Quantcast

President Trump to address gun violence

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by TTv2, Aug 5, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jmorris

    jmorris Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    13,124
    We’ll know more in 10 minutes. I figure worst case would be he is overly confident with the far left Dem field and does something that winds up alienating his base thinking it will help him in the middle. He would cram it together with some watered down version of other promises and call it a “compromise”.
     
  2. SilentStalker

    SilentStalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,537
    Location:
    Somewhere in the U.S., London, or Australia
    I think he is fixing to totally alienate his base but what difference does it make. The deed will be done whether he wins re-election or not. We won’t be getting any rights back if anything goes through. You all know this.
     
    P5 Guy and JR24 like this.
  3. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    25,323
    I think we will get pious platitudes and no action whether repressive or effective.
     
    Walkalong likes this.
  4. SilentStalker

    SilentStalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,537
    Location:
    Somewhere in the U.S., London, or Australia
    Trump could be trying to put the ball back in the Dems court on something he knows probably ain’t likely to pass but it’s a risky gamble.
     
    Jeb Stuart likes this.
  5. Jeb Stuart

    Jeb Stuart Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,618
    Location:
    Confederate Country
    Trump is one smart savvy deal maker. He will not pander to the Dems nor when he hurt his base. Some do not like his style, many do. The point is, he has a big habit of winning. He knows how to win. And he knows how to play the game with the Dems. Why do you think they hate him so much? He is a strong leader and they hate strong leaders.
     
  6. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,031
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    Trump spoke. He wants health care reform.
    He also wants "red flag laws," which, depending on how they're worded, and if they protect due process, may not be horribly onerous. But the "devil is in the details," as they say, and I've heard some very bad things regarding them.
     
    Texas10mm, SilentStalker and ATLDave like this.
  7. PWC

    PWC Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2018
    Messages:
    341
    Location:
    PHX, AZ
    Well, while reading this, Trump just called for red flag laws, and the death penelty......
     
    P5 Guy likes this.
  8. Rule3

    Rule3 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,663
    Location:
    Florida
    In today's "Newspaper" it is of course all Trumps fault as he has divided the Country and it's all racially motivated (his fault)

    So tired of all the crap

    They even go on to say the same old crap of Universal Background checks. What would that have solved in these cases???
     
  9. ATLDave

    ATLDave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,553
    In concept, I think there ought to be some kind of mechanism for temporarily addressing a situation in which many people around a person know something is seriously wrong. After about 95% of these mass killings, there is lots of evidence that people "knew" the person was in crisis or violent or a nut.

    The challenge is how you prevent a neighbor who doesn't like your barking dog (or who doesn't like your complaints about his barking dog) to basically SWAT you. Given the anti-gun biases of some judges, the level of scrutiny given to some complaints will be basically zero - if the judge thinks nobody should have guns, then any excuse to get rid of some guns in private hands is OK.

    This is stuff that can be addressed somewhat in drafting, though it will never be perfect. Any time you create a legal/human-process mechanism, there will be times when the mechanism doesn't function perfectly.
     
    jstert, P5 Guy, Charlie Horse and 2 others like this.
  10. ATLDave

    ATLDave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,553
    It's amazing how I often I read stories that explicitly concede that it would have had no impact in the vast majority of shooting cases - and then they say "but we still have done nothing." As if doing something unproductive is better than doing nothing.
     
    jstert, P5 Guy, DoubleMag and 4 others like this.
  11. Jeb Stuart

    Jeb Stuart Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,618
    Location:
    Confederate Country
    Wall Mart could have simply taken the Democrat advice and Placed a "No Gun Zone" sign at each entry and this would have never happened. My gosh these are some very smart folks with a lot of brilliant ideas.
    My Democrat Gov. is out there now advocating for more No gun Zone's. See how simple things are. "Can't we all just get along"?
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
  12. reddog81

    reddog81 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2014
    Messages:
    848
    Location:
    Iowa
    It doesn't make any sense. Pass UBC and stuff like this will still happen so we'll need more laws. Pass magazine capacity restrictions and stuff like this will still happen. Ban Assault rifles and stuff like this will still happen. 2/3rds of often quoted 30,000 gun deaths per are suicides. You'll have to ban everything up to and including single shot pistols to make any impact on that number. Passing more gun laws isn't going to stop gang violence.

    But, but, but we need to do something....! There are a lot of people out there with no interest in guns so making it harder to own guns, banning magazines, banning features on guns will make no difference to them at all. Passing ineffective laws will allow them to feel better for at least a couple of minutes...
     
    P5 Guy, DoubleMag, Deanimator and 2 others like this.
  13. ATLDave

    ATLDave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,553
    Taking rights that you aren't using seriously is hard. It's easy to be OK with restrictions on free speech such a flag burning if you cannot imagine yourself ever burning an American flag. It's easy to think racial profiling at the airport is OK if you don't look middle-eastern and wouldn't be subject to repeated searches for nothing that you can control. And it's easy to take away gun rights if you don't own guns or want to own guns yourself.

    This is one of the big failings in our society right now. We are losing these bedrock civics-lessons commitments to respecting that you have to put yourself in others' shoes when you are considering whether to restrict rights.
     
    Dudedog, jstert, qwert65 and 6 others like this.
  14. theotherwaldo

    theotherwaldo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,167
    Location:
    In the Wild Horse Desert of Texas
    Incrementalism: Pass restrictive laws that you know won't solve the problem in question so that you can pass more laws... .
     
    Theohazard, Texas10mm and ATLDave like this.
  15. ATLDave

    ATLDave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,553
    Anytime there is a right that is hated by a large number of people (right to abortion, right to say hateful/offensive things, right to own guns), incrementalism is guaranteed. Every possible reduction of the right is seen as a good - but insufficient.
     
  16. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    6,053
    Location:
    Virginia
    Even the most rabid antis (such as Virginia Gov. Northam) are calling for a 10-round limit. That would carve out classic guns such as Garands and 1911's. Most modern pistols, that normally come with 15- to 18-round standard magazines, have 10-round factory magazines available. But M1 carbines and AR-15's would definitely be affected.

    What happens to the millions of existing over-10-round magazines? We would have a huge contraband problem, because these would not be turned in.

    Cloth belts for MG's would be felonies. It's not clear how disintegrating links would be affected.
     
    Texas10mm likes this.
  17. SilentStalker

    SilentStalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,537
    Location:
    Somewhere in the U.S., London, or Australia
    Respectfully, there is no right to an abortion in the Constitution. Either way, I don’t see anyone hindering women from doing these things despitenthr fact that I could argue that there are far more babies killed legally than there are people taken out with guns. What I see is an erosion of moral standards across the board all while trying to censor/erase anything that is of the conservative mindset.
     
  18. ATLDave

    ATLDave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,553
    Silent', you are illustrating my point. I'm not arguing about whether there should be a right to abortion, just that a lot of people don't think there should be, and are therefore always trying to chip away at that right.

    A lot of people also don't think there should be a right to guns. Just like the anti-abortion folks, they have their arguments about why the constitution doesn't include an individual right to guns - but their views wouldn't change based on the constitutional language, just like anti-abortion folks wouldn't like abortion if the constitution addressed it directly and specifically.

    Same dynamic, different topic.
     
    Theohazard, P5 Guy and SilentStalker like this.
  19. Rule3

    Rule3 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,663
    Location:
    Florida
    Magazine limits are as lame as Gun Free Zones. It takes what 2 seconds to drop a 10 round mag and insert another??

    Why is 10 rounds a magic number? Is it like Minimum Wage?. Why not 5 rounds, or single shot? I have a 8 round revolver, is that to many??
     
    jstert, P5 Guy, DoubleMag and 2 others like this.
  20. Pat Riot

    Pat Riot Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2015
    Messages:
    925
    This statement, I am sure will not be sufficient god some in power but it shows that Trump is looking at the acts versus the the guns

    FROM THE ARTICLE:
    “Mental illness and hatred pulls the trigger, not the gun," Trump said, going on to call for red-flag laws to allow the seizure of firearms from those judged to pose a grave risk to public safety.

    This is from this article: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-shootings-remarks.amp

    The statement below sends chills up my back.

    FROM THE ARTICLE:
    "We must do a better job at identifying and acting on early warning signs," Trump said. "I am directing the Department of Justice to work in partnership with local, state, and federal agencies and social media companies to develop tools to identify mass shooters before they strike."

    Imagine you are here on The High Road or another pro gun or shooting forum and you receive an updated “Users Agreement”, or whatever it may be called, telling you that everything you say may be monitored by the government. Or worse, you get into an argument with someone online or have a disagreement only to find your actions have gotten the attention of a Federal or local law enforcement or justice bureaucrat.

    It doesn’t take many of the wrong words to make someone look like a threat...

    Of course there was backlash to Trump’s speech. What he said didn’t follow “the agenda”.
     
    jstert and SilentStalker like this.
  21. Jeb Stuart

    Jeb Stuart Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,618
    Location:
    Confederate Country
    Has anyone ever stopped to think what would happen if the Dems got their way and to the point that all firearms were banned and no honest law abiding citizens would have any way to protect their families themselves? How many jobs would be lost. How game would over multiply to the point of disease etc. And do the Democrats really believe the criminals would not benefit in a huge way? Do they not understand that taking away any part of the US Constitution would mean the start of stripping away more of it? And what that would lead to?
    My Democrat Gov. wants more NO GUN ZONES and he voiced this right after the Virginia Beach shooting. What would he say to the family of one of the victims that the night before thought about brining in a CCW weapon because she felt a danger. What would he say to her?
     
    jstert, P5 Guy, Texas10mm and 2 others like this.
  22. Ryanxia

    Ryanxia Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,573
    Location:
    'MURICA!
    The most important aspect of this is whatever gun control bills are proposed we all need to hammer on them hard and bombard our reps with emails/letters/calls (whatever you prefer). We've done a really good job of defeating additional gun control bills that they hurl at us one after the other, whatever comes in the near future will have to be dealt with the same way. Even more so by individuals with the chaos going on in the NRA (maybe that chaos won't affect their ILA branch at the moment).
     
    Jeb Stuart likes this.
  23. LiveLife

    LiveLife Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    19,494
    Location:
    Northwest Coast
    News flash.

    The government has been monitoring internet, email, cellphone, social media, texting traffic etc. for a long time, certainly after 9/11 attack.

    Can't confirm this but when I worked in IT as support project manager for a pilot program, I got the feeling and notion that many companies, like Microsoft, are required to monitor and forward to DHS any red flags they detect to ensure the safety and security of USA.

    Don't worry, if you are typical gun enthusiast and post on THR, you are likely "grouped" with other pro-gun/2A patriots than those posting on social media that they are going to kill people with repeated hateful rant which will immediately trigger a red flag.
     
  24. Pat Riot

    Pat Riot Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2015
    Messages:
    925
    Hey, want this thread closed? Keep up the political party bashing!
     
    Theohazard and Walkalong like this.
  25. Deanimator

    Deanimator Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,314
    Location:
    Rocky River, Ohio
    This morning Hugh Hewitt said that "red flag" laws would not be abused.

    Somebody ought to ask him if he feels the same way about the FISA courts...
     
    jstert, P5 Guy, theotherwaldo and 3 others like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice