Watch Live Congress and Trump talking GUNS.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: introvert

Oh, the NRA has a roll to play, now more than ever. It's to help alert folks to the danger. That's all they can do, for all intents and purposes.

The rest is our job.

Trump was never a Republican, he was/is, by appearances, nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing. Well, on this issue, he's seemingly revealed himself as the lifelong Democrat he'd always been.

Oops.

As with Obama, I was giving him his chance... As with Obama, he's revealed himself to all of us, if we care to take off the goddamned blinders and take a good, close, hard look.

I wondered, when he seemed in favor of the attacking the first amendment by somehow taking CNN out of business. Now, he's, seemingly, in favor of attacking the second. Without recourse to due process.

So... Here we are. I wonder which amendment is next?

I completely agree.

I could add a bit more to it, but I don't think it would serve a purpose at this point.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Mandroid7

That's what they want you to do. So don't.

THE REST OF YOU!!

OK, fine, Trump seems to have betrayed you all, at least on this issue. There really is no point in pointing fingers and saying "I told you so".

On "this issue"???

"This Issue" is the Constitution right? There is a few other issues covered in that document like Freedom of The Press and Free Speech. Trumpites seem fine when Trump had no care for those constitutional principles, as a matter of fact they cheered everytime he took a crap on them.

This seems to be a case of worshipping the Cult Leader until he asks to marry YOUR 10 year old daughter, then all of a sudden something aint right.

Former Trump Adviser Says He Tried to Teach President the Constitution, but His Eyes Just Rolled Back in His Head

“I got as far as the Fourth Amendment, before his finger is pulling down on his lip and his eyes are rolling back in his head,” Sam Nunberg, a former adviser to the Trump campaign
www.newsweek.com...

For what it is worth, I am for stricter gun laws and better background checks. Eff anyone that thinks Due Process is disposable though.

originally posted by: neo96

As mentioned before, Trump supports raising the age limit for the purchasing of long guns to 21, something that Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) balked at for the simple reason that a) it denies Americans of voting-age their Second Amendment rights; b) he represents a hunting state; and c) there are already a lot of 18,19, and 20 year olds in his state and elsewhere who have rifles for target practice and hunting. Toomey, along with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) tried to do a comprehensive background check bill after Newtown, which failed. But it’s been rehashed, with the president wanting to add mental health provisions, raising the age limit for firearms, and having universal background checks, while nixing any hope of having concealed carry reciprocity attached to the legislation to make it at least palatable to Republicans.

Yet, in all, this meeting was a total disaster. It pretty much was a capitulation to pro-gun control Democrats.

Yep after a year of calling Trump a nazi. The Democrats just gave him permssion to take their guns, and make it harder for people to get them.

Put that in your peace pipe and smoke it.

Oh, right, those poor Nazi's!

Who simultaneously don't exist and are a fabrication of the alt-left whilst also having Constitutional rights that should be respect and not punched.

The same Nazi's who killed Heather Meyer and injured dozens more.

Oh - and then there's thi s.

Florida shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz 'etched swastikas into ammunition magazines used in massacre'

So looks like yet more blood spilled due to this newfound refresh of Nazism.

I wonder why this hasn't been posted all over ATS - ah, that's right, the bias here is unreal. If he had inscribed Antifa or BLM... we all know how this would play out.

Godwins Law in effect. The longer a discussion, the higher chances Nazism gets thrown in.

But when it comes to self-proclaimed Nazi's ramming people in the streets, ordering themselves as "Atomwuffen," and being involved in over five murders, to this new kid.... I should have to respect their Consitutional rights and it's "wrong," if I punch these people in their face.

a reply to: VimanaExplorer

Trump is going to destroy the conservative right and then become ultra-liberal just in time to get reelected in 2020.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: neo96
Don't worry neo.


Didn't he say he'd support any bi-partisan DACA bill?
He backed out on that claim pretty quick, didn't he.

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath here and realize that sometimes Trump spews stuff out of his mouth that gets dropped later. Someone will probably talk to him tonight and tell him that even mentioning delaying due process will piss a whole lot of people off, and he'll drop it like a hot potato. The man is an idiot who talks first and thinks later (if at all).

I'm really concerned some here are going to have a stroke or heart attack. I'm not kidding.

a reply to: RomeByFire

But when it comes to self-proclaimed Nazi's ramming people in the streets, ordering themselves as "Atomwuffen," and being involved in over five murders, to this new kid.... I should have to respect their Consitutional rights and it's "wrong," if I punch these people in their face.

So why arn't the the naziphobes trying to ban cars eh?

Nice strawman by the way.

a reply to: kaylaluv

I just might actually watch Hannity this evening.

a reply to: testingtesting

Probably. On the issue of "gun control", it seems the vast majority of Americans polled, several thousand probably, are in favor of increased background checks, or more in-depth, anyway... I'm betwixt and between on it, but could live with it.

This bill, is not that. It is nothing short of an attempt, a bi-partisan attempt, no less, at gutting the second amendment, and reducing it to a series of meaningless words.

In the process turning me into a criminal, because I will not comply. Thus making a mockery of the 4th, and 10th, amendments at the same time.

