS” from the start. Wasn’t this idea proposed some time ago, backed by the NRA, and the democrats stomped their feet and said no because “it doesn’t go far enough” and “only democrats can support gun reform” or some Shit? I swear this song and dance happened last year.

        • @Hank – I’m one of those upstate NY gun owners who constantly sends the “action alert” emails from GOA to my Senators. I’ve received the boiler plate email reply from Schumer so many times now that I can almost recite it, but in the email, Schumer stresses he supports the “Fix NICS” stuff. So it looks like indeed, the Democrats can’t help but go full Commie and will try to force a bill that will never pass.

        • Wishful thinking, or better put as C.S. Lewis’s invisible rabbit argument.

          If there were an invisible rabbit sitting in a chair, then the chair would appear empty, wouldn’t it? Well, the chair does appear empty. So there must be an invisible rabbit sitting in it! Well.

          If Trump had a super secret, ultra brilliant, pro-2A strategy, then that whole gun grabbing confab he conducted this week would have been devoid of all trace of such a strategy. Well, it was devoid of such a strategy. So he must have a super secret, ultra brilliant, pro-2A strategy, then!

        • Jonathan – Houston,

          I did not mean to suggest that Trump is enthusiastically pro-Second Amendment. What I was trying to convey is that he appears to have a strategy that garners support of some Democrats and people in the middle for making an offer that they want — while maintaining his base support since no new gun-owner control laws actually come into existence.

          If all Trump does is keep laws basically the same as they are now and appoint conservative justices (who will strike down existing laws) to U.S. Appellate courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, I will consider that fairly good for our side. It sure beats what would be happening if Hillary had taken the White House.

        • It’s good enough if this is what he does by accident.

          I speculate that he’s been accidentally trained to do exactly this, instinctively. A guy who’s spent his whole life navigating hostile admin environments where he’s over-matched will develop some skills and instincts (or become extinct.) It’s called “sensory learning.” You don’t need to plan, or even describe what you are doing, to develop the skill to do the perfect thing, which you learned intuitively over lots, and lots, and lots of trials. (Creating situations where sensory learning happens is another whole topic — maybe we should do that more, on purpose, so people get good at doing things just by doing them.)

          You can see Trump’s entire career as a yuuuuuge pile of learning trials, to train up in surviving, and thriving in a contentious, divided environment, where he’s over-matched. The economic development authorities have the admin power. The banks have the money. The zoning boards arbitrary the permissions. Local community and citizens’ groups the mind share. Chattering classes hold approval of what’s elegant or gauche. What’s he got? Orange hair and a big mouth. He can pick up a phone and talk to people who build ice rinks that work.

          What uncommon_sense just said, there, is *exactly* what Trump did on immigration. No, they don’t really want what they are agitating for. They want much, much more. Can’t take half a loaf without alienating their base. Can’t admit the whole loaf without alienating vast swaths of the “moderate” middle (and getting shown for the liars they are.) Can’t let progress happen without losing the issue. Now he has another one of those “listening meetings” on school safety. And everybody sees, maybe a bit bumbling with Orange hair, but really, he comes off as the sanest one in the room. (Contra president: “I won” and his photo-op with the R-people on the health care law. The optics are not even remotely the same when you’re “listening” after you *passed the damn thing*, then spend the whole event lecturing the people you are “listening” to. It’s horrible optics. The last administration never got that occasionally you have to play to not your base. 8 years in office, and they still didn’t get it. Ran a follow-on candidate who was even worse at that than the outgoing. “Deplorables?” “Irredeemables?” I used to think the R’s were the canonical, politically incompetent party.)

          Trump created a situation where the other guys only have losing moves. And he gets to do pretty near anything, and win.

          I won’t claim the “stable genius” is doing this gaming out the scenarios in the front of his head. He doesn’t have to “know” what he’s doing in in any articulable sense. It’s good enough if he’s the chicken that never loses at tic-tac-toe: a trained instinct that works, he doesn’t know why.

          Conveniently, once you know what kind of grubs this particular chicken finds tasty, you (we) can train him to do stuff in line with what we want. (He likes to think himself smart. He likes attention. He likes to make people who’ve been snotty to him look stupid, or worse. He likes to be the patron, doling out favors and making things work for people (who thank him.) Approaching Gun policy on principle, or even electoral math isn’t the best way, with him. He gets to harvest adulation, making other people looks stupid; adulation from people he’s allowed to be “great” again, “the best people” who BTW adore him. Let him set himself up to be adored, by doing what we want. That’s all it takes. Winning!)

    • We almost have enough the state legislatures and the Republican Party is trying their damndest to lose them.

    • Well, you didn’t expect a bigot like him to actually sully his dainty hands with the touch of a real gun, did you?
      🤠

    • Cruzo1981: He’s a democrat, never subject to the laws of we proletariat. [See Cngrsmn Maurice Hinchey d-NY and loaded .32 in his carry-on; or David Gregory NBC showing illegal (empty) std cap mag on TV]

  3. I love the constitution. All of it. But this fight is absolutely highlighting the 2 biggest weaknesses of it. The 2nd Amendment has some obvious flaws when it comes to criminals and the mentally ill. Especially in our modern, relatively pacifist society where the idea of putting down thieves, rapists, and other violent criminals is morally reprehensible. But this fight, purposely instigated by foreign enemies, wouldn’t be possible without the protections of the 1st. If this was happening in just about any other non-western country, this attack wouldn’t be possible and the Russians wouldn’t have bothered.

    The Russians started this crap. Everyone acknowledges and/or is starting to believe that we and our media are being purposely derailed by foreign enemies. And just about everyone admits it, left and right. Including the media. Continuing this fight, knowingly, is tantamount to treason against the United States of America. What possible motives do the Russians have to start this? They are only going to care about military, economic, and infrastructure advantages. I’m sure a detailed analysis has been done on this. I’d absolutely love to see it.

    • Hmmm…
      Bolshevik Revolution – 1917
      American Revolution – 1776
      Mmm… nope. Americans have been vociferously disagreeing with one another long before the communists came along.
      We’ll need to find a different scapegoat for this…
      🤠

    • “The 2nd Amendment has some obvious flaws when it comes to criminals and the mentally ill.” Only if you don’t take the numbers of crimes in context. If one is not involved in crime or attempting suicide, assault by firearm is pretty far down the list of causes of death. I think it is about the same as death due to hernia. The media just blows the problem egregiously out of proportion.

      • I had to look up the hernia stat… holy smokes, those things kill tens of thousands a year (wikipedia quotes 32,500 in 2013).

      • ” “The 2nd Amendment has some obvious flaws when it comes to criminals and the mentally ill.” ”

        No it doesn’t. Those with criminal intent and the mentally ill have flaws, and are il-fit for Society.

        The 2nd Amendment’s only flaw is that we fing talk about it ad nauseum and nobody gets hurt, except the people who are upholding the law and the Constitution. Plant a few of those MFs instead every ~ 10 years and we’ll be good. Until THAT changes (occurs), we’re stuck with people claiming the “2nd Amendment is flawed”.

        Think that sounds inflammatory? That’s only because you don’t care enough to pay attention to how you sound to me (and you don’t apply enough effort to Fing yourself).

    • The Russians have nothing to do with gun control in the US. The gun control crap started nationally in the US with American Democrats in the 1960s (y’know, those same Democrats who started the Vietnam War) and was continued by Republicans in the 1980s. It’s all just party politics (even if one side is looking more and more like a murderous totalitarian party every day).

      • The 1960s left was/is bought & owned by Moscow.

        Today Moscow is largely irrelevant. The damn CHICOMS are the existential threat to the US. There is way to much remaining of the soft hearted pre 1948 evangelist’s good will for China. Not enough reality and understanding of the bastards.

      • anonymoose (Russians nothing to do with gun control): Stalin, lenin, trotsky, marx, all were /are integral to modern-day Russia, and, I believe, modern-day democrats.

      • Anonymoose,

        Gun-owner control started in earnest in the U.S. in the 1930s with the National Firearms Act of 1934 which infringed our right to keep and bear suppressors, rifles and shotguns with “short” barrels, and full-auto firearms.

        The Gun Control Act of 1968 mandated that firearms dealers obtain a federal firearms license, mandated sales through federal firearms licensees, and implemented age restrictions.

        The Hughe’s Amendment in 1968 closed the supply of full-auto firearms for civilians.

        And the Brady Handgun Violence Act of 1993 implemented the background check system.

        So, I would say the National Firearms Act of 1934 was the “kick-off” for gun-owner control with significant “amendments” in the following decades as listed above.

        • The Hughes amendment was part of the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act not the Gun Control Act of 1968. Maybe you just transposed.

        • Exactly. The nfa was the first major victory for the gun control movement. From a modern perspective, the most important thing to remember is that the nfa was a compromise bill. We gave up the politically incorrect scary guns (sbs,sbr,full auto) in exchange for them not going after normal guns. The only thing that compromise gives us less ground for the next fight. They will never be happy till there are no guns in America, and we shouldn’t make things easier for them.

    • CoryC,

      The 2nd Amendment has some obvious flaws when it comes to criminals and the mentally ill. Especially in our modern, relatively pacifist society where the idea of putting down thieves, rapists, and other violent criminals is morally reprehensible.

