Heading for a "one termer".
Stop the handwringing.
One answer: NO!
Think about the term “gun violence”. I’ve never met a VIOLENT gun. I’ve met some violent people. And THEY will, if disposed to become killers, find ways to kill! Would you also prohibit sale of materials like diesel fuel, ammonium nitrate and steel pipe and fittings - ALL necessary to the functioning of a modern society and innocent enough alone but - as demonstrated by muslim morons - capable of killing hundreds at a time in an instant?
The FBI COULD have kept this idiot in Florida away from his guns BUT THEY WERE TOO BUSY to even INTERVIEW HIM???
And ask yourself WHY - in this highly computerized culture - our various law enforcement agencies DO NOT share background information with one another? Am I paranoid to think that perhaps these sad murders of innocents aid in advancing some totalitarian agenda as they attempt to whip otherwise intelligent people into a frenzy to herd them in a direction they wish them to go? Look up Hegelian Dialectic for starters. There are forces at work in the world today that pay no heed to what most of us consider rules of civilized behavior. They are only guided by what advances their agenda. Does the old phrase “You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs” come to mind.
Some quotes to ponder:
“A free people should not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might abuse them, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT.” That from George Washington!
And the late DEMOCRAT Senator and presidential candidate Hubert Humphery offered this on the topic:
“The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against
arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny
which now appears remote in America, but which historically
has proved to be always possible.”
(Ed. Comment: Heavens, how the Democrats have changed!)
And consider the IRONY that the 4th Estate (which has largely morphed into a 5TH COLUMN) always raises the false argument that the Founders never envisioned the advent of weapons like the AR15 and other modern arms. Those 56 men were students of history and the knew well the failings of human nature. They understood that the Constitutional economic and political system they sought to leave as their legacy would produce abundance and liberty for more people than any in history. They ALSO knew that it would spawn advances in technology that would some day make the physical artifacts common in THEIR day the relics they have become in ours. THAT INCLUDED WEAPONS of all sorts!
Now here’s the irony: If one applies to the Second Amendment the media’s claim that ordinary citizens “...the people..” today should ONLY be allowed to possess unrifiled, muzzle loaded flintlock muskets, that “logic” would limit THEM to writing today’s latest “fake news” by dipping quill pens into ink wells and scribbling on parchment!
And for those who still believe that the media are benign innocents simply “journalizing” events here, I’m compelled to add this from Mark Twain:
“Do not fear the enemy, for your enemy can only take your life. It is far better that you fear the media, for they will steal your HONOR. That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoemaking and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poorhouse.”
Let me wrap this with a fact MOST humans find so disturbing that they refuse to confront it: MOST OF THE HUMANS KILLED OVER HISTORY WERE MURDERED BY GOVERNMENTS.
It’s called DEMOCIDE and 260 MILLION people died at the hands of a government in just the 20th century.
And THAT is why those of us who still possess critical thinking skills and have families STILL outnumber those who repeatedly call for steps toward the ultimate goal of the left: Total disarmament of this population.
It seems he agrees with any audience he attends.
It’s not Trump I’m worried about. It’s Congress.
They are just trying to put words in Trump’s mouth, hoping to influence him.
“Must be some more of that 23 dimension chess or something.”
Nope, more like a classic political tactic called “Christmas tree-ing” where more baubles and tinsel are added to the tree until it falls of its own weight. In this case, appearing to give lots of sides just what they want, it falls of its own weight because one side hates what the other side is getting so much that they are willing for the entire thing to fail.
“Heading for a “one termer”.”
Let’s watch ‘immigration’. If Trump folds on that, then he’ll likely fold on gun control. So far Trump has proposed a reasonable compromise on immigration (at least in the opinion of most of us here) - all sides get something, but all sides lose something. If Trump moves Left from there...we won’t like it, one bit - as he would have folded
Assuming immigration works out (either he gets everything his way, or everything dies...which is also fine by our side), then expect the same for gun control. He’ll say nice, leftist-sounding words, but then moves back to our side when push comes to shove.
So time will tell.
I agree that “universal background checks” would require a gun registry—which is a nonstarter.
But he said “comprehensive background checks.” What the heck does that mean?
An national registry of criminals and nutcases is not the same thing as a gun registry.
Whoraldo was profusely praising Trump today....ungh.
I fear that the libs have discovered an old Trump weakness and are going all out to exploit it...
“Anything fur the cheeeldruns,” even if it’s foolish.
If that's the case, someone better get past his gang of dolt advisors and tell him the democrats will take any little bit they can get and count on their judges to misinterpret it and build on it if they're ever in the majority again.
\ Whatever he has in mind, this is BS, pure and unadulterated. In fact, it sounds like something out of the mind of Ivanka who hangs with the crowd who don't give a rat's azz about the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights.
JMHo
“This is so because universal background checks are not enforceable without a gun registry.”
I bought two 22 rifles some years ago, and my background was checked both times with the official government form. The kind that states you will go to prison if you lie. They made a call to the FBI.
A background check is not a registry. Some stores keep the form, I heard, and some don’t.
Gun registration..?? NO..!!
I am totally against more background checks but the idea that universal background checks cannot work without a national gun registry is a non sequitur. NICS works just find without any gun registry and the proposal is essentially just an expansion of the existing NICS system. I call ‘bullshit!’ on Mr. Hawkins’ claim.
Like a criminal will register his/her gun! LOL!!!!
I’m sure Trump has no intention of hassling gun owners. Actually NJ already has a registry and know who owns what.