So. That's my line, they crossed it, or want to. We have a chance to warn them off of this course...they'd do well to remember both the mid-terms are coming up, and how this country was founded, and why.

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776.
THE UNANIMOUS
DECLARATION
OF THE
THIRTEEN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

WHEN, in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's GOD entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the Causes which impel them to the Separation.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate, that Governments long established, should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

They would do well to remember those paragraphs above...for they are treading upon thin ice. Today, it's gun owners who are being treated as second class citizens, joining blacks, women, and a host of others.

Is the promise of some form of ephemeral safety enough for us to toss away one of the founding principles of our nation? That we may be safe and secure in our persons, and that the crimes of others not be placed on our shoulders who are innocent of any wrong doing?

Benjamin Franklin said it best when asked, after the signing of the Constitution, what form of govt America would have, he said words to the effect that it was, “A republic, if you can keep it.”.

How many amendments being ignore will be too many? No vote has been cast yet, so we've still time to come to our senses, collectively, and tell them no.

But that would require some of us, many of us, to let go the partisan hate that has us held captive.

Is it a bulwark to protect us from an overweening govt? Or is it just a god damn piece of paper? We get to choose.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: RomeByFire

But when it comes to self-proclaimed Nazi's ramming people in the streets, ordering themselves as "Atomwuffen," and being involved in over five murders, to this new kid.... I should have to respect their Consitutional rights and it's "wrong," if I punch these people in their face.

So why arn't the the naziphobes trying to ban cars eh?

Nice strawman by the way.

Naziphobes?

Wow, it's a contest to the bottom and you're the sole contender.

By your standards, and what you've previously called me, I'm a white supremacist hater and Naziphobe.

Sounds like you're trying to tell us something here. Got no quarrel punching a Nazi in the mouth. The only people who do are Nazi's.

a reply to: seagull

Probably. On the issue of "gun control", it seems the vast majority of Americans polled, several thousand probably, are in favor of increased background checks, or more in-depth, anyway... I'm betwixt and between on it, but could live with it.

I can't live with it.

Guilty until proven innocent.

The complete opposite of how our judicial system is suppose to work.

a reply to: Phage

Yeah, it should be interesting to see if he can pull his head out of Trumps ass.

He's a gun owner is Hannity... Let's find out if he's actually capable of independent thought.

a reply to: RomeByFire

Sounds like you're trying to tell us something here.

Sure was.

People hate Trump so much they are going to give their means of self defense to him.

Crazy town.

a reply to: neo96

I'm fully aware of that.

Politics, and compromise with in politics, is about leaving everyone equally unhappy. There's a fine line here, that if it isn't crossed, will do just that. Satisfy no one on the fringes, but for folks with less skin in the game, they'll be able to live with it.

In an ideal world, neo, my friend, yes background checks are unnecessary. This ain't that world. Background checks aren't a cure all, that's only too obviously true. But they help. Probably a lot.

Like arming teachers, and having security guards in schools, background checks are only a bandage. But until a better solution presents itself? It is, what it is. No one says we have to like it--and I, most assuredly, do not.

You, of course, are free to disagree with my take on it. There is still a first amendment...for now.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: RomeByFire

Sounds like you're trying to tell us something here.

Sure was.

People hate Trump so much they are going to give their means of self defense to him.

Crazy town.

Some people think the answer to preventing mass shootings is to make bulletproof cubicles for children, as well as disbanding public schools and just doing it over the Internet.

I mean, it's a pretty good idea. If we just stay in our homes and never leave, us who deal with the snow during the winter won't have to deal with it!

That's innovation.

a reply to: seagull

You, of course, are free to disagree with my take on it. There is still a first amendment...for now.

I do, but I am not going to argue over it.

It did not exist until the Clinton era, and it is being sold as a cure all.

Then tying mental health in to it.

One day were going to wake up to having been declared nuts, with the police knocking on the door saying give them here.

Your not fit to have them.

a reply to: RomeByFire

It would also cut down on CO2 emissions.
Winning.

a reply to: neo96

Let's work to make sure that doesn't happen, eh?

I wouldn't worry to much. Tomorrow Sarah Sanders will tell us that we are taking Trump out of context and everyone will go back trusting what Trump says like before. Wear your MAGA hat with pride!!

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: neo96

Let's work to make sure that doesn't happen, eh?

I'm all for stopping 'litmus testing,citizen testing' whatever the word is I'm looking for.

Before people get to practice a clear right.

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: RomeByFire

Sounds like you're trying to tell us something here.

Sure was.

People hate Trump so much they are going to give their means of self defense to him.

Crazy town.

Some people think the answer to preventing mass shootings is to make bulletproof cubicles for children, as well as disbanding public schools and just doing it over the Internet.

I mean, it's a pretty good idea. If we just stay in our homes and never leave, us who deal with the snow during the winter won't have to deal with it!

That's innovation.

Who matters more?

Children going to school, or random people getting on planes?

If you answer, they are equally as important. Which I feel is the only correct answer there, then you kind of need to look at why security seems more of a priority in airports, and not so much in schools?

If we don't all face the fact that people are much crazier than they used to be, we won't ever try to find out why.