Posted on 01/23/2016 12:07:02 PM PST by Isara
|
Field & Stream: Q&A: Donald Trump on Guns, Hunting, and Conservation https://t.co/RFR63RSq38 pic.twitter.com/WkvIrTSSGy— Field & Stream (@FieldandStream) January 22, 2016 |
Some news to report out of Las Vegas where Donald Trump sat down with Field & Stream magazine for an interview during the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s annual SHOT Show.
First up, the GOP front-runner came out against letting states control public lands now run by the federal government saying, “I don’t like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don’t know what the state is going to do”:
This is what they’re talking about, with the land in red owned by the federal government:
Rand Paul has already spoken about this, saying in 2015 that federal lands should be handed over to state or local governments:
“I’d either sell or turn over all the land management to the states,” Paul, a Republican presidential candidate and senator from Kentucky, said, landing him big applause at a campaign event. “I don’t think the federal government needs to be involved.”
Later in the interview, Trump seemed to signal that we shouldn’t allow oil and gas companies to drill any new wells on federally-controlled lands because there’s already “so much energy”:
You can read the entire interview here.
Yet another area in which Trump and Barry agree. How nice.
He pays attention. He’s pretty precise about past events and things that were said both by himself and others. Also A good negotiator must also be a good listener. Idiots don’t normally rise to the top in their profession. You have to be a good listener to work the kinds of deals and runs the kinds of companies he does.
I can’t honestly say that I am surprised at all by him position on this. Trump is not much of a supporter of federalism, gor good or ill, depending upon how you look at it.
It makes sense when you look at it from the perspective of a businesman who doesn’t want to have to deal with things being different from state to state.
For those of us more supportive of a a federalist philosophy, we see the ‘one size fits all’ mandates from DC as not taking local conditions or needs into account. I think we are much better off if the states can experiment. We’ll perhaps learn something useful from it that we otherwise would not.
I believe that this kind of issue is important. We should look at our candidates and try to see not only what they believe, but why they believe what they do. This is one way we can intelligently discern who really is a better candidate that more closely mirrors our own philosophy.
How a candidate sees an individual vis his relationship with the state is of similar importance.
Actually, neither. Jefferson’s ideas, put into the Land Ordinance of 1785, is that the land, as much as possible, belongs in the hands of INDIVIDUALS. Trump’s wrong but the states don’t have rights to seal this off in unlimited ways either.
Was Conservative Ted at that rally in DC.
Bingo. Jefferson’s idea.
Not any more. That was in 2000.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/06/politics/donald-trump-assault-weapons/
Donald Trump OK with assault weapons
"Washington (CNN) Donald Trump said Tuesday he supports allowing Americans to legally buy and own assault weapons.
"You have to be because the bad guys are going to have them anyway," Trump told CNN's Chris Cuomo on "New Day." "What happens when the bad guys have the assault weapons and you don't in a confrontation?"
Trump suggested overturning gun-free zones and said civilians with guns could have stopped the mass shooting at a community college last week in Oregon."
And from his web site:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/second-amendment-rights
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."
Living in Washington state I assure you, his point is impossible to argue against. The local politicians are constantly stirring up the socialist greenies against Big Oil or Timber under the guise of conservation. Deploy the army of useful idiots, jack up the fees and fines, extortion plain and simple.
He said he wants to open more lands to the public and increase management spending. Sportsmen, ranchers and hikers have proven themselves to be good stewards, probably no need to increase the spending.
Outside of the Constitution the states are sovereign which means the PEOPLE of the states may decide how they want to manage the lands of their state. State governance is LOCAL and the people of their state may choose how they want the state run, except the Constitution demands that state government must be a republic (Art 4, Sec 4).
So if the majority of a people of a state want their state lands in the hands of individuals, then they can push that objective through initiatives, propositions, and/or elected state officials. The feds have nothing to say on the matter.
Generally I think that is how state lands are managed - individual ownership.
Yup. Trump screwed this up. He needs to be educated, flip, and apologize for his error in judgement.
I do not like big government, big banks, big corporations, big unions big media, etc.
I do not trust any entity that has the power run our everyday lives be they public or private.
Trump’s in a whole new ballgame. Yes, certain skills he has and has acquired in the business world will serve him well here. But Trump’s working a whole new deal now, completely unlike his business deals.
In business, Trump was an empire builder. But to make America Great Again, Trump must DISMANTLE the unconstitutional portion (more than 80%) of the federal government empire. He must realize America is great because of the God-given and constitutionally-protected freedom individuals have to run their lives and build their own individual “empires.”
Trump is convincing me that if elected he will not do any of the necessary things to restore the Republic. If he actually thinks the Federal Government can manage anything at all better than the states or citizens, then he does not understand how it is.
I already agreed Trump was wrong on this. Why isn’t that good enough for you?
In a sense the feds have two problems that are made for each other.
First, Social Security. Like any pyramid scheme, there’s no way to shut it down without screwing the last generation that paid, but it’s still a communist, collectivist scam that has no place in a free country. So what to do?
Second, owning millions of acres that could be put to some pro-freedom, pro-citizen use is too much power with which to entrust the government. The federal government even moreso than the states, but still. Who wants 99% of Nevada even to belong to the Nevada state government?
Some FReeper once suggested paying off those who’ve paid into SS with federal land as a way to shut down SS. Don’t remember if he saw getting the feds out of the property business as a huge advantage of the plan, but it certainly seems that way to me.
That’s pretty good. I don’t think you could mandate it, but it could be an option, and as such MANY would take that.
The reason is all agenda 21. Read.
I agree. Novice but innocent works for me with Trump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.