Trump: universal background checks are off the table

Status
Not open for further replies.
A negative for Trump for starting the mess. Recanting in a blaze of incoherence is not good.
 
If Wayne La Pierre's position at the NRA had been more secure, he might have been tempted to provide political cover to Trump on background checks, as he did on bump stocks. (Let's remember that Trump's first inclination, supported by his daughter, was to "do something" on background checks.) As it was, La Pierre's shaky position at the NRA, due to the ongoing scandals, forced him to take a hard line. He remembered the reaction of the membership to the bump stock fiasco. He couldn't afford more of a revolt among the NRA rank and file.

Perhaps the lesson from this is that there must be an ongoing external stimulus to keep the NRA leadership on its toes. Otherwise, it's all too easy for it to become part of the D.C. "swamp" and lose sight of the members' interests.
 
A negative for Trump for starting the mess. Recanting in a blaze of incoherence is not good.
Throwing an idea "into the wind" to see how it is accepted by the public is right out of Tweetmaisters playbook. The election campaign is in full swing and the Tweetmaister is taking no prisoners. Greenland being large on map mass he is even trying to buy it from Denmark. Anyone looking at the map would be hard pressed not to say USA is greater for owning Greenland. This is true even if the land is leased for extraction of natural resources or putting military bases there. Along the wall along southern border to keep Latinos out this will go along nicely with Make America Great Again slogan.
 
Last edited:
A negative for Trump for starting the mess. Recanting in a blaze of incoherence is not good.

I’m struggling to find a definition of “the mess” that one could say trump started.
Pretty sure there’s been a ton of noise on background checks and bans and whatnot forever and certainly in the news from the Democrat debates where their candidates are raising the issue. For him to indicate he’d be open to a deal and wait for someone to propose it and then shut it down is pretty typical behavior for past two years. Shouldn’t surprise anyone but it continues to I guess.
It allows him to appear centrist and willing to compromise. And shutting it down gives him an opportunity to say we already have strong background checks.
Which part was incoherent?
 
The discussion of how he will get both parties and the NRA on board for beautiful background checks and the like. Leading to McConnell having to bleat about something will be done. Meeting with clearly antigun Senators to discuss restrictions. This may be business as usual for his chaotic style but it doesn't mean we have to think that every time he does it, it is 4D political brilliance. He started it as he did with bump stocks by his blather. A coherent plan would have been to say that the issue is complex and should be studied. Instead he just shoots off at the mouth.

It is cognitive dissonance not to see that he is a risk factor in protecting the RKBA. Donald, if another horror occurs, God Forbid, shut up except for sympathy. Don't suggest any 'solutions' that you are obviously uninformed about (WLP had to school him - Geez). If anything, you just fire up the opposition more than necessary.
 
The failure of the gun world to come up with a convincing message for maintaining the semis in private hands is the greatest strategic weakness. Just depending on a reflexive progun vote from what might be a shrinking base won't work over the long run.

Why do we have to come up with something? The antis want us to jump every time they get a good body count going after a shooting. If we play that game, we might as well just give up everything now and call it a day. If we let them drag us to the bargaining table every time they get the public's emotions whipped up to a good froth, we're giving them exactly what they want. We need to distance gun rights from negative gun incidents. These scumbags responsible for evil deeds are not our own. They aren't our agents. They aren't advocates for our cause. They aren't us.

Our rights aren't human sacrifices that occasionally need to be fed to a big volcano god to appease its appetite.
 
Pretty sure there’s been a ton of noise on background checks and bans and whatnot forever and certainly in the news from the Democrat debates where their candidates are raising the issue.
For the Democrats, background checks are the lowest of the "low hanging fruit." It would be a political plus for Trump to deprive them of this issue by co-opting it, if he could do so without upsetting his base too much. That's why the NRA's "political cover" was so important. Still, between now and November 2020, Trump is going to revisit this issue. Maybe more than once.
 
I will remind folks again that general politics are not for us and insulting language is not going to continue. Such deleted. The Green New Deal or the Greenland New Deal - take it elsewhere.
 
I suggest that we all (I've already done it) write/email TheWhiteHouse.gov and THANK him for his current stand against UBCs and suggest that he do the same on the unconstitutional red flag laws. Gently remind him that any gun control is a non starter with millions of VOTERS. Be polite but firm.
 
I suggest that we all (I've already done it) write/email TheWhiteHouse.gov and THANK him for his current stand against UBCs and suggest that he do the same on the unconstitutional red flag laws. Gently remind him that any gun control is a non starter with millions of VOTERS. Be polite but firm.

I appreciate everyone's perspective ...which only leads me to conclude that I must really be the SLOW ONE. I'm following this closely and can't tell from one day to the next, and now even hour by hour, what DJT's "current stand" is.

If, by chance, anyone does know, please advise ...and I will write the White House again.
 
I appreciate everyone's perspective ...which only leads me to conclude that I must really be the SLOW ONE. I'm following this closely and can't tell from one day to the next, and now even hour by hour, what DJT's "current stand" is.

If, by chance, anyone does know, please advise ...and I will write the White House again.
Maybe this will help. And it never hurts to write/email/call/twit in support of gun rights/2A to the president. Just keep doing it.


