Trump caves in and orders AR parts ban.

Let the Trump 2nd Amendment Sellout begin. I always knew Trump would leave his supporters out in the cold just as soon as there was some advantage to him in trimming his sails to appease the political winds.

http://www.fox9.com/news/president-trump...ike-bump-stocks

What makes this even worse is Trump did this HIMSELF. Can't blame congress, the Dems, whatever. So much for Trump being pro anything. Except for pro-Trump, of course.

Yeah, yeah, it's just bump stocks. Whatever. Like that's going to satisfy any of the gun grabbers. How long will it be before Trump caves in and bans magazines of more than 5 0r 10 rounds all basically give the Democrats their whole wish list?

I always knew he'd sell us out.

Grouse

 
Last edited:
the problem with this is - its not gonna be just bump stocks - it cant be just bump stocks. they're going to have to go after ROF (Rate of fire) modifiers as a group. otherwise the regulation/law/whatever wont stick in a court of law.


so here goes the bmf activator for your 10/22, any of the crank style trigger actuators, binary trigger systems, bump stocks and who knows what the [beeep] else until we find out the language used.



and once you start messing with ROF modifiers, whats to stop the definition of a ROF modifier down the road from being changed to include match style short travel/reset trigger groups (ie timney's, etc) and lightweight bcg's, reduced power buffer springs and lighter weight buffer systems? or magazine size because by its very nature, smaller magazines will slow the ROF of any firearm due to the need to reload more often.



i am not a happy trump supporter right now, and the GOP is in the process of sinking to an all time low. :oops: :oops:


time to start sending emails
frown.gif
 
Originally Posted By: obaroMight oughta start setting aside a brick of .22 LR ammo now and then......

Old women and their tea. Flittering around filling their basement with something that has nothing to do with the current situation.

I love all the so-called 2nd Amendment supporters who, when the chips are down, suddenly go into hoarder mode like this does something.

Attention hoarder idiots. They aren't going to ban .22 rimfires. Quit standing in line at Walmart and do something that matters.

Trump. I always knew he was a New Yack liberal at heart. As soon as the chips were down, the Trumpster Fire sold out Constitution.

More bans will follow, mark my words. You ain't gonna hoard your way out of this one. 30 round mags are next and they're not just going to ban new ones, they'll be illegal to possess with a stiff prison sentence. And yeah, yeah, they'll be lots of tough talk about hiding them but then the talkers will cave in because they'll realize that if you're caught with illegal mags, you're a felon and your guns all get confiscated right then and there. That's how the liberals are going to clean out the SBCs.

That's what the liberals want and now Trump Dump is going to give it to them because he's worried about re-election.

Grouse
 
Last edited:
i fired this letter off to my reps today, feel free to use/modify it as needed to contact yours.


i tried to look for one from the NRA - but it doesnt exist. so i came up with this


Quote:The tragedy in Florida last week saddens me to no end. 17 family's lives were destroyed by the actions of one misguided animal intent on inflicting harm on others. We may never know why, but hopefully justice will be served.


What saddens me even worse is the vitriol being spread nation wide about people who had nothing to do with this massacre. We've been bombarded nonstop with cries of our shared responsibility in this case. How evil firearms are. How we law abiding citizens who support the 2nd amendment are seemingly all mass murdering monsters who just dont know the depth of our own evil, yet.

Guns arent the problem. Our current Laws arent the problem. Our rights to own firearms isnt the problem. Firearm accessories arent the problem.

The problem is people who have no respect for the lives of others.

The problem is people who will use a tragedy like this to push a political agenda.

The problem is people in positions of responsibility who could have stopped this very tragedy failed to do so, even after several VERY specific warnings about this shooter.


So to solve these problems - we're told over and over that we need more laws, because we who already respect the current laws are the problem. Our rights are the problem. Our freedom is the problem.

The thing is - for someone who's already going to commit murder, even the murder of only a single person - that person isnt going to worry about what other laws they have to break to do that heinous act. They're already contemplating breaking one of the worst laws they can break - taking the life of another human. In the case of the recent events, It would have been just as easy for this shooter to take his car, wait until school was dismissed for the day, and run a bunch of people over in the parking lot or on the sidewalks. There's precedent - its been happening all over the world.

So further restricting peoples rights to specific types - or all types - of firearms isnt the answer. That will only affect those of us who already follow the laws. Restricting firearms accessories isnt the answer for the same reason.


There are around 300 million guns in private ownership in the US today. There are trillions of rounds of ammo in private ownership today to feed those 300 million firearms. There are thousands of firearms accessories and an untold variety of configurations they can be combined in. If any of these things were the REAL problem - we'd know it! It wouldnt just manifest itself in the occasional person who wants to murder someone (or multiple someones).

