Donald Trump (courtesy npr.org)

Donald Trump is trying to be the embodiment of a stereotypical Republican. On all the matters that matter Trump seems to pander to the Republican base with a heavy hand, including the issue of guns. South Carolina was host to a Trump rally last night and the presidential candidate decided to talk a little bit about firearms, capitalizing on Hillary Clinton’s recent comments on the topic in order to gain some points from pro-2A voters. While the gun-friendly comments are welcome, there was a moment where he stepped even further over the “alarmist” line than the NRA . . .

From CNN:

“You know, the President is thinking about signing an executive order where he wants to take your guns away. You hear about this? Not gonna happen. That won’t happen. But that’s a tough one, I think that’s a tough one for him to do,” Trump told the crowd. “There’s plenty of executive orders being signed, you know that. And we can’t let that go on.”

The “Obama’s going to take your guns” line is a well worn chestnut that the NRA and others rely upon to drum up supporters, and while it’s probably valid that Obama wants to make confiscation a reality, it probably isn’t as valid that he’s considering doing it by executive fiat. In fact, every move that Obama has made so far indicates that he’s willing to work extremely hard for even insignificant increases in gun control so long as the legislative branch and doesn’t originate with the executive at all.

The idea that an executive order is coming to confiscate guns is about as likely as Obama revealing that little green men landed in Roswell, New Mexico. But it probably works to convince low information voters to rally to the Trump campaign. An effective, if factually inaccurate, campaign claim. In other words par for the course.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

115 COMMENTS

  3. We’ve known this for going on 7 years now. Please tell us something that we haven’t already been told/known since the day he came into office.

  4. I’m starting to wonder if Trump is just trolling Republicans at this point. He’s just copy-pasting far-right talking points now. Just throw in something about how bad gays or Muslims are and he’s got the nomination locked.

      • That’s my thought too. I honestly think he will lose a general election. The republican base wont turn out for him. I won’t. This entire process has been turned into a reality show, and a sham.

        • And that is the ass clown statement of the year. I’m taking my ball and going home is the exact reason why BHO won a second term. Clowns like you stayed home and handed him that victory. You sure as shiitake that Jamal from the hood was voting no matter what and who he was voting for.

          • Do you realize you are fostering the notion that a slow death is preferable to a fast death? Voting Republican does not alter the political landscape, only provides more drag on the perpetual slide into a third-world nation. GOP leadership depends on voters having no alternative to voting straight-party ticket, so the core constituency is ignored, slandered, threatened. Meanwhile, Leftists run candidates who reflect the grassroots, with a single-minded purpose of eliminating all resistance, everywhere.

            Slow death of the Republic, or fast death. Rescue is not an option.

        • “The republican base wont turn out for him. I won’t.”

          Any true conservative Republican who foresees America’s fate in the hands of LibSoc Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton _will_ turn out to vote AGAINST her…regardless of whoever the Republican candidate is.

        • ” . . .The republican base wont turn out for him. I won’t. This entire process has been turned into a reality show, and a sham. . .”

          Congratulations. You have just articulated a political candidate version of the classic FUDD complaint.

        • I do not support Donald Trump. I’m allowed to have my opinion and you are allowed yours. Calling me a fudd or a clown based on that is absolutely wrong. I’m not basing my opinion of him on his 2nd amendment stance. None of the Republican candidates will take any step towards more gun control; I’m not worried about that. He hasn’t won the candidacy yet and there is still hope someone else can pull it off. You are not choosing between two parties, its two sides of the same coin. Donald Trump is not a conservative and I do not support him. This country needs a conservative leader that can bring us back from the edge of European socialism. Donald Trump will not hold us back or turn us around. I hope that we have someone that I can in good conscious support. You all support the crap out of him, and with my blessing. I won’t call you any names either.

    • You’re starting to wonder?

      Didn’t it occur to you from the get go when he started playing the immigration card pretty much full retard, making bluntly racist gapes and then encouraging his supporters to repeat them?

      The guy has single-handily done more damage to the GOP brand in a few months than Bush Jr did in 8 years. And that’s a very high bar.

      • I certainly hope so. The GOP “brand” is positively unrecognizable as the same party I voted for in 1960, or 1980. It needs to be completely destroyed and rebuilt, which is pretty much what a Trump presidency would accomplish. Forget the fanatic social controls, get back to shrinking government and reducing government interference in our lives, our finances, and our business. THAT is the GOP I can vote for, and it is pretty much what Trump is campaigning on. The tea party was hugely effective at demanding fiscal responsibility, and was promptly coopted by religious looneys, leaving a vast confusion over who had anything backing them. Trump is about fiscal sanity, forget the desire to control everybody else’s actions, leave them alone. Hillary is all about buying votes with borrowed money, also will not interfere with decisions best left private, like gay marriage or abortion. Fanatical puritans will not be elected, unless they lie a lot and very convincingly.

      • Page Not Found Error 404

        The page you requested could not be found, either contact your webmaster or try again. Use your browsers Back button to navigate to the page you have prevously come from.

  6. I never thought in my 53 years, half our population would consider having a conversation about removing or restricting the 2nd Amendment.

    • and then there are the hilary pronouncement that the first amendment must be altered in order to restrict free speech (as in putting your money where your mouth is). times have changed. until the 1960s, the rights protected in the constitution were of a higher moral imperative than mere human musings. now, nothing is morally superior; all things are subject to change at the whims of a muddle-headed populace.

      • Times can change.

        People living together on a fing rock in space won’t. One of the ways that have been decided we’d all get along is our RTKABA. The Constitution does not bestow NOR protect it, nor does any gOvernmEnt. People that exist in proximity to you might claim that the RTKABA does not exist, and it’s up to you to make their struggle for their own existence a much more engrossing concern, because those people have WAY too much time on their hands to F with you. And that has already been proven, throughout history, to be a real dangerous thing.

        • yes.

          changing times is the bedrock of the gun-grabber culture. RTKABA is obsolete, of an ancient time. we do not need to be personally responsible for our safety, that’s why we pay the government. we don’t need protection from the gangs and strong arm criminals (because we don’t live in those ugly neighborhoods), we need protection from all the mass of people we must endure everyday. protection from one of them intentionally or accidentally shooting us in our safe neighborhoods, homes and malls. times have changed. we don’t live on the wild frontier, we are civilised, peaceable people who have a natural right to be safe in our persons at all times, free from hardship, inconvenience and any requirement to take care of ourselves in any manner. times have changed.

        • “The question is hereby asked, and answer demanded:
          HOW LONG WILL AMERICA LAST?
          The answer is an UNKNOWN, and anyone offering a guarantee IS LYING.
          But what IS guaranteed, is that the desire to maintain it IS REQUIRED for it to be possible. What is also required IS THE MEANS. Anyone claiming that the means excludes ARMS, is full-of-sh_t.
          BUT IN THE EVENT IT SHOULD FAIL, you will ABSOLUTELY need arms to have a say in what comes next. But, regardless, anyone’s supposed claim that they can impose their will on your RTKABA will sunset eons before then.

          KEEP YOUR GUNS FOR THE END OF AMERICA

        • 2Asux doesn’t live on the frontier, she lives in an urban ball of snakes and can’t trust her neighbors, so she needs to take away your guns.

          • Actually, I don’t trust my neighbors because, after 25 years, the demos have changed so dramatically, I cannot recognize the place anymore. Tried staying low-key by not flying any flags, and displaying no political yard signs. Now, I am conspicuous by the absence of such. Seems like this part of the city was annexed by San Francisco. We don’t have neighborhood watch, we have a “here, take mine, we don’t want you to feel bad about stealing” stance. It is considered uncouth to talk about taking action to prevent crime because “those people” are only here as “an act of love” and greeting them at 2 AM with a hostile response would get you dis-invited from the garden club. So no, I don’t trust my neighbors because they would use the homeowners association to force me to move. My house is paid for, low taxes, beautiful surroundings (except the people), so I don’t want to move (which would be to give in). I just keep my garage door shut (so I can transport things without curious eyes observing), and have a private mail box for delivery of packages with markings that would alarm the peasants.

            2A sucks for those who don’t like it.

        • 2Asux wrote on October 21, 2015 at 02:29 hours:

          “RTKABA is obsolete, of an ancient time. we do not need to be personally responsible for our safety, that’s why we pay the government.”

          Guess what, ‘2Asux’?

          Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
          By Linda Greenhouse, June 28, 2005

          WASHINGTON, June 27 – The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.
          […]
          http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect-someone.html

          Also:

          Just Dial 911? The Myth of Police Protection
          Most Police Have No Legal Duty to Protect Citizens from Criminal Attack
          By Richard W. Stevens Saturday, April 01, 2000

          Underlying all “gun control” ideology is this one belief.” “Private citizens don’t need firearms because the police will protect them from crime.” That belief is both false and dangerous for two reasons.

