Matt Larosiere gets it half right in Gun Rights Aren’t Safe in a Trump Presidency. Frankly, only a fool would think gun rights are safe in any presidency. Especially while plutocrats like Michael Bloomberg, George Soros and others seem so willing to spend big dollars to sway the less-informed.
Again, Matt makes some good points in his Washington Times op-ed.
Mr. Trump and the Republican Party at large haven’t done gun owners any favors.
Amen. They haven’t for years, thanks to the Republican leadership that have become swamp creatures.
The administration has managed to ban possession of “bump stocks” by administrative fiat, making felons out of tens of thousands of gun owners overnight.
Trump’s ATF passed the fiat order banning bump stocks by unlawfully and grossly overstepping its regulatory authority. As I’ve written before, Trump is no dummy. He knew an ATF bump stock ban – not a “Trump” ban – would be overturned by the court in short order.
And that process continues today. In the meantime, DJT allowed the ATF to throw that giant red herring at Democrats who really wanted to ban semi-auto firearms and enact all manner of gun control measures, including universal background checks, age restrictions, and magazine capacity limits. They took it as a victory, even though they received little or nothing of actual value. As did their sycophant Democrat operatives-with-bylines in the mainstream media.
[The Trump administration] also supported state efforts to implement red flag laws, restrict the gun rights of young adults, and threatened gun owners with domestic surveillance and unconstitutional seizures. So much for that “crashing end” to the assault on the Second Amendment.
Talk is cheap. On both sides of the equation.
Mr. Obama’s administration, on the other hand, relaxed prohibitions on carrying firearms on federal land, and made it easier for people to acquire NFA items like suppressors and machine guns. Of course, it wasn’t all good. The administration also cracked down on homemade firearms and tightened some import restrictions.
Laugh out loud. Obama “relaxed prohibitions on carrying firearms on federal land” because that language was attached to a must-sign appropriations bill if I recall correctly. Not because Obama held some deep-seated desire to facilitate self-defense for the little people on federal lands.
I’m unsure of the background on NFA changes, but I will say they affected only a tiny subset of 330 million Americans.
But despite constant claims that Republicans are beholden to gun rights organizations, when the GOP held the entire government in 2017 and 2018, nothing changed — no concealed-carry reciprocity, no deregulation of firearm suppressors, no changes to any of the thousands of absurd regulations from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).
Spot on, Matt.
In fact, during the time the Republicans controlled the entire government, all that passed was stiffer background checks. Mr. Trump could’ve taken action on many of these items anytime he wanted. This doesn’t sound like a party under the thumb of gun owners.
“Mr. Trump could’ve taken action on many of these items anytime he wanted?” Really? Trump can’t pass legislation. That requires both houses of Congress to act and the president’s signature.
Peeking under the hood for why nothing happened in the first two years of Trump’s administration, one need look no further than Senate President Mitch McConnell for the lack of progress. He kept pro-gun legislation buried on his desk.
Concealed carry reciprocity? Passed in the House early in that Congressional term. Cocaine Mitch was unwilling to break “with tradition” and pass the bill with a simple majority as he’s done with Trump’s (outstanding) judicial nominees.
McConnell is nothing more than the latest Republican swamp dweller to talk a good game on guns, but doesn’t deliver in Congress when the opportunity arises.
If you want to blame one person for a failure to move pro-gun legislation at the federal level, that person would be McConnell, the longest-serving Republican U.S. Senate leader in history.
Clearly, the GOP has gotten lackadaisical on the concept of civil rights. Some Republicans are even throwing support to dangerous red flag laws and other worrisome proposals, such as the TAPS Act, which would see law enforcement combing social media for “threats” to “manage.”
Amen to that. Hence why gun rights aren’t safe under any administration and we can’t become complacent. And frankly, complacency has allowed all manner of anti-gun legislation to pass in the states.
Meanwhile, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made clear, Senate Republicans are waiting for Mr. Trump to hand them an agenda on gun control — entirely forgetting how our government is supposed to operate.