      The true flaw is allowing violent mentally-ill people and violent criminals to roam largely unopposed among us. If something like 1/6th of the responsible adult population were armed, prisons kept violent criminals imprisoned, and mental institutions kept violent mentally-ill people secured, there would be no significant problem with violent crime and spree killers.

      The Second Amendment does not pose any problems — it provides solutions when all else fails.

    • Yeah, if only we could find a way to just take away the rights of people you deem “politically inconvenient”. /sarc

      Go live in Nazi germany or the Soviet Union; you’d do well there. Just don’t cry when they take your rights away because they determine you to be “mentally ill” for wanting a gun.

    • QUOTE: “Everyone acknowledges and/or is starting to believe that we and our media are being purposely derailed by foreign enemies.”

      Nice try, Troll-Farmer. When you used the word “everyone,” you gave yourself away. Consider getting an actual job that benefits America; one that doesn’t require such deceit.

    • “Especially in our modern, relatively pacifist society where the idea of putting down thieves, rapists, and other violent criminals is morally reprehensible.”

      Only by those who’ve never been car-jacked or raped. Those people would rather a woman be raped than the rapist turned DRT. Disgusting.

  4. Why would we fix a broken federal bureaucracy when we could just pass more ineffective laws and ban stuff.

    • How about simply starting by making people responsible for their actions. Or, in some cases, their in-action (dereliction of duty) such as the FBI and Broward County Police.

      More than one person should be going to jail and lose their pension over this. The law-abiding citizen should not be losing their freedoms.

      Dangerous Freedom > Peaceful Slavery

      • Just as a thought experiment, what do you suppose would have happened if in an alternate universe everyone including the students had their own weapons on them, loaded and ready to deploy when this nutcase walked in with his little AR? If every teenager in that building had learned in school how to safely handle and shoot those weapons.

      • “going to jail”… you misspelled “get stood up against the wall and shot”. That’s what you do for cowardice in the face of the enemy.

      • @GOV –

        I’m not sure the point you are getting at. In your alternate universe, I doubt the punk coward would have entered the school in the first place (its no longer a GFZ). Assuming he did, wouldn’t anyone who fired a shot would still be responsible for their actions? And it doesn’t impact the lack of action by The ‘almighty’ State in the first place. As another said, it would probably make for a polite society. That doesn’t remove personal responsibility for your actions.

        @PWRSERG –
        Execution may be justified, however, not before due process, at least in this country, IMHO. Summary execution would simply be another brand of totalitarianism – whether it’s fascist or socialist doesn’t matter.

        • We assume that it’s someone else’s duty to protect us from the violent elements among us, but they’re not the ones who pay the ultimate price for their inaction. A hundred years ago any 12 year old farm boy was proficient with fir earms and responsible enough to be the man of the house in his father’s absence. We haven’t devolved genetically, we just coddle ourselves and our children. We freak out over the thought of arming teachers, but there’s no reason why teenagers can’t be capable of defending themselves. I don’t see this sort of thing ever happening if we all placed the duty of protecting ourselves on the one person who has the most to lose.

        • I don’t know of many crimes more serious than cowardice in the face of the enemy, in military law it ranks up there with desertion, striking a superior officer, and treason. There is a reason for this. If society relies on a group to do a certain job and gives them special privileges to perform said job, those people have to be held to account when they deliberately refuse to do said job.

  5. So they literally said “we don’t want to solve the problem we just want punish the innocent.”

    • Hank: Don’r forget “and we want to APPEAR to do something for our photo-op for re-election.”

  6. Too early for the issue to go away. November is still 8 months out. Plus, they sure don’t want to make Republicans seem reasonable or participatory in any way. Gotta drag this thing along as far as possible otherwise it’s fingers crossed for another shooting incident in mid to late October.

    PS: Blumenthal has always been a grade A piece of shit through and through. How nobody has come forward with date-rape allegations yet is beyond me.

  8. It may be the main reason we go to war with piss ant small blue evil POS (D) states, and one big one out West.

    • And who is going to show up to defend the failure that is California? Are the thousands of people living in tents in their parks and under their overpasses going to rise up to the occasion? We already know the answer to that.

      You would think that Progressives would be scared out of their minds about the prospect of going head-to-head in a violent conflict with true Conservatives since true Conservatives have most of the firearms AND THE RESOLVE TO GET THEIR HANDS DIRTY IF NECESSARY. (While Progressives talk a big game, few of them are willing to get their hands dirty.)

    • You’re still not quite getting it, Joe. It’s not “blue state vs. red state”.

      It’s “urban vs. rural”.