(AlexanderA, good grief, pay attention and take some notes. You still don't sound like a pro-gun/2A supporter. With your posts, you aren't fooling any THR members. :rofl:)

I believe Trump is trying to appease gun owners and fulfill his campaign promise to support gun rights/2A and NRA which "chief" of NRA reminded yesterday with Trump. And enough of NRA bashing. NRA members voted and spoke and now it's time to move on with our efforts against the WAR with the antis.

Now's the time for all of us gun owners to set aside our differences and forge a solid support behind the president and we'll get a lot accomplished for gun rights/2A future and with increasing support by federal courts and the SCOTUS.


New York Times: N.R.A. Gets Results in One Phone Call With the President - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...l-with-the-president/ar-AAG5cjR?OCID=AVRES000
  • President Trump spent at least 30 minutes on the phone Tuesday with chief of NRA, the latest conversation in an aggressive campaign by gun rights advocates to influence the White House
  • Call ended the way [gun owners wanted] with president Trump espousing NRA talking points in the Oval Office and warning of the radical steps ... Democrats wanted to take in violation of the Second Amendment.
  • We have very, very strong background checks right now, but we have sort of missing areas and areas that don’t complete the whole circle,” ... adding, “I have to tell you that it’s a mental problem.”
  • Democrats would, I believe, give up the Second Amendment,” ... “A lot of the PEOPLE that put me where I am are strong believers in the Second Amendment, and I AM ALSO.”
  • ... a reminder that even if his initial response after the mass shootings was to say he would press for aggressive gun legislation, any such push would be seen as a betrayal of the NRA members who helped elect him.
  • In 2017, president Trump assured NRA members, “You came through for me, and I am going to come through for you.” And that's what happened after he talked with NRA chief assuring that even after another round of mass shootings, he was not interested in legislation establishing universal background checks and that his focus would be on the mental health of the gunmen, not their guns.
  • According to staff present, president Trump did most of the talking with NRA chief and made it clear that he believes there are ways to scrutinize people’s fitness for gun ownership other than the current proposals. But his latest comments on guns were the strongest sign to date that he is unlikely to make bipartisan gun legislation a priority this fall, when Congress returns. Without president's backing, any chance of a bipartisan bill passing the Senate is likely to be dead on arrival.
  • President Trump told NRA chief he wanted to focus on mental health and access to juvenile criminal records which fall far short of the sweeping new restrictions that Democrats wanted and what president said after the August 3/4 shooting. (I believe pressure from gun owners sent a clear message to the president - You bet! Believe me, emails, calls and especially comments to his twitters will get the message across in 2019)
  • President’s remarks demonstrate how NRA's $30 million spent on Trump’s 2016 campaign and how NRA stuck with him when other Republicans wavered in their support, still wields great influence.
  • NRA chief expressed satisfaction with the outcome of the call. “We discussed the best ways to prevent these types of tragedies. President Trump is a strong 2A President and supports our right to keep and bear arms!
  • While president's aides said that he is still seeking legislative action but president’s definition of background checks is different from the type of universal background checks that Democrats want and ... his support quickly evaporated after a late-night Oval Office meeting with NRA officials. President Trump later threatened to veto a background check bill.
  • NRA has not been the only voice as president has heard from a wide range of conservative allies that his re-election chances will be in jeopardy if he makes a deal with Democrats on guns. (Thanks Ivanka for getting the "information" from law makers! ;):D :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:)
  • Earlier this month NRA chief said he “opposes any legislation that unfairly infringes upon the rights of law-abiding citizens.” Willes K. Lee, the second vice president of the NRA board and a key ally of NRA chief went further, tweeting recently that “Nothing short of disarming America satisfies @Democrats. Give them NOTHING.
  • This year, the House passed its first two significant gun control measures in a quarter century. One of the bills would require background checks at gun shows and on internet sites, where private buyers and sellers can arrange to meet in person to complete a sale. A second bill would increase the waiting period if a potential buyer does not immediately pass a background check. These measures have stalled in the Republican-controlled Senate. So have the so-called red flag laws.
So, how do you like president Trump now? Whether you like or dislike him, he is in a position of power to affect positive changes for our gun right/2A future for our children and grandchildren.

Let's set aside our differences and forge our support behind our president and fight the antis/anti-gun law makers together with the NRA and other pro-gun/2A organizations!

And make sure to vote for Trump in 2020 so he can help ensure our judicial future for gun rights/2A for decades and generations to come.
 
Last edited:
And make sure to vote for Trump in 2020
That's overt partisan politics. I thought we don't do that on THR. Perhaps you can word your recommendation in a more subtle way.

As for me personally, quoting Taras Bulba, I would "kiss the Devil" before I would vote for Trump.
 
Last edited:
I will let the moderators be the judge of that. (To save you the trouble, I self "reported" my previous post for moderators to review whether it is in line with RKBA forum rule requirement)

This thread is about president Trump and his "improving" position in support of gun rights/2A with direct action by NRA.

Voting for Trump in 2020 WILL positively influence future of gun rights/2A especially our judicial future.

Yes, they are intimately intertwined in supporting RKBA according to THR forum rules - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?pages/code-of-conduct/

"1. All topics and posts must be related to firearms or 'Right to Keep and Bear Arms' (RKBA) issues."
 
Closed and take a hint all opinions are welcome but if you decide that you are the guardian of ideological purity and personally insult some one, you will be shown the door.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top