Ideally, McConnell would find himself defeated by a primary challenger in this coming year’s primary election season. Defeated by a candidate who genuinely backs gun rights in very gun-friendly Kentucky. However, with Cocaine Mitch’s many decades serving as Kentucky’s Senator and de facto Republican Party leader in the Bluegrass State, it’s unlikely anyone can overcome his name recognition (to say nothing of the perks of incumbency).
Besides, despite McConnell’s failings on gun rights, he does enjoy the complete and total animus of the Left thanks to his so effectively pushing Trump’s judicial nominations past intransigent Democrats. They hate him with a white-hot passion.
The bottom line: No, President Trump doesn’t walk on water when it comes to guns and gun rights. However, he has done more to resist gun control than any president in the last few generations.
Matt and I agree on most things. But the bottom line remains that America faces a stark choice in 2020.
Contrast what Trump has and hasn’t done with the adamant, signed-in-blood pledges of any of the current clown car full of gun ban confiscation activists seeking the Democrat presidential nomination.
It will fall upon the shoulders of freedom-loving Americans and gun owners to go to the polls and cast their ballots accordingly both in 2020’s primary races as well as the November general elections. Ultimately, protecting gun rights always falls on our shoulders, not any given politician’s.
Firearms rights aren’t safe under any president. Duh!
No rights have ever been “safe”, under any system. The predators are always in there plugging away to make the sheeple ever more helpless, making them easier and easier to prey upon. Ever it has been thus.
“eternal vigilance is the price we pay for liberty” – Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, whoever said it, its been around since at least 1817, so its not a new idea…
Another reason we have gunrights.we hun predators
Our rights are not safe under ANY government, period. That is EXACTLY why our nation’s Founders codified the Second Amendment.
Reminder: “government” is nothing more than a bunch of people who are just as prone to the same temptations, foibles, weaknesses, biases, corruption, and errors as the rest of us. You would NEVER hand $20,000 of your own money to a complete stranger and ask him/her to hold that money for you for a few years. Well, government employees are complete strangers as well and no more trustworthy than any other stranger on the street.
“…no man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.”
— Gideon J. Tucker, Final Accounting in the Estate of A.B. (1866) (Law Notes, Volume 5, 1902)
The above quote is identified as the first “findable” instance of the sentiment. Unfortunately, the matter addressed a state of New York civil case. Perhaps if the statement had been to a federal case, “the president” would have been included.
“It will fall upon the shoulders of freedom-loving Americans and gun owners to go to the polls and cast their ballots accordingly both in 2020’s primary races as well as the November general elections. Ultimately, protecting gun rights always falls on our shoulders, not any given politician’s.”
The above is an interesting and contradictory statement.
Tired of giving tens of thousands of your hard-earned dollars to the government every year?
Tired of your 2nd and 1st amendment rights being trampled?
Don’t expect voting to end these abuses. We absolutely cannot vote our way out of this. Nothing short of American Revolution II will bring our freedom back. We all know this.
Organize locally.
“Nothing short of American Revolution II…”
“Nothing short of American Revolution III…” (also, Civil War III)
FIFY*
*Editorial housekeeping; not endorsing any kinetic activity
I’ve long thought that any nuclear exchange aught to be referred to as Nuclear War One. Go ahead and just acknowledge there will be more right from the get go.
“I’ve long thought that any nuclear exchange aught to be referred to as Nuclear War One. Go ahead and just acknowledge there will be more right from the get go.”
First Great Patriotic War of Light and Heat?
Great Balls of Fire I?
First Great Leveling of the Playing Field?
The Night Chicago Died, Part 1?
Boom, Boom, Boom, The Beginning?
A Kind of Hush, All Over the World, 1?
Hold My Beer, and Watch this S–t, Iteration 01?
First Fire and Brimstone Campaign?
I prefer Great Balls of Fire.
Or perhaps it’ll be known as the First Mushroom War (a nod to the Adventure Time cartoons).