          First, the police cannot and do not protect everyone from crime. Second, the government and the police in most localities owe no legal duty to protect individuals from criminal attack. When it comes to deterring crime and defending against criminals, individuals are ultimately responsible for themselves and their loved ones. Depending solely on police emergency response means relying on the telephone as the only defensive tool. Too often, citizens in trouble dial 911 . . . and die.
          […]
          http://fee.org/freeman/just-dial-911-the-myth-of-police-protection/

          Just a few other examples:

          Riss v. New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579,293 N.Y.S.2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 806 (1958)
          Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981)
          Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982)
          DeShaney v. Winnebago County D.S.S., 489 U.S. 189 (1989)
          Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)
          Barillari v. City of Milwaukee, 533 N.W.2d 759 (Wis. 1995)
          Ford v. Town of Grafton, 693 N.E.2d 1047 (Mass. App. 1998)
          Castle Rock v. Gonzales, (04-278) 545 U.S. 748 (2005)

          Care to comment, ‘2Asux’?

    • Well, We now have Free Speech Zones, the Patriot act and it’s intrusive successor the USA freedom act.
      The 1’st , 4th and 5th amendments were kneecapped while the country watched Dancing with the Stars and blamed “that party” (either one, pick one). Now they’re after the 2’nd. Surprised? I’m not.

  7. Trump says what we all want to hear and has switch on several things! No thanks, I’ll take Cruz, he has never switched. Shoot straight and hit your target. p.s. vote for who you want, but I hope you trip and break your neck if it is hillary.

    • Well, I live in TX, and we have essentially no say in the nomination process, so choices between Cruz, Trump, Bush, etc are wasted on me, I get to choose between a Dem, a Rep, or an also ran once the primaries are over. Which I vote for has to do with who is selected in those primaries, there are several Reps I won’t vote for already, and one Dem I could have voted for has dropped out.

  8. It seems like Leghorn is an establishment/reach across the isle kind of guy and is prone to writing hit pieces against those that threaten the Republican establishment candidates.

    This president has continually pushed the boundries of his office, I put nothing past him.

    • +1

      What’s even more absurd is how many people believe what they think matters. Check FB if you doubt.

      Voting is for the intellectually challenged. Either way we’re F-ed !

  9. PROTECTING OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

    Donald J. Trump on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

    The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.

    The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right that belongs to all law-abiding Americans. The Constitution doesn’t create that right – it ensures that the government can’t take it away. Our Founding Fathers knew, and our Supreme Court has upheld, that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to guarantee our right to defend ourselves and our families. This is about self-defense, plain and simple.

    It’s been said that the Second Amendment is America’s first freedom. That’s because the Right to Keep and Bear Arms protects all our other rights. We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment. Protecting that freedom is imperative. Here’s how we will do that:

    Enforce The Laws On The Books

    We need to get serious about prosecuting violent criminals. The Obama administration’s record on that is abysmal. Violent crime in cities like Baltimore, Chicago and many others is out of control. Drug dealers and gang members are given a slap on the wrist and turned loose on the street. This needs to stop.

    Several years ago there was a tremendous program in Richmond, Virginia called Project Exile. It said that if a violent felon uses a gun to commit a crime, you will be prosecuted in federal court and go to prison for five years – no parole or early release. Obama’s former Attorney General, Eric Holder, called that a “cookie cutter” program. That’s ridiculous. I call that program a success. Murders committed with guns in Richmond decreased by over 60% when Project Exile was in place – in the first two years of the program alone, 350 armed felons were taken off the street.

    Why does that matter to law-abiding gun owners? Because they’re the ones who anti-gun politicians and the media blame when criminals misuse guns. We need to bring back and expand programs like Project Exile and get gang members and drug dealers off the street. When we do, crime will go down and our cities and communities will be safer places to live.

    Here’s another important way to fight crime – empower law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves. Law enforcement is great, they do a tremendous job, but they can’t be everywhere all of the time. Our personal protection is ultimately up to us. That’s why I’m a gun owner, that’s why I have a concealed carry permit, and that’s why tens of millions of Americans have concealed carry permits as well. It’s just common sense. To make America great again, we’re going to go after criminals and put the law back on the side of the law-abiding.

    Fix Our Broken Mental Health System

    Let’s be clear about this. Our mental health system is broken. It needs to be fixed. Too many politicians have ignored this problem for too long.

    All of the tragic mass murders that occurred in the past several years have something in common – there were red flags that were ignored. We can’t allow that to continue. We need to expand treatment programs, because most people with mental health problems aren’t violent, they just need help. But for those who are violent, a danger to themselves or others, we need to get them off the street before they can terrorize our communities. This is just common sense.

    And why does this matter to law-abiding gun owners? Once again, because they get blamed by anti-gun politicians, gun control groups and the media for the acts of deranged madmen. When one of these tragedies occurs, we can count on two things: one, that opponents of gun rights will immediately exploit it to push their political agenda; and two, that none of their so-called “solutions” would have prevented the tragedy in the first place. They’ve even admitted it.

    We need real solutions to address real problems. Not grandstanding or political agendas.

    Defend The Rights of Law-Abiding Gun Owners

    GUN AND MAGAZINE BANS. Gun and magazine bans are a total failure. That’s been proven every time it’s been tried. Opponents of gun rights try to come up with scary sounding phrases like “assault weapons”, “military-style weapons” and “high capacity magazines” to confuse people. What they’re really talking about are popular semi-automatic rifles and standard magazines that are owned by tens of millions of Americans. Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own.

    BACKGROUND CHECKS. There has been a national background check system in place since 1998. Every time a person buys a gun from a federally licensed gun dealer – which is the overwhelming majority of all gun purchases – they go through a federal background check. Study after study has shown that very few criminals are stupid enough to try and pass a background check – they get their guns from friends/family members or by stealing them. So the overwhelming majority of people who go through background checks are law-abiding gun owners. When the system was created, gun owners were promised that it would be instant, accurate and fair. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case today. Too many states are failing to put criminal and mental health records into the system – and it should go without saying that a system’s only going to be as effective as the records that are put into it. What we need to do is fix the system we have and make it work as intended. What we don’t need to do is expand a broken system.

    NATIONAL RIGHT TO CARRY. The right of self-defense doesn’t stop at the end of your driveway. That’s why I have a concealed carry permit and why tens of millions of Americans do too. That permit should be valid in all 50 states. A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

    MILITARY BASES AND RECRUITING CENTERS. Banning our military from carrying firearms on bases and at recruiting centers is ridiculous. We train our military how to safely and responsibly use firearms, but our current policies leave them defenseless. To make America great again, we need a strong military. To have a strong military, we need to allow them to defend themselves.

    • @Louis: Have to say that I agree with most of what you have said. One question though. If I defend myself with a gun and somehow the way I do it is a crime (no trigger lock when someone breaks into my home for instance). Would I automatically go to prison for 5 years under a Project Exile type of program ?

      • No! Obviously not! Trigger lock laws and other gun control laws are unconstitutional and null and void. Trump may be an opportunist, but as long as he is OUR opportunist, who really cares?

        • An unconstitutional law is not so until courts declare it thus. Acting as if a restriction on an enumerated right is “null and void” will get you out of…..absolutely nothing. 2A was considered constutionally constrained until late in the 20th century. Courts held all along the line that the right to personal ownership of handguns (and SBR and full-auto weapons) was not an individual right. Declaring such restrictions were “null and void” was not considered a legitimate defense. Nor is it now.

        • Opportunists, by definition, do not ‘belong’ to anyone. If the path to the opportunity changes, so will he.

          Other Republican candidates have a long history framing a lot of their beliefs on things like guns, through actions and previous votes.

          Trump, on the other hand, is just famous.

          It really surprises me that people think he’ll have some kind of allegiance or loyalty to the population that gets him elected if he does win.

          The guy would switch from R to D mid-term if it suited him. I cannot vote for anyone who supported the Clinton/Feinstein AWB.

        • That’s the whole point of trust, isn’t it? He was for the assault weapons ban not that long ago just before he decided to run on the Republican ticket and if we were stupid enough to elect him, he can do anything he damn well wants to and we can’t do anything about it!
          In 2000, Trump supported the Assault Weapons Ban and waiting periods to purchase a gun:
          “The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse even limited restrictions,” he wrote in his book The America We Deserve. “I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I also support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun.”
          https://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/a-flip-flop-trump-now-supports-second-amendment

  10. I get the feeling that this was just a vague idea in the Donald’s head that tumbled out his mouth in a characteristic jumble of vagueness and self-contradiction.

