President Trump "I will never ever allow them to take away your sacred right to keep and bear arms"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trump has accomplished more gun control than Obama was able to do in 8 years.
Not so fast. What kind of federal judges and Supreme Court justices did Obama appoint? Pro gun rights/2A or anti gun rights/2A?

Obama appointed 329 federal judges and two Supreme Court justices! :eek: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_judges_appointed_by_Barack_Obama


And we got Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to start as future Supreme Court rulings will ultimately secure the future of gun rights/2A in coming years - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...with-question-on-the-second-amendment.856201/

Gorsuch: "Bill of Rights and liberty ... Bill of Right is a set of promises on paper ... What makes a promise worth the words on paper is the enforcement mechanisms behind it ... Our Bill of Rights is excellent ... Judges are the backstop to ensure rights and liberties, that is our job"

when asked about president Trump commenting in 2017 that "Neil Gorsuch, he will save people's Second Amendment rights", Gorsuch repolied, "My business is your rights, ALL OF THEM, are enforced" :thumbup:
 
Last edited:
Now, you will say: He's not Hillary ... That was then and this is now.
So if Hillary ran for 2020, would you vote for Hillary over Trump?

I don't think so.

More to the point, I think Trump likes the NRA because he's realized that if he says and does something like what they want, people like me keep supporting him. There's a word for that. . . um. . . democracy!
Same here. When I looked at my approaching retirement in 2016 with prospect of Hillary winning, I was distraught.

Had Trump not ran, a RNC candidate may not have won the election against Hillary.

Think about that hard ... Yes, Hillary COULD have won if it wasn't for Trump.

So, I will extend him tremendous amount of leeway. While I disagree with the bump stock thing, the FACT that Trump appointed justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh along with over 152 federal judges and counting more than makes up for me as I get to enjoy my retirement watching their case ruling year after year, decade after decade - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_judges_appointed_by_Donald_Trump

And now looking at the Democrat alternatives for 2020, to me Trump is still the obvious choice for our gun rights/2A who WILL secure the judicial future by appointing the future SCOTUS replacements and hundreds more federal judges to tilt the panel/bench pro gun rights/2A.
 
Why aren't 2020 Democrat candidates talking about protecting us and our right to self defense?

Why are they talking about taking our "legal" guns away from us?

And how are we supposed to protect ourselves without guns in situations like these?

What if there are multiple intruders?

Shouldn't we have the option to defend ourselves with large capacity magazines in carbines/rifles against greater threats?

What if they are wearing body armor which defeats handgun caliber bullets?

What about kids' safety at home from intruders

Why? Because they're preaching to the masses (liberal sheep if you will), telling the masses whatever they want to hear! Putting their spin on it it, whether it makes sense or not, to buy their votes. It's called politics.
 
I think that if we have Trump BECAUSE of Odoofus. If he wasn't SO bad, or if McCain or Romney would have won, we'd be like the proverbial frog in the cooking pot - slowly getting cooked before realizing it.

Going back decades there hasn't been one Dem that I voted for. Yes I voted for Nixon - look at the alternative.

I vote 2nd A. I find that if the candidate is strong 2A then I generally support his/her other positions about 85% of the time. Those positions I can negotiate. 2A is absolute.
 
I consider right to self defense "God given" right - https://biblereasons.com/self-defense/

Exodus 22:2-3 “If a thief is caught in the act of breaking into a house and is struck and killed in the process, the person who killed the thief is not guilty of murder."

Luke 11:21 “When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own mansion, his property is safe.”

Even Jesus endorsed use of arms for protection,

Luke 22:35-37 “Then Jesus asked them ... “take your money and a traveler’s bag. And if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!"

Luke 22:38-39 “Look, Lord,” they replied, “we have two swords among us.” “That’s enough,”
These all refer to human actions, not to direct divine intervention. It's up to you to defend yourself, just as it's up to you to secure and defend your gun rights. God won't hand them to you on a platter. For most of recorded history, ordinary people did not have the right to be armed, just as throughout most of recorded history, certain people were held as slaves. God did not lift a finger to prevent these abuses. In fact Scripture was cited as authority in support of the divine right of kings and in support of slavery. All human progress toward freedom was in rebellion to the established order, including that imposed by institutional religion. Monopoly of force in the hands of the ruling authorities is actually the default position, historically speaking. Our 2nd Amendment is a historical aberration. If indeed the right of self-defense and the right to weapons (the means of self defense) were "God given" you would see them more universally recognized throughout the world. We are a minority of one.
 
Last edited:
Why? Because they're preaching to the masses (liberal sheep if you will), telling the masses whatever they want to hear!
But in doing so, they are sending a clear message to the rest of the voters (And to many in their own party ;)).