“Or perhaps it’ll be known as the First Mushroom War (a nod to the Adventure Time cartoons).”
Oh yeah. Good one. Like it.
World war three will be nuclear. World war four will be sticks and stones.
YOU GOT IT!!!!!
THE GOVERNMENT IS COMPROMISED BY COMMUNISTS….
IT’S OVER….. TIME TO REBUILD!
McConnell is 101% a swamp rat. Underlining the word RAT.
But unfortunately hes and Trump are both the lesser of 2 evils.
In my personal case.
I dont care what laws are passed. If I feel they aren’t Constitutional Based on my own system of beliefs.
I wont obey them.
If the gubbermnint and these KlowNz in particular. Which to make me and millions of other Americans criminals.
So be it.
Ive had enough.
No more Mr nice guy here or anywhere else.
“If I feel they aren’t Constitutional Based on my own system of beliefs.
I wont obey them.”
One of the positive benefits of the federal penal system is the unfettered access to writing materials.
Good, that is a relief since I was denied access to writing material in the state penal system.
“Good, that is a relief since I was denied access to writing material in the state penal system.”
No access to computers and printers? Bummer. Violates the 8th. A person should get double food servings if they are restricted from accessing writing materials. This ain’t Red China. A person’s got rights, here.
Good. Maybe the survivors can pen “Mein Greener, Newer Deal: The Final Solution.”
If there are any, that is.
In other words you pick and choice what you like or don’t.
Shitbama DID do gun owners several favors and under his administration the BATFE DID make it easier to acquire Tax Stamps for NFA items by NO LONGER REQUIRING LOCAL LE APPROVAL just simply notification when filing a FORM 1 or FORM 4.
Under his administration, Bump Stocks and Rifle Caliber Carbine Pistols became legal to own IF they had a ‘stabilizing brace’ in lieu of a stock AND no vertical foregrip.
More stuff too…
Exactly. The letter was changed from permission from LEO to notification & them having to write the ATF why you shouldn’t have it.
That makes the process WAY easier.
thanks, Omama!!!!
Unless you do a trust or business, then became a lot harder because it added the CLEO notification, and fingerprints and photos for the trust/business officers and beneficiaries.
a lot of people tend to disregard the positives from Obama when it came to guns…are we better off now under this unstable an unpredictable “leader”??????
Isn’t that strange?
A black president and a democratically controlled Congress actually passed legislation allowing CCW carry on hundreds of thousands of Federal acres, yet he is vilified by POTG.
A white president and a Republican controlled Congress erode POTG rights, yet he is worshiped by POTG.
Hmmmm, what could be the difference?
That is a definite advantage for some areas where the CLEO says he will not sign off on them, even if they’re legal in the state. However, Obama did change rules for NFA trusts that were not popular, particularly changing it to include background checks, pictures, finger prints, etc for ALL parties on the trust instead of just the owner of it. Makes it a huge pain buying more nfa stuff as you have to get everyone in the trust together for the paperwork
Well you know, I’m kind of OK on having background checks for people we’re may be handling M 60s and Ma deuce.
An automatic weapon trust seems like a great way for gangbangers to get their hands on fully automatic weapons. They just need one clean girlfriend, etc. and all the homeis are beneficiaries without a records check.
Haha, do gang bangers and their girlfriends make NFA trusts, get fingerprints and photos, and then go browsing dealerNFA, autoweapons, only the best etc looking for transferable M16s, $40,000 MP5 sears, or $13,000 Uzis…. And then get their form 4 and wait a year? They are too busy getting themselves in and out of jail to wait for their gun to come out of NFA jail… And then take that $40,000 HK and do a drive by? Easier to get the Chicago slap on the wrist when caught with a hi point in your waistband than a machine gun, and if gang bangers would go to this much effort they might as well get an FFL and pay ITAR and the SOT and become a dealer.
Nothing is “safe” in this or any other society. Anyone who expects the G to keep them safe from anything is a fool.