      • I get’cha HP, and I offer a concurring opinion (agree with your conclusion but get there by a different argumentative route) yes, rural v. urban, but the biggest problem are when POS (D) reach the top of the fed/state/local management pyramid. When that happens, I (on the plains of Oklahoma) cannot adequately affect (counter) a correction back to U.S. Constitutional (Republic) / Declaration of Independence / Christian based Society / standards. I don’t carry the “jursidictional” authority to get that done, BUT IT IS STILL “PART OF MY AMERICA” (part of my country).
        I hold the people of such states then, PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE for the sh_t, pain, and stress that they put me in, and I threaten to “call” them on their raise of a demand for civil war to stop them.

        I’ve posted too many times here, and I’m doing it again because it’s worth bearing out:

        IF YOU LIVE IN A BLUE STATE, YOU
        MAY
        BE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
        IF YOU HAVE A (D) AFTER YOUR NAME, OR ARE LIBERAL, PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALIST, COMMUNIST, GLOBALIST, ECO-IST, CLIMATE-CHANGE-IST, OR RINO
        THE PROBLEM IS
        PART OF
        YOU
        YOU ARE PERMANENTLY BROKEN AND A SCOURGE, AND YOUR MOTHER OWES US AN ABORTION.

  9. The dumbocrat manifesto is gun CONFISCATION. They want everyone living on their plantation suckling up to MASSA’. Thats the “fix”…

  10. Freaking morons. You scream “WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING” and when we offer something that would actually help, and go at least an amount towards fixing a broken federal system that has been proven to be utterly ineffective as it stands, as nearly all of the past several mass shooters SHOULD have been flagged to not purchase a firearm but were not through GOVERNMENT FAILURE, you complain that it’s not good enough. Is there any clearer indication that by “DO SOMETHING” they mean “ACTUALLY TAKE AWAY THE GUNS”?

    It’s what you’re getting, assholes. If you reject it, the fallout is on you. This will not spin well. “Trump offers compromises, concessions, Dems flatly reject them.”

    You cry to DO SOMETHING. When we offer something, you don’t like it. FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUU

  11. its another good day in america friends:

    most of washington dc still hates the presidents guts

    THATS A GOOD THING

    thats how we know hes draining the swamp

    if youre taking flak youre over the target

    oh yeah and hes the first sitting president to speak live at the national right to life march in washington dc

  12. Dem’s are terrified of any gun control passing before November. I honesty believe they would sabotage anything that had the slightest chance of passing before November.

  13. Rush Limbaugh predicted on Wednesday that the Dems would torpedo any gun control bills that may pass because they are not prepared for the blood loss that would occur during the midterms. Looks like the torpedoing is starting with the not far enough rhetoric.

  14. They are double torpedoing themselves while dive bombing their own battlship.
    First torpedo: Vehemently rejecting all Republican suggestions thereby looking irrational.

    Torpedo two: Pushing for heavier restrictions.

    Divebomb: Still trying to scream it’s all Trump and the NRA’s fault nothing has been implemented.

    I’m not saying Trump is a genius and not saying he’s an idiot because to be honest I don’t know that he’s doing this on purpose… If he is the man is far FAR smarter than anyone ever gave him credit for and if he isn’t doing it on purpose he’s the luckiest son of a bitch I ever saw.

    • Once is an accident: Trump getting elected.
      Twice is coincidence: Trump effectively turning the immigration debate into an election issue.
      Three times is deliberate action: Trump forcing the DNC to come out of the closet on gun confiscation.

      He may not be a genius, I don’t know the man. But at worst, he’s an idiot savant at playing out enough rope to let his enemies hang themselves.

      • True… Luckily for him though they keep wrapping that rope around their necks. He’s the first president I’ve seen successfully play the left against itself and make them admit what they really are after. It’s amazing it took this long for someone to figure it out….

        Issue X comes along. Lefty wants to use event Y to ban object Z to prevent future event Ys however, they know they can’t attack object Z because it’s Constitutionally protected and there’s no way in hell to get the votes for an amendment. So lefty goes after object Z with features 1,2,&3.
        Righty fights it but lefty has very loud friends so eventually Righty caves and “compromises” giving up object Z with features 1,2,&3.

        With Trump. Lefty goes after object Z with features 1,2,&3. Trump agrees it’s a problem and says ok I’m open to banning this. Lefty and his buddies think they win so they push for more. Trump says no take what I agreed to or get nothing. Lefty pushes for more then starts arguing with his friends while Trump sits back drinkin beer and does nothing on Issue X. Meanwhile, the heat dies off the public forgets and in 6 months nobody remembers wtf Issue X was about.

  15. For the Democrats to support fixing the NICS, they would have to admit it was broken in the first place.

  16. Living in CT, this draft dodging, stolen valor asshole is (shudder) my senator. Why does anyone listen to anything this liar has to say. I can’t believe even the domocommies in this state voted for him after his lies were made public.

Comments are closed.