Donald Trump Says, 'Take the guns first, go through due process second'

a reply to: face23785

So let me get this straight, the draft office was in on this scheme with these rich people to let them avoid going to get a military doctor to examine them?

In some cases, perhaps (you might want to see the composition of those draft boards), but mostly they just didn't care enough. Like I said, plenty of fine young men of draft age. No need to waste much time on it.

They'd just accept these private doctor notes even though procedure didn't allow for that?

I don't know if the procedure allowed for it or not, but it was done.

Did they have to forge some exam records so no one asked why x, y or z registrant hadn't been processed according to procedures?

As I understand it, all the "official" doctor had to do was write "bone spurs" or "homosexual" on the report. Maybe they would attach the doctor's note, or not.

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: projectvxn

Does that mean that someone who has been legally determined to be mentally ill but has committed no crime must be allowed to purchase a gun?

No, because an adjudication satisfies due process in these cases.

As it does with "red flag" laws. Permission to confiscate must be attained from a judge. A restraining order of a particular sort.

Trump thinks that a phone call takes too long. It may have been effective in Cruz's case (plenty of opportunities, apparently), but Florida law does not allow it.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
I never thought I would say this.

Anti your post is spot on.

Trump lost a good supporter today with his behavior. Nobody fought for our rights.

I will support a 3rd party independent from this point on.

I've never been so disapointed.

I was pumped, fof the first timr, in a long time that someone was going to MAGA.

His actions reflect he is a shill, and you were right.

(Passes out and falls over)

...But Clinton would have sucked a bigger egg, lol

Libertarian for me again, I voted Trump last time because he wasn't HRC and about the only choice we had. Now he is proving why some people think he was a moderate lefty that ran R. His big mouth has delivered as much as it has hurt. This could hurt us as bad as the 25% tariff on steel.

As for the quote in the title. It's frankly disturbing and I'm hoping it will finally snap a few among Trump's supporters out of their stupors

For every one that I’ve seen in the last 24 hours that’s made their disgust known, there’s been another one trying to win Olympic gold for mental gymnastics.

Of course we have the usual standby “chess, not checkers” types which is humorously countered with “what level of chess are we in now, 4D? 5D?”

By far the most stunning display has been blaming Clinton and the democrats for what Trump said yesterday, because somehow Clinton being likely to go after guns makes it her fault Trump is.

It would be stunning if it weren’t so dangerously idiotic.

a reply to: Justoneman

The tariff is good for the US steel industry.
Doncha know.

Think he might have pissed off the "right" bunch the wrong way this time...

Like I've said over the last year, his supporters were fine with Trump's apparent disregard of rights of citizens.. if it wasn't rights they cared about. But I knew for a certainty at some point, Trump would blunder to take away something his sheep actually care about (because he is fairly clueless and making it up as he goes), and then.. THEN they would suddenly realize the type of guy he was.

Don't worry - he'll do it again. He waffled on so many issues coming up to the Presidency, he is bound to anger his followers again. If he does that, there will be no chance at reelection.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

It's different for an 18 year old that joins the military and is trained for months vs an 18 year old that has no discipline in their lives.

One can be mentally ill and go on a shooting spree and the other can't? Would you like some examples of military personnel who shouldn't have had access to guns? You could work your way backwards from Nidal Hasan to Kent State and keep going.

a reply to: Phage

Price of steel is historically low now so it may not hurt the auto companies the way the Hawley Smoot Tariff did.
Due process was well thought out months ago by the economic advisors not Trump.

a reply to: Cauliflower

Price of steel is historically low now

This does not seem to be the case.

Historically, Steel reached an all time high of 4772 in December of 2017 and a record low of 1750 in February of 2016.

tradingeconomics.com...

Trump doesn't believe in the rule of law

What the hell how the #$%^ did it take you this long to realize it?!

His entire administration is a bunch of criminals, fully supported by his completely immoral supporters.

Lmao, looks like Trump triggered everyone. Look, something needs to be done on many levels. One of them being not allowing kids with mental issues and violent tendencies that threaten others to be allowed to buy and own an AR-15. Also, this police department allowed this to happen with their inaction and negligence.

originally posted by: fleabit

Think he might have pissed off the "right" bunch the wrong way this time...

Like I've said over the last year, his supporters were fine with Trump's apparent disregard of rights of citizens.. if it wasn't rights they cared about. But I knew for a certainty at some point, Trump would blunder to take away something his sheep actually care about (because he is fairly clueless and making it up as he goes), and then.. THEN they would suddenly realize the type of guy he was.

Don't worry - he'll do it again. He waffled on so many issues coming up to the Presidency, he is bound to anger his followers again. If he does that, there will be no chance at reelection.

What rights of citizens has he disregarded over the past year? I ask because I seriously want to know. I may have missed this information so I have no problem learning from someone that knows. Links would be great so I can read on those right of citizens he has disregarded. Again, thanks!

a reply to: Phage

As I understand it, all the "official" doctor had to do was write "bone spurs" or "homosexual" on the report. Maybe they would attach the doctor's note, or not.

I wonder how many times "came in and shat his pant's" was used..once at least.

Strolls in, hands in pockets, sifts the dust with his shoe, looks up ...

"Told ya'll so..."

Strolls out, but stops just out of sight.

"...and sorry I was right."

originally posted by: Baddogma
Strolls in, hands in pockets, sifts the dust with his shoe, looks up ...

"Told ya'll so..."

Strolls out, but stops just out of sight.

"...and sorry I was right."

So, if this proposal never becomes anything more then spoken ideas and doesn't become law, will you stroll back in, with sweaty palms, dusty shoes, look up and say...

"Sorry, I was wrong..."

strolling out, stopping just out of sight,

"...and thankfully I was wrong."

a reply to: RazorV66

If some fool posts a picture of themselves brandishing a gun on Facebook or whatever, with a caption that reads “watch out” or some other nonsense, sure....take the gun and look up their ass with a microscope.

That, in and of itself, is neither a true (or direct) threat, nor probably cause to take a person's firearm without cause or legal authority.

To keep an eye on them to see if there is a pattern of behavior, sure, perhaps; to take their firearm, no.

It's a very dangerous precedent.

a reply to: Phage

Maybe was talking about gun prices? I heard AR's are cheaper than AK's lately.

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: projectvxn

Does that mean that someone who has been legally determined to be mentally ill but has committed no crime must be allowed to purchase a gun?

No, because an adjudication satisfies due process in these cases.

As it does with "red flag" laws. Permission to confiscate must be attained from a judge. A restraining order of a particular sort.

Trump thinks that a phone call takes too long. It may have been effective in Cruz's case (plenty of opportunities, apparently), but Florida law does not allow it.

No, it doesn't. Adjudication is a conviction. A warrant is just a warrant.

a reply to: Phage

I heard Trump announced a 25% tariff on imported steel and aluminium today..prices will probably rise some more.
www.cbc.ca...

a reply to: GBP/JPY

Hes applying his acting skills here maybe....