Robert Francis "Beto" O'Rourke said, "Hell Yes, We're Going to Take Your AR-15s" :eek:

Substitute AR-15s with "Bill of Rights" (as attack on any amendment is attack on the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution) and we have,

"Hell Yes, We're Going to Take Your [Bill of Rights]" :eek::eek::eek:

I believe that's the message people will take in.
 
I consider right to self defense "God given" right - https://biblereasons.com/self-defense/
These all refer to human actions, not to direct divine intervention.
Declaration of Independence preamble says, that all men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" and the Bill of Rights numbers those unalienable rights because the founders believed that everyone has an inherent right to self-defense.

National Review: Yes, Gun Ownership Is a God-Given Right -
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/gun-ownership-god-given-right-self-defense/

Politico: Yes, Gun Ownership Is a God-Given Right - https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/04/yes-gun-ownership-is-a-god-given-right-228034

Alyssa Milano Wants To Know Why Self-Defense Is God-Given Right. Ted Cruz Educates Her - https://www.dailywire.com/news/5128...hy-self-defense-god-given-right-ryan-saavedra
 
I consider right to self defense "God given" right - https://biblereasons.com/self-defense/

Exodus 22:2-3 “If a thief is caught in the act of breaking into a house and is struck and killed in the process, the person who killed the thief is not guilty of murder."

Luke 11:21 “When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own mansion, his property is safe.”


Even Jesus endorsed use of arms for protection,

Luke 22:35-37 “Then Jesus asked them ... “take your money and a traveler’s bag. And if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!"

Luke 22:38-39 “Look, Lord,” they replied, “we have two swords among us.” “That’s enough,”


Even Dalai Lama endorsed use of arms - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...lated-information.849620/page-3#post-11100167

The Dalai Lama use air rifles to protect small birds from hawks - https://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/28/magazine/the-dalai-lama.html

Dalai Lama: Yes, very much. I also had an air rifle in Lhasa. And I have one in India. I often feed small birds, but when they come together, hawks spot them and catch them -- a very bad thing. So in order to protect these small birds, I keep the air rifle.
Interviewer: So it is a Buddhist rifle?
Dalai Lama: [ Laughs ] A compassionate rifle!

In 2001, Dalai Lama spoke to 7600 Oregon and south west Washington High School students and said this about school shootings and using gun for self protection - http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20010515&slug=dalai15m0

"One girl wanted to know how to react to a shooter who takes aim at a classmate.

... if someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, he said, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. Not at the head, where a fatal wound might result. But at some other body part, such as a leg."
While I agree with your premise I think you need to correct Exodus 22: 2-3 you left out “at night” 22-3 specifically says if it happens after sunrise the defender is guilty of bloodshed, as per NIV

FWIW I believe both sides be fundraising more than anything with the hype
 
While I agree with your premise I think you need to correct Exodus 22: 2-3 you left out “at night” 22-3 specifically says if it happens after sunrise the defender is guilty of bloodshed, as per NIV
That's because during daylight, homeowner has the ability to chase away intruder with arms kept on person/in the house.

Still does not change the fact that God endorsed self-defense to the point of death.

Believe me, many tens and thousands of times each year, mere display or drawing of firearm prevent potential crime/rape/murder from happening. But if the threat still persists and becomes immediate, then we have the option to use force, even deadly force.

Just because you are armed does not mean that's the response option you have to use all the time. We have other options we can use depending on the threat level. I just prefer to have firearm option just in case other response options don't work out. I live in rural area where bears, mountain lions and even deer/elk have known to attack and injure humans. As a mere human, my non-firearm options are limited against wild animal attack.
 
Last edited:
That's because during daylight, homeowner has the ability to chase away intruder with arms kept on person/in the house.

Still does not change the fact that God endorsed self-defense to the point of death.

Believe me, many tens and thousands of times each year, mere display or drawing of firearm prevent potential crime/rape/murder from happening. But if the threat still persists and becomes immediate, then we have the option to use force, even deadly force.

Just because you are armed does not mean that's the response option you have to use all the time. We have other options we can use depending on the threat level. I just prefer to have firearm option just in case other response options don't work out. I live in rural area where bears, mountain lions and even deer/elk have known to attack and injure humans. As a mere human, my non-firearm options are limited against wild animal attack.
Ok but misquoting scripture damages one’s credibility.
 
We need to keep the pressure on Trump.
As this shows while he was wrong on the bump stock “compromise” he’s still better than the alternative.

Not to pick sides but either we support him or we are done as any of these anti gun zealots will gut the 2nd Amendment and make sure the UN Small Arms Treaty is implemented. And for those who haven’t actually read it, it’s frightening.

But supporting him doesn’t mean we can’t flood the White House with calls and letters and keep pressure on.

No it's not binary. We can support the president but keep pressure on him. He's shown that when people put pressure on him he'll consider options. If not he'll go with what he thinks or what he hears.

So I agree with you for those of us who are pro U.S. Constitution the only option is to support him. But I'm also for making him know that we don't support giving an inch anymore on 2A issues.
 