Government exists to protect itself. That’s what cops, federal agents and armies are for. To the state, citizens are of secondary importance, but only if they are useful to the state.
The state and all its actors are completely corrupted by power. The Founders knew this might happen. They created a state with many checks and balances to try to postpone the final accounting for as long as possible. But in the end, Mao was right: political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
Which is why they want yours.
Ralph, I’m glad somebody understands this. I’ve been beating the drum for years, ALL politicians eventually become corrupted ,some sooner than later.
The only way to protect your civil rights is to teach children about them. High School shooting teams, 2A and firearms classes. But try telling that to gun owners who have no children and aren’t married. The NRA use to have I think 7 people dedicated to coordinate supporting the 4H, boy scouts, and other groups with grants for 22 cal rifles, ammo, gun safes, as well as other equipment. That were some of our dues money went.
There is no support in the gun community for passing on civil rights knowledge children. Except a few examples scattered across the country. There are 55 million students in this country. Less than one percent of them are getting any kind of 2A education in school. On the other hand the Russians and almost every third world country teaches its children about military guns. Not just 22 caliber rifles.
A pro 2A voter is taught to be a 2A voter from childhood.
The Left really hates the boy scouts. A one reason is because they teach boys about guns and how to shoot. That hatred goes back over 100 years.
American vs Russian Schools video 2 minutes long
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra6BkWO1U4A
I dated a Russian gal when I lived in Moscow back in the 90s. She of course, thought it was completely unremarkable that she knew how to tear down an AK. I was pretty impressed.
Field stripping an AK is unremarkable but that’s due to its extremely simple design ( that’s a good thing ) but I get your point. 👌
The left has subverted the boy scouts and girl scouts to a large extent. In my area I know that quite a few troops have broken away from the national organizations because they have gone leftist.
The Marine Corps League (a veteran service organization) sponsors a youth organization called the Young Marines (a nation wide organization) that teaches the constitution, bill of rights, takes them shooting regularly and all the other stuff that conservatives like.
Most Leftists don’t have children. Or if they do they abandon them and the mother. They almost never get married. They get nervous when you talk about their personal life. They only want to talk about the lives of other people.
Precisely why democrats are so heavily invested in public schools.
I think it should be reiterated how important the fight in the states is. Figure this, we all know how the federal congress is, we have just enough support to blunt or stop most gun control efforts. Other then that it’s a stalemate. We can hopefully continue our edge in the courts. But outside of that the fighting in the state houses are becoming where it’s at. The past 20 years we’ve actually had some enormous state victories with the spreading of conceal/open/constitutional carry. I can remember before those movements existed. It’s much better now. It wasn’t that long ago that carrying a gun on your person was seen as something only cops or criminals do. Now conceal carry is fairly common and quite popular. Now Predictably, the blue slave states recently have begun to rack up their own string of victories. We need to keep up the pressure in the states, it’s much easier to pass and fight for legislation at that level then at the federal one.
NO rights are EVER safe. PERIOD.
They ALWAYS must be protected by vigilant citizens.
I respectfully disagree with the narrative that Trump did his bumpfire stock ban knowing it would be overturned. Quit defending his actions he shouldn’t have done it plain and simple and there’s no telling how it will turn out in court at this point in time.
Nothing is free. Especially not political power. Trump used the bump stock rule to buy some political power. Simple as that.
He playing a game none us knows all the rules to or what the all pieces are. We hope this was a pawn for a queen, but only time will tell.
With how many good judges are being put in place our odds of gaining something from this are only going up.
Is he going to cut a big check to slidefire, rw arms, and give rebates to all the gun owners who destroyed them or turned them in? And will the various state legislatures unban them as well? Why didn’t the Supreme Court issue an injunction then? He could have said he was going to ban them, just to stall, and then promptly do nothing on them, but he kept bringing it up and pushing it through.
So its all Mitch huh?!? There’s a cattle car full of RINO’s to aid and abet. Was this a backhanded love-letter to herr Drumph😫Lock n load POTG…
That may be but we DEFINITELY do not need Democrats in the White House. Here’s how dense some politicians are, 2 of them in my state have introduced legislation to prevent the purchase of cigarettes and alcohol with food stamps ( an EBT card). Excellent idea EXCEPT somebody already thought of it and such restrictions are in place. A national politician from my state thinks when ordera gun online it gets shipped to your house no questions asked. It is obvious he hasn’t tried to buy one online. He also doesn’t understand that online sites such as ebay that facilitate sales between individuals don’t permit firearm sales. Related accouterments, yes.
T.T. It’s not just in your own state, they’re in most states.
Where’s my Hearing Protection Act?
You never had the votes for it pass. And you never will get 60 votes for it.
I think Ben Franklin made this point long ago when he said “…if you can keep it”.
The wording suggests that in his mind keeping isn’t a once and done thing but rather a continual effort to which every citizen must commit themselves if they wished the Republic to remain intact and functional.
This is part of why I’m somewhat perplexed that people think the job of defending their rights ever ceases. I mean do you think that your heart beating once means you’ll live forever? That you can survive indefinitely on a single breath of air? No one thinks this way, yet when it comes to their rights that would seem to be exactly what they expect in many regards, which is doubly odd since they know a right not exercised is generally lost.
All of life is fighting the red queen. Most are lucky to be able to run fast enough to go nowhere.
President Trump had no 2A legislative agenda whatsoever and still doesn’t have one now, except for passing gun control. As we have seen recently, the Senate doesn’t take on legislation that they do not know if President Trump will sign it.
You can blame the first 2 years of President Trump’s presidency on Mitch McConnell (and possibly Paul Ryan) all you want, but President Trump was nowhere on supporting any pro-gun bill, such as reciprocity, hearing protection or anything else. He was more busy with d**k measuring contests about inauguration ceremony attendance than in our rights.
As for those arguing for the elimination of the legislative filibuster (passing legislation in the Senate by simple majority), you are simply asking for mob rule. Remember that on January 3, 2021 if Democrats for some reason win the majority in November 2020.
Yes, President Obama “relaxed prohibitions on carrying firearms on federal land” because that language was attached to a must-sign appropriations. So, WHY THE F**K wasn’t something like that done under President Trump??? Again, the Senate does not know what President Trump supports and what he doesn’t.
President Trump has not pushed Congress to pass a single piece of pro-gun legislation! That is a fact! Stop excusing his inaction and stop blaming it on everyone else!
President Trump has signed exactly one piece of pro-gun legislation, the elimination of the social security gun ban rule, which was done via the Congressional Review Act. President Trump has banned bump stocks and has expanded President Obama’s ban on Russian firearms imports to VEPRs. That, in a nutshell, are President Trump’s “accomplishments”.
The problem with unconditionally endorsing President Trump is that we have no leverage whatsoever. As discussed on all gun blogs and forums now, we have no alternative in 2020 than to vote for the lesser evil, President Trump, who will enact gun control just slower than the Democrats.
The endorsement of President Trump should come with conditions and not with a cult of personality close to North Korea’s.
When Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation had his meeting with President Trump recently I hope he communicated that to the President.
“President Obama “relaxed prohibitions on carrying firearms on federal land” because that language was attached to a must-sign appropriations.”
This statement is a complete falsehood, the amendment was not attached to an appropriations bill.
In fact, the amendment was attached to a bill protecting citizens like you and me from predatory credit card practices by the big banks and lenders. And this bill originated in a democratically controlled Congress, there was no ‘must sign’ situation, it’s all about protecting citizens.
Actual history is quite different from the narratives we are exposed to these days.
In fact, it was Republican president Reagan who made it more difficult for citizens to possess their firearms in national parks.