    • Just like so many of us who are so frustrated we could spit. Makes Trump more like the people he wants to lead.

  11. Trump is con man and sees what his marks want and tells them what they want to hear He is a crony capitalist, big government Hillary clone. He will take your guns as fast as Hillary when it suits his purpoae. Oh and his faking it on immigration too.

    Ever notice how he uses recycled DNC talking points to attack his Republican opponents? First with Scott Walker and he is now using DNC talking points about W to attack Jeb. You don’t have like Jeb to identify Trump as a DNC Trojan Horse.

    • They’re all our a-hole neighbors needing jobs. And there’s not a mf in the race that isn’t there for “matching funds”.

    • Politicians in a democracy are always, in the nature of the profession, deceitful SOBs.

      Walker? Walker talked a “stop the illegal immigration” line in public. However, he flew a trial balloon at a fundraiser to see if he could switch to amnesty. That was the end of his candidacy. He proved he’s a jerk like Kevin McCarthy, unable to tell the difference between public and very private discussion.

      I find the “pander” language in Nick’s text offensive. If Trump wants to pander, he’s going to have to take lessons from Hillary. Jeb is every bit the pander: He simply has a different coalition of voters in mind. I noticed this morning that Trump’s numbers in national polls are….up again. The base does not want Paul Ryan’s open borders. The corporate interests (and of course the farm owners) really like the idea. You decide.

  12. Trump is showing that he’s an immature, one-dimensional poseur, exactly what I expected. He’d burn through his veil too fast. But, with so many voters on both sides being so shallow and dense that they barely qualify as people… That’s probably what’ll win.

    I’m still voting for Cruz.

    • Do I understand correctly? When Trump tells you just what you want to hear, he is a charlatan? But when Cruz tells you just what you want to hear, he is not?

        • All over the map? Trump’s platform regarding taxation, immigration enforcement, and trade policy has been consistant.

          For those who object to tougher trade rules, I would point out that Warren Buffett has, over the years, repeatedly pointed out the ‘sucker’ nature of our imbalanced trade, saying we should impose “a dollar of goods out allows you a dollar of goods imported” rule. That’s the sort of policy Trump has favored.

          I’m glad I have options, because I see (even here) the US voters getting confused again. There are only a few big serious issues, trade, immigration, and taxation/spending. The rest is just screw-the-voters mind games. 18 trillion in debt? Paying farmers to turn corn into car fuel while we say, in the next breath, that electric and fuel cells are the future.

          Of course Trump likes one little exemption for the real-estate industry: exemption from RE purchases from the money laundering “know your client” rules. Laugh.

      • It’s the reason why Sanders is close (or even exceeding) Hillary in the polls: supporters feel he is more genuine in his political views, even though both are pretty much hardcore leftist.

        Cruz seems to have a better grasp on Constitutional issues then Trump has, and it helps he actually has some sort of record, even if you consider his involvement in cases at the Supreme Court level. Trump, for better or worse, has a very limited political record, so even if he says something very similar to Cruz, most Cruz supporters are going to be skeptical.

        C’mon man, I thought this stuff was common sense.

        • Thinking seems to be Trump will play “smash mouth” football with the political toads in DC, while Cruz might be more comfortable just smashing his party.

        • Cruz has *just barely* more political experience than Trump, is in fact running as an outsider, just like he did for senator.

  13. Nick. You are a great gun guy and budding gun writer.
    With respect, put the pen down, and walk away from the political analysis…

    Son, I’m not even a Trump supporter and some things jump out at me.

    1. “Donald Trump is trying to be the embodiment of a stereotypical Republican.” No. He is not.
    He is a circus barker, we can agree, but Trump’s appeal is exactly that he is NOT a typical Republican.

    2. “In fact, every move that Obama has made so far indicates that he’s willing to work extremely hard for even insignificant increases in gun control so long as the legislative branch and doesn’t originate with the executive at all.”

    Ok, I am not a writer by any means, but this sentence doesnt even have a verb in the second clause.
    If I understand you, that his gun control DOESNT originate with the Executive, then how do you explain this?

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/foghorn/obama-announces-expanded-use-executive-powers-bypassing-congress/

    Ok, RF- where is Nick and what have you done with the body?

  14. Here’s a question. When are we going to stop focusing on whether it’s feasible or whether a president can follow through on his threats, and focus on the simple fact that supposed American leaders wish to take away innocent people’s civil rights and eliminate the public’s ability to defend themselves?

    I don’t care if such flat out evil notions as confiscation are feasible or not, if a politician utters even the slight possibility of perhaps supporting it, they should not even be permitted to run for office, let alone be a contender. We’ve reached a point in this nation in which we’re mulling whether politicians’ treasonous declarations of domestic war are feasible or not, rather than reeling in horror that a free nation is even tolerating such a notion.

    If a man came to your door and said he’s mulling the possibility of stealing your property and kidnapping or killing you and your family if you resisted, would you just stand there and rub your chin and wonder whether he could do it or not?

    • Excellent point. No, Obama probably isn’t going to sign an executive order to confiscate guns, but not because he respects gun rights, the Second Amendment, or the Constitution. He won’t do it because it’ll cost too much politically. If he thought he could get away with it, he’d do it in a heartbeat.

      • someone already wrote “sleep at your peril”. tyrants of the last century all stated what they would do, and how. the populace said, “he doesn’t really mean it.” or, “he won’t really do that.”

  15. The truth is, Obama never said a word about guns or gun laws during his first term. It wasn’t until Sandy Hook that all this started. Now, Sandy Hook was such a horrendous crime that I can see anyone reacting emotionally. Even the President. I still get emotional when I think about it, and probably always will. But someone in a position of power has to be able to think rationally. The legal availability of guns did not cause this awful tragedy. When Obama (and every other U.S. President) took the oath of office, he vowed to uphold the Constitution to the best of his ability. That includes the Second Amendment. And whoever the next President is (and it won’t be Hillary) will do the same thing. It is not an option, it is mandatory. Maybe Obama should go back and watch himself taking it. Maybe he has forgotten. Maybe all the candidates should read that oath (and the Constitution) before they go any farther.

    • I believe he took the swipe at PA voters with the “clinging to their guns and bibles” during the first campaign.

      Regardless, there was a political reason why he didn’t say much on Gun control or anything regarding the 2a during much of the first term. He was hoping to keep the supermajority of Democrats in power, some of which were considered moderate and believed in the 2a. But when he lost the House in 2010, I believe he calculated there was no point in keeping quiet about it.

      But he is no fan of the 2a. John Lott has often talked about his time meeting with Obama when he worked at the University of Chicago Law School, and the disagreements they had regarding the individual right to bear arms.

    • G.S.
      It sounds like you’re willing to discuss Oholes f’d upness reasonably and rationally.

      Not interested.

    • No, Obama was a gun grabber from way back. He was on the Board of the Joyce Foundation for eight years, which is notoriously anti-Second Amendment. He voted for all bills but one in the Illinois legislature that attacked the Second Amendment. In the U.S. Senate he voted for quite a few gun grabbing bills.

      He was just waiting until he was a lame duck and a good opportunity came along to start the attacks on the Second Amendment.

  16. I am not going to complain that a person running for president is bluntly making statements in support of the Constitution. I hope others screw their heads on and enjoy the opposition to a Socialist anti-constitutional progressive left. Don’t complain about Trump!

    • Will you complain when he becomes pro gun control, like he used to be, when it suits him down the line?

      • If he’s ever full-on (D)bag [like it sounds like you might be swaying].

        THEN
        YES

        When there’s no hope for you, know that people will have stopped looking for hope too long before, for you to gain any back.

  17. “The idea that an executive order is coming ……..” Don’t forget Comrade Hussein Soetoro/Marshall-Davis/Obama not only still has his “pen and a phone” but he also commands an army of badge carrying bureaucrats willing to execute his orders (and us) at a moments notice.

  18. It’s hard to get past “(D)’s are a pack of evil POS’,” to even consider the fact that their “coming after your guns” FU(D)s. That’s like saying that planned parenthood is gonna sell you back your kids in pieces through a third party. (D)bag (D)heads are trying furiously [all over the world but now even in Canada…yeah your a cack-sacker pro lib PM FU] to F up America by caving in what we hold dear in America, so they can rewrite our Constitution. Sad news is, they won’t live that ling, people are going to have to kill their own kids to keep them from experiencing the sh_t storm the (D) heads are brewing. (D)-herpe Jerry POS Brown gov CA, and (D) bag legislators just gave up a part of my country to illegal aliens. It won’t be placed back in (D) hands after any civil war to take it back. The problem has always been you (D). Too late to fix your evil sh_t.

