Replies

JMO of what is happening ........

Have you noticed that POTUS will often say some “wacky” thing and then do the opposite? Most of the time when he does this, he manages to get the Dems/libs all spun up and they come out in vigorous opposition to what he has said. Next, POTUS “clarifies” what he meant and it turns out to be another win for him/conservatives.

Example: POTUS: the Mueller investigation is a gigantic waste of taxpayer money, a witch hunt, etc. Result: Mueller testimony and 100% or close to it of all the Dems (maybe Rs, too) opened their questioning by stating emphatically that no one is above the law. Next they acknowledged that perhaps a sitting President can’t be indicted, but once he’s out of office he can. All of these Dems were gleefully rubbing their hands together and planning to indict Trump after he’s out of office. But what they were too stupid to realize that what applies to one President also applies to ALL. BJC, 0vomit. :-) I can see future indictments coming for them and now we have all the Dems on record in favor of it being perfectly legal. In fact, demanding that it be done. Thank you, President Trump, for having them clarify that position!)

Ok, so back to red flag laws. I am completely in agreement with you and against any laws that will restrict our 2A rights. I am not seeing exactly how this might play out, but having observed how Trump plays this game for the past 2.5 years, I am 99% confident that we will be happy with the result.

I am actually expecting an expansion of our 2A rights. Maybe “expansion” isn’t quite the right word. Maybe “restoration” is more accurate. An American citizen should NOT have to worry about driving across state lines with a weapon, shouldn’t have to worry about “reciprocal” permitting or any of that nonsense. I’m in favor of nationwide rights for open carry and concealed carry. Why should I need “permission” to exercise a fundamental Constitutional right?

On the surface, it seems reasonable to have red flag laws restricting crazies from having/carrying guns. On the surface. The parallel is that we have 1A rights but still cannot yell “fire” in a crowded theater. But look past the surface. If someone is so dangerous/crazy that they need to have their Constitutional rights restricted, then why is that person out loose in society in the first place?

The problem should not be “fixed” by removing rights from all of us. The problem should be fixed by removing rights only from the crazy person. The main danger here is the danger that if lefties were in control, their play might be to have all gun owners or all conservatives declared mentally unbalanced and have them committed or locked up. But in an ironic twist, it is exactly our 2A rights that would protect us from that.

So... I am going to let this one ride for a bit to see how Trump handles it. For now, I’m confident that he’ll do the right thing. I watch what he does and the results that he gets. (I also watch what he says, but I see that more as trolling the left and setting the stage for action.)

Again, JMO. YMMV.