“The policy was enhanced in 1983 to prohibit possessing, carrying, or using a firearm outside of certain approved areas and hunting seasons, with an exception for firearms kept in a car or mobile home “when such implements are rendered inoperable or packed, cased or stored in a manner that will prevent their ready use.” The revision effectively mandated that visitors store their guns, unloaded, in a car trunk or equivalent while in a national park. After four months of public comment, President Ronald Reagan approved it.”
That didn’t change until Elizabeth Warren promoted a bill to protect citizens from predatory credit card company practices. This was the bill that was later amended to include expansion of gun rights on thousands of acres of federal land.
“Elizabeth Warren — not yet the junior senator from Massachusetts — played a prominent role in securing the passage of the Credit CARD Act of 2009. The bill’s proponents sought to put a stop to what they deemed predatory practices on the part of credit card companies. The House passed the original bill, introduced by Democratic Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney of New York in 2008, but the Senate refused to vote on it. It was reintroduced in the next session of Congress, again passed the House, and again went to the Senate, where it sat until May 2009.
The second time around, President Obama joined Warren in an aggressive lobbying campaign, holding town halls and publicizing consumers’ credit card horror stories. There was significant pressure on the Senate to act before Memorial Day, and leaders of both parties going back and forth before eventually reaching a deal the week of May 10.
Soon after the compromise announcement, an amendment to the bill was introduced, quickly voted on, and passed. This new measure had nothing to do with borrowers or lenders. Instead, Section 512 carried the title “Protecting Americans from Violent Crimes,” and it dismantled all existing federal restrictions on firearm possession for visitors to the national park system outside Alaska. State laws — including concealed carry statutes — would govern national forest areas instead.”
Not only did President Obama and the Democrats expand your right to carry weapons on federal land, they did it along with a bill to protect you from predatory lending practices by credit card companies.
All this, to relax Reagan area gun prohibitions in national parks.
Tell me again how the Republicans are all about preserving gun ownership and Democrats want to take all your guns, I love to hear your fairytales.
Well, you are right that it wasn’t an appropriations bill. Point taken on that one! It was still a must-pass bill given the political realities of the economy at that point in time. That was my point!!! The guns in National Parks amendment was R-sponsored, by the way, and considered by some Democrats as a potential poison pill.
S.Amdt. 1067 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)
https://www.congress.gov/amendment/111th-congress/senate-amendment/1067/actions?r=63&s=a
Senate Approves Coburn Gun Amendment…in Credit Card Bill
https://web.archive.org/web/20090621182431/http://washingtonindependent.com/42641/senate-approves-coburn-gun-amendment
I never said that “the Republicans are all about preserving gun ownership and Democrats want to take all your guns”! Quite the opposite actually, I said: “President Trump had no 2A legislative agenda whatsoever and still doesn’t have one now, except for passing gun control.”
It looks like you not only completely missed my point, but also make stuff up as you go. If we don’t hold the Republicans feet to the fire, they will pass more gun control and, in contrast to Democrats, will be successful with it. That was my point!!!
At any time our”legal” right to keep and bear arms is one mass casualty event from going away. Our arguments to defend our rights will either be unheard or ridiculed.
” But, but my rights come from God”.
“Great, let him show up and defend your right to keep a evil gun”. What, your imaginary friend didn’t show up,? Too bad you lose”.
“We have good guys with guns!”
“Yah, they are called cops, we will be sending them by to pick up your guns”.
” We could prevent mass shooting”
“Hasn’t happened yet, has asshole! ”
” Gun control hasn’t worked in Chicago! Look at all the shooting every weekend!”
“That’s because you assholes keep leaving guns in your cars and trucks and won’t except safe storage laws”
Develop your arguments now, because the next maniac is being warmed up now.
The time for arguments is long past. Decades and data and examples all around the world haven’t worked. There are no magic words that will convince the people that want you dead and your children enslaved.
Mao was right when he observed the source of political power.
Ask the assholes if they know what molon labe means and see what they say
I know what it means. But they think it means you need to meet a Bearcat.
CCWs have prevented or blunted mass shooting events, just cause the media doesn’t report it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. There was that mall shooting in Seattle, the church in Texas, just to name two off the top of my head.