You have two turds sitting in front of you. You must eat one or die. So you pick the one that stinks the least. Trump says what people want to hear. Hillary would have been a disaster. So we as a whole ate the least stinky turd.
 
Declaration of Independence preamble says, that all men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"
Not even Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, believed that. (He was a Deist, and did not believe in a God that personally intervened in the affairs of men. His God just put things into motion and then stood back.) Not only does the Declaration have no legal effect, but it's basically a work of 18th century propaganda. How could Jefferson have written "all men are created equal" with a straight face, when he himself owned slaves? Analyzed closely, the Declaration is full of lies and hypocrisy. But I suppose it was good for the purpose.
 
But in doing so, they are sending a clear message to the rest of the voters (And to many in their own party ;)).

Robert Francis "Beto" O'Rourke said, "Hell Yes, We're Going to Take Your AR-15s" :eek:

Substitute AR-15s with "Bill of Rights" (as attack on any amendment is attack on the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution) and we have,

"Hell Yes, We're Going to Take Your [Bill of Rights]" :eek::eek::eek:

I believe that's the message people will take in.

Let's hope so!!
 
These all refer to human actions, not to direct divine intervention. It's up to you to defend yourself, just as it's up to you to secure and defend your gun rights. God won't hand them to you on a platter. For most of recorded history, ordinary people did not have the right to be armed, just as throughout most of recorded history, certain people were held as slaves. God did not lift a finger to prevent these abuses. In fact Scripture was cited as authority in support of the divine right of kings and in support of slavery. All human progress toward freedom was in rebellion to the established order, including that imposed by institutional religion. Monopoly of force in the hands of the ruling authorities is actually the default position, historically speaking. Our 2nd Amendment is a historical aberration. If indeed the right of self-defense and the right to weapons (the means of self defense) were "God given" you would see them more universally recognized throughout the world. We are a minority of one.

I don’t usually agree with you but you are right on in the above statement.
 
Why does everyone keep saying that Donald Trump is a Republican?
He isn't, really.
He's a lifelong Business Democrat who has been left behind in the Democrat's leftward stampede.
Most of the Republican leaders despise him and won't let him into their club.
Most of the Democrats were seeing him as dead meat, especially after his embarrassing (to them) run for president as the Reform Party candidate in 2000. Standard procedure is to strip these embarrassments of money and reputation and walk away laughing.
So.
Mr Trump had the choice of being crushed or running again - and winning.
Luckily, the DNC needed a Republican presidential candidate that could win in the primaries but that they were sure that their candidate could beat in the actual election - much like John McCain.
So Mr. Trump accepted the surreptitious backing of the Left and the Press, embraced Populism and the middle class in Fly-over Country - and WON!
(The Press is still kicking itself.)
So, President Trump still believes in the basic tenets of the Business Democrat platform of 40 years ago, tempered by the Populism that he has had to embrace to maintain his position.
Why is anyone surprised that he doesn't particularly care about bump stocks or such peripheral odds and ends?
That will wind up getting settled in the Supreme Court, anyway.
No, President Trump is in favor of the Second Amendment in a general way, much as any other Business Democrat of the 1980s would be.

That's not the hill that he feels that he must live or die on... unless WE force him to
 
You have two turds sitting in front of you. You must eat one or die. So you pick the one that stinks the least. Trump says what people want to hear. Hillary would have been a disaster. So we as a whole ate the least stinky turd.
Hillary would have been able to do nothing on the gun front, given the makeup of Congress and the solid opposition of the Republicans. She wouldn't even have been able to get a Supreme Court nominee confirmed, since Mitch McConnell would have stonewalled her nominees as he did with Obama's.

Trump, on the other hand, outlawed bump stocks, and who knows what else he might do -- with the complicity of Republicans in Congress.

The overall picture on gun rights is worse than it would have been with Hillary.
 
We are not discussing what a deity said , perhaps, in the past. If a deity goes on Meet the Press to discuss the Second Amendment, perhaps then.

My point, which, others have made is that not being Hillary doesn’t give you a pass on how you act now. Whether the judges do something is an unknown. Until then speeches are not worth much.
 
God did not lift a finger to prevent these abuses.
Please stop. You simply don’t know the Bible. God helps those with the courage to listen to him and do as he commanded. Guess it was a man who parted the Red Sea when Moses lead the Israelites out of Egypt.

You don’t believe. That’s fine. This is a thread about rights. Rights printed on paper by our founding fathers who many did believe in God.

I’d much rather have God on my side than Charles Darwin.
 
Both of our major parties are functionally dead, having outlasted their reasons for existing, and are in the process of reformulation. This is a time of extreme danger for established rights and traditions, as almost all assumptions will be called into question during these transitions.
During times like these, it is necessary to keep your politicians and bureaucrats on a particularly short leash... or your rights will be dead as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top