Posted on 03/27/2023 5:43:45 PM PDT by Drew68
UPDATE: I did not know about the Nashville school shooting until after I sent out this story. I did not intend to make a political statement of any kind about the victims from the Covenant School. I pray for the families and the school.
As president, Donald Trump privately pushed for banning AR-15-type rifles, according to a new report. Trump was — and is — a big defender of Second Amendment rights. So the new revelation is surprising that he tried to renew the “assault weapon” ban during his first two years in office.
The news about Trump is buried in a lengthy story in The Washington Post on Monday about AR-15 style rifles. The report says he tried multiple times in 2018 and 2019 to get support for a federal “assault-weapon” ban.
“I don’t know why anyone needs an AR-15,” Trump told aides as he flew on Marine One to the White House in August 2019, according to a person who heard his comments. As one former official put it in describing the real estate developer turned politician, “His reflexes were a New York liberal on guns. He doesn’t have knee-jerk conservative reflexes.” But Trump was also petrified of the NRA and others taking him on, former advisers said, and heard from a number of advisers that it would be unpopular. Trump ultimately stopped entertaining the idea of working with Democrats on gun control later that year, when he was caught in a scandal over his now-infamous phone call with Ukraine’s president. “F--- it, I’m not going to work with them on anything. They’re f---ing impeaching me,” Trump said in one Oval Office meeting, according to a participant.""In the summer of 2019, after back-to-back mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso involving an AR-15-style pistol and an AKM-style rifle, Trump told aides that he wanted to ban AR-15s, according to people present for the statements.
The AR-15 is a style of rifle. The FBI crime statistics for 2021 show there were 11,628 people killed by guns, and 447 of them were by rifles of any type. The bureau does not track the style of the rifle.
A spokesman for Trump, who is running for reelection in 2024, did not deny the remarks. From The Post:
"Steven Cheung, a Trump spokesman, did not respond to detailed findings in this article but said that “there had been no bigger defender of the Second Amendment than President Trump.” He said that Trump had offered other proposals after mass shootings, such as adding security guards to schools and allowing teachers who are licensed to carry a weapon to do so."
Trump’s bipartisan gun control
While this reporting from The Post is from anonymous sources, it lines up with Trump’s public comment in 2018 in a bipartisan White House meeting on gun control measures after the horrific school mass shooting in Parkland, FL.
Trump told Sen. Dianne Feinstein in a live TV meeting that he would look at her “assault weapon” ban bill. It caused an uproar with the pro-gun groups that helped get him elected. I cued up this video to watch him tell her:
NRA protest
The Post reported this meeting and one other in more detail:
He mentioned it on live television to one of the Senate’s most vocal gun-control backers, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), and in a private meeting with Parkland families. His comments rattled NRA officials and some of his own advisers. NRA representatives later warned Trump against taking action. “They came up here and said to him, the base is going to blow you up,” according to a former official who sat in during a series of meetings with the NRA. They, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private interactions.""Shortly after Parkland, President Donald Trump repeatedly floated the idea of supporting a new assault weapons ban.
Trump supported the NRA in the same 2018 meeting with Feinstein and others (transcript here): "I’m a fan of the NRA. I mean, there’s no bigger fan. I’m a big fan of the NRA. They want to do it. These are great people. These are great patriots. They love our country. But that doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything."
The not agreeing on everything is a reference to the issue of raising the federal minimum age for owning a gun from 18 to 21 years old.
Based on what?
Yeah, we certainly had smoothbore muskets. But we also had Kentucky long rifles, and THAT was the comment I made re: superior firepower in long guns.
It’s like saying that Joe and Jim down the street both have several .22LR rifles, but Jim also has a .30-06; in which case, Jim has superior firepower in long guns.
Your were right regarding that issue, RB, so props are due in that regard.
Agreed.
That’s a really ignorant statement.
Equal firepower? Not on your life. The rebels didn’t even have equal clothing or food levels possible for Brits.
Why do you think the new US was so lobbying the French? Mostly what they got was more equipment including firepower (still woefully dependent on capturing big guns…yeah I mean cannon), along with other needs. In fact that was the biggest reward from the French, not their own troops. And it still was uneven.
Based on, he didn’t build the wall. blah blah, didn’t do muh of anything really and 2020 was a depression-level nightmare.
What good was there?
“I don’t know why anyone needs an AR-15,” Trump told aides as he flew on Marine One to the White House in August 2019, according to a person who heard his comments.
__________________________
Must be true if his anonymous aides said so 🤷♂️
I mean NYC - Manhattan types. I have been all over New York.
Someone needs to inform Trump it’s not based on what he or anyone else determines to be a “need.” He sounds more like his fellow NYer Chuck Schumer on this matter.
Is that you, Desantis?
I like both of your takes on it. I stand down to some extent on all this. However, I do NOT stand down on this:
“The method Trump used to ban bumpstocks was extremely dangerous. To direct the ATF to ignore the clear words of the law, that a full auto fires repeatedly with ONE TRIGGER PULL, and order them to make up something (that many trigger pulls were actually one trigger pull) showed an ignorance (or contempt?) of the Constitution and how we make law.
Furthermore, when this transpired, I observed that this sort of precedent could pose horrible problems for gun owners. Luckily, leftist administrations have not yet taken advantage of this precedent. It is an EXTREMELY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.”
Maybe? :)
LOL. what a joke of an article
Despite the myth, the bulk of the major combat in the RevWar was mass frontal assault. Pennsylvania (another myth…these were really created in PA and mostly from PA in the RevWar) rifles were even longer than muskets and had ZERO mounting for bayonets. They were even more unwieldy than the long muskets. The rifles also were tough to load, taking average 1 round per minute vs 3 rounds per minute for a musket. They were few, and when they were in use it was mostly as sharpshooters in the mythical “guerrilla” mode, hoping to pick off a few. For most of those reasons, the rifle wasn’t a big player. It was notable, but not major.
I’m talking specifically about 2nd Amendment issues. You gave Bush a B+ and Trump a D-. I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m just asking what you base that on. Have you done a comparison between the two on this issue?
That’s just a blatant lie, Jeb.
I stand corrected. I believe you. Thanks.
How is my opinion a lie? Explain that please..
I agree with you on this, Laz.
“Luckily, leftist administrations have not yet taken advantage of this precedent. It is an EXTREMELY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.”
That’s because it doesn’t exist, it’s all in your own opinion nothing to do with the law…or they would have.
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.