Neither party particularly wants it’s People armed. The democrats are going the extra step of registration with future confiscation at the moment but both parties would prefer we just pay taxes and somewhat we are told.
Not much of a choice for us in the pro-2A community. The devil that takes some of rights away Trump, but the devil that takes all of our rights away Democrats. I would have like to have neither of the two. Trump knows we are stuck with him for another 4 years if he wins. He will do what he wants he has said recently on gun control proposals. Many have said good things about the new federal judges that Republicans have put in place, but they are just putting them in place without seeing them as friendly to the pro-2A community and 2nd Amendment. Look at the judicial appointment to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Amy St. Eve, whom has help to upheld the Cook County and Chicago, IL prohibition (ban) on semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines this past Aug. 29, 2019 in the ruling they hand down. They should have never appointed a judge like this that had this anti-2A background if Republicans were so pro-2A.
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/us-court-of-appeals-upholds-chicagos-assault-weapons-ban
So in other words rather than judge a case on merit. You want a bias built in because it backs your view. A judge is supposed judge each case on its own.
“A judge is supposed judge each case on its own.”
Yes, absent that bias you mentioned.
Generally, there are two schools of jurisprudence: what does the law read, and how does it apply?; what could the law be construed to read, and how can I stretch it to an outcome I favor? All of which is really no different from accepting a constitution as a firm standard, vs. promoting a constitution that can be “breathed” to accommodate the culture of the day. But note…those who endorse/enforce a “living, breathing constitution” never permit the breathing to contract to a state of rest.
I would much rather have President Trump in the oval office than anyone running for democrat in 2020 that mostly have stated or inferred that they want to ban and confiscate pretty much any and all semi automatic firearms. I can’t recall President Trump ever saying anything close to that. Then there is the matter of federal judges including SCOTUS. I personally would much rather have another Neil Gorsuch or Brett Kavanaugh than another Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan . Those singing the praises of Obama on gun control need to remember that he vowed to sign the latest 2013 AWB attempt in congress that failed to pas but he would have gladly signed it. BTW here is the breakdown in the senate vote for that. I see a pattern here.
Yes:
Democrats 38
Republicans 1
https://projects.propublica.org/represent/votes/113/senate/1/101
Indeed. And President Trump *will* be impeached. Senate is very unlikely to convict, but Nancy can’t back down now. It’ll be fun watching her explain why she’s impeaching inside an election year.
Does she know RBG is about to ‘retire’?
What protects our gun rights is the U.S. Constitution, they being Congress and/or the President will continue to use it as a door mat until we the people make them stop. At this time we have more combat vets in the U.S. since Vietnam, and they fear us. This is why they are pushing to remove weapons we are familiar with. They do not want us to start trouble with them.
Individual rights are always at risk. There is always some push to increase herd protection at the cost of the rights of the individual, that is the underlying theme in socialism / communism. The danger from many GOP presidents (I can’t call Trump a conservative because he is not) is they will tend to give away little pieces in an attempt to placate the middle. It never works, but we acclimatize to the reduced rights. The DEM machine will try to take giant chunks. That scares the heck of of people and tends to cultivate reactions. You still loose rights either way if you don’t resist, one is just faster than the other. I don’t mind updating gun laws, but it needs to be a fair trade, i.e. we gain some gun rights back and loose some. This the balance is preserved. So far all I see is lose/lose which will quickly tilt the scales to socialism.
“It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.” – John Philpot Curran: Speech upon the Right of Election for Lord Mayor of Dublin, 1790.
Often summarized and always misattributed to other famous people here in America as, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”
I think gun rights were safe under Madison.
Don’t wait for the next event hold their feet to the fire it only takes a few clicks everyday!
Many email programs allow u to schedule emails daily with different msgs.
All of Congress has twitter its easy to do as well.
Contact Congress 202-225-3121
https://gunowners.org/alert082119/
https://gunowners.org/alert090419/
Comments are closed.