  19. Well gee somehow I believe the donald. Barry Soetoro may pull a fast one next January-especially if a certain pos gal gets erected. Civil war anyone?

    • No one’s expecting you to tell.

      You could say you’re never going to do civil war, but what would you say if you were?

      It’s the ‘kick the bucket’ scene in “It’s a MAD MAD World”.

      • I live in Illinois Joe-they are ALWAYS coming for my guns. I’m also old and don’t wish to live in a dictatorship. AS far as America-NO mention in biblical prophecy(I’m thinking it will a division of the anti-Christs world government-Northamericaland-Canada,USA and Meh-he-co). Wish I was not serious…

  20. People keep bashing the Donald for having switched positions over the years, but considering he’s got a carry license and sometimes carried, he’s more 2A than most of the pandering politicians.

    Yes, Cruz is more principled. But I want a winner willing to get down and dirty to win. Playing nice and losing is for suckers.

    • It always boils down to kish or fut bait. Trump sounds like he’s fished before. Other people sound like they want to describe the bait cutting process as can be had through D.C. Tired of those wanting the job, but not wanting to do the job OBAMA. Tired of those wanting to do the job they made up in their head smoking pot in HI, OBAMA. To damn fing tired of all you liberal -holes that do this sh_t to us on purpose.

  21. At least we all agree, liberal sh_tbags are why we don’t just get to talk guns here. Conservatives, and Conservatism, is how we’re ever going to keep our country together, or restore her should she falter. F ALL ELSE.

    • “Conservatives, and Conservatism, is how we’re ever going to keep our country together, or restore her should she falter.”

      Not even close. Social conservatives and fiscal progressives are what is keeping this nation divided. One wants to dictate non violent behavior to everyone the other wants to steal from you. Neither will win.

      When conservatives learn to keep their noses out of everyone’s business, things will get better.
      When progressives learn that stealing is wrong, even in the name of charity, things will get better.

      When people as a whole understand that the initiation of force against non violent people is universally wrong, you will see what true liberty is, and how well it works in practice.

      • Ya, except, if you play the argument out to the end, you want me to be conservative, to have mores, norms, shared values, etc., or else, you couldn’t even have a website to argue here. If we’re going to do anything goes, we’re going to do my version and I guarantee you won’t like it.

      • When conservatives learn to keep their noses out of everyone’s business, things will get better.

        So, it’s conservatives telling people how many rounds their magazines can hold, how large their sodas can be, how much salt they can use on their food, where they can smoke cigarettes, to whom they can sell cupcakes, how they can educate their children, what doctors they can see, what medical insurance plan they can acquire (or none at all), and what mere beliefs business owners can hold?

        It is Progressives who reach into the privacy of the individual, and impose their own views upon individual liberty.

      • Spot on. Despite those right here who insist on not understanding, a combination of fiscal conservative and social liberal is what we need, and what the GOP has historically supported. Actually, fiscal conservative and social WGAS, which is pretty much the same thing. I don’t elect someone so that person can tell me how to behave. That’s ridiculous.

        • No,
          Conservative is what we need. We don’t need liberal anything. “LIBERAL” IS ALWAYS WORKING TO MOVE BEYOND ‘COMMON CAUSE’. That is unsustainable, and you don’t need me to type that here, there are whole hemispheres, much less countries, existing now (without needing the countless examples from throughout human history) that evidence is, and to claim otherwise is no-longer simply “ignorance” or “dis-ingeniousness” it is lying.

  22. I am waiting to order my trump sticker when he promises we will get to hang Lois Lerner, holder and company…. nothing gets my vote like a good old pitchfork and torch party….. till then cruz16 for me

  23. Umm, newsflash, Obama has already banned Kalashnikovs and 5.45×39 ammo. He used the Treasury Dept and ATF to do it, but the orders are coming straight from President Valerie Jarrett aka Obamas Brain, so, yeah he is banning guns with executive orders. Trump is right, and don’t be surprised if Obama does make an announcement about little green men any day now to declare martial law and remain Presidente a vie.

    • I am still waiting for that, and thinking the time is coming. Some manufactured crisis “precluding” an election, I’ll just have to stay on … forever …

  25. The government came to confiscate our guns in New York, Maryland, and Connecticut. Confiscation is underway. The Second Circuit paved a path for future confiscation of pump action rifles, provided that the state offers an argument in support of confiscating that kind of gun. The Bill of Rights is under attack. Binding precedent is set that will eventually affect all states. The next president will likely name several Supreme Court justices. Sitting back and doing nothing because “it won’t happen here” is contributing to the death of our rights.

  26. Sure seems from the comments here/elsewhere that Cruz has a lot more support than Jeb, at least. And a hell of a lot more intentional support for actual reasons, than any (R) candidate except maybe Rubio. Two explanations: either people are telling pollsters they support Trump for giggles, or pollsters are mistakenly targeting the same people as the Nielson Ratings Co. for questions, and basically recording name recognition figures from ignorant morons over and over again (who probably will either end up not voting, or more likely voting for whoever has the most TV coverage by primary day, regardless)

    • Trump and Carson have been in the lead for a couple of weeks now. Cruz has been steady in 3rd with 9-10%. FNC is pushing Bush (6%) and Rubio (6-13%) with every fourth news story being about them all day long.
      I don’t really see the appeal of Carson; he’s backtracked on 2A just as much as Trump. Cruz is the WYSIWYG candidate. He is rock solid consistent and definitely a threat to the establishment. Even Bush 43 has begun talking down Cruz. In seven years, he couldn’t muster anything about Obama but when he finally comes out swinging, its against Cruz and Rubio.

      • The Bush family is not a dynasty from Texas, but from the upper-East Coast. They are upper class Brahmans. They are white-shoe, country club Republicans, with patrician airs. Probably all really nice people, but not champions of the masses.

        The difference in their reactions to Obama and Rubio/Cruz is that Obama has not attacked them personally, by name.

        • “It’s Bush’s fault” –Barack Obama
          Cruz called out John Roberts – a Bush appointee, Rubio and Jeb attacked each other.

          • Not the point.

            The problems we face go beyond a single president. Just pointing out why Dubya is attacking Republicans, but not Obama. The privileged class generally does not name their enemy of the same class, but has no compunction about savaging those of a lesser class. Dubya is no dummy, he always knows what he is doing. Not mistake-free, but he doesn’t do things because he is clueless.

        • We need a Bush or a Clinton to fix the mess Obama made fixing Bushes mess that started with Clinton fixing Bushes mess.

          • Neither of the Bush presidents had a functional majority in the Congress (well, even with a majority, Republicans don’t have a functional majority), the “mess” is all on the Dems and liberal Republicans (BTW, in countries with parliamentary governments, you don’t find liberal conservatives, or conservative laborists).

  27. Trump is the Democrat’s “Manchurian Candidate”. His task is to split the Not-Democrat side of the Election into tiny fragments so that only a Democrat can win the Presidency in 2016. Trump will alienate enough Not-Democrats so they won’t Vote. Hilary or Joe (Obama’s Third Term Proxy) Biden will win and we will all experience infringement on RKBA via EO the likes of which you’ve never imagined. The Democrats won’t be able to repeal the Second Amendment (yet), but they can do a lot of things to harass and bullyrag gun owners from The Oval Office.

    BTW-The Donald has no idea what’s going on and is programmed to flip-flop most of his positions should things go terribly wrong and he actually wins the Presidency. There will be sufficient Democrats in Congress to derail any attempt to Impeach him and let his VP take over.

    * Wakes screaming and sweating from a horrible nightmare *

    Oh, Thank God…it was only a bad dream, “Well, then…Nevermind!”

  28. Far as I”m concern limiting my ability to buy guns through a legislative ban is right along with taking them away. If the 2012 AWB would of passed I would not have many of my guns. They would in fact have taken them away.

  30. Mr. Zimmerman – At the risk of being called “an alarmist,” I would give your opinion more credence if I didn’t recall Mr. Farago’s repeated reassurances that “no one is coming for your guns.” We have the realty of a sitting President and the leading Democrat contender for the position referring fondly to the Australian solution. Politicians lie without scruple, but occasionally they also tell the truth.

  31. “Obama Is Gonna Take Your Guns Away”

    He can TRY.
    Or more likely he’ll get some compliant local Police Departments to TRY and do it for him.
    Wonder how that will go over?

    Molon Labe, Comrade Obama.

Comments are closed.