Unfortunately - laws cant dictate morality. They cant force 100% of people to be a functional normal part of society. If they could we wouldnt have ANY of the problems we have with society today as all of the most heinous acts we consider detrimental to society are already illegal under current law - Rape, Murder, Theft, Assault, Discrimination - just to name a few.

So please, as a law abiding gun owner i'm asking you to not support any changes that restrict our rights as a firearm owner because of this tragedy.

Dont make those of us who already obey the laws pay a penalty for the very small segment of society that refuse to.


As an active voter in your representative district, i consider gun rights a single issue stance. I will be following your actions in regard to this and it will STRONGLY weigh into my voting decisions in future elections.

Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter, i look forward to your response.
 
So, Grouse, what are you going to do with your 30 round magazines?


Plant One, that is pretty good stuff you have written there.
 
Originally Posted By: obaroSo, Grouse, what are you going to do with your 30 round magazines?



What am I going to do with my 30 round mags if it becomes a felony to possess one? Destroy them, obviously. You'd have to be a total moron to keep them and risk the confiscation of all your firearms if possession becomes a felony. Not to mention most guys don't even think about what happens to their jobs if they become a felon. Even with no jail time, you'd be surprised how many employers have the automatic termination of a felon.

That's where they're going to go with this, IMO. A ban on new mags won't be enough, this is the prize for liberals, the outright nationwide ban on possession with a felony kicker for anyone caught in the future. Of course, they'll also want mandatory AR registration just so they have a list of who's got one and then if any other incidents happen, guess what's next?

Sure, there will be lots of tough guy survivalist Rambo talk about burying stuff in the backyard, blah, blah, blah and some guys will try it. Nice protest gesture, but totally meaningless? Sure, you can whip one out in case of Zombie Apolocypse, but getting real I can't see a lot of guys wanting to risk a felony record to try to hang onto something that they'll likely never be able to use again.

Now Trump has openly sold us out and guess which party our next president is going to be from?

I hate to say it, boys, but this time is different. We have a bizarre political situation where the president is a loose cannon and does not feel at all bound to honor American values if he sees personal gain in doing otherwise. We have a punch-drunk Republican-controlled Congress that can't seem to find ANY direction and is obsessively fixated on surviving the Midterms at any cost the Citizens.

I don't see good things coming out of this storm.

Grouse
 
Grouse, Trump thinks five moves ahead. I would not do a knee jerk reaction to what he said, but contacting our legislators is a good thing.

The complexity of getting anything changed in as far as the 2nd Amendment is very, very tough if not impossible...he knows it.

He will get programs for making schools a "hard" target, and liberals will NOT like being armed.

The fact that the armed guard at the school in Fla. did not engage the subject while he was shooting, is significant. The guard may have saved many, many lives. Some of these nut cases are wearing bullet proof vests, shooting armor piercing bullets, and the guard had a pistol.

So, the guard had the mentality to wait till the act was done, then catch the perp... You also have to wonder what his training. We all would like to think that we would rush in and save the day taking out that perp, but the body will either freeze, take flight, or fight. Wonder how many would rush a machine gun nest, under gunned? Just imagine an AR being shot as fast as the nut job can pull the trigger, people screaming(dying) with wounded gimping out of the builing, with an onslaught of terrified children, 6 minutes of [beeep] on Earth. The guard I am sure wondered how he was going to fire a shot without killing another child...try living with that or living with doing nothing...suicide case either way.

Obaro, when Ca. outlawed 20 and 30 rounders, we had to have blocks put in them to limit capacity. I do believe that in Ca. now, you have to have mags permanently affixed to the lower, break open the action, and top load the magazine just like a bolt gun. I don't know what limit they have on the capacity in Ca.

As the population grows(more rats in a cage), I fear that all of this will get worse, not better. God is all but gone from most of the homes. Police and courts teach right from wrong. ONLY a Thin Blue Line will keep us from Anarchy!

Seems like since the cops do not do "license checks" anymore, that neighborhoods have gone to heck. They sure got a lot of crap off the streets in those check points.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about Trump but I think our senators will protect the 2nd amendment. They don't have to worry about getting re-elected until every 6 years and hopefully this Florida Thing will blow over before the 2018 elections.

Until then I am taking on the liberal chat forums myself and defending my right to keep and bear arms and to form militias. We the people will keep our arms....... all of them.
 
that deputy had one job. one. he didn't do it.

any cop who stood around listening to those people getting shot & didn't go looking to do something about it needs to GTF OUT of law enforcement right now and go do something they're capable of. dipping fries out of the grease maybe, or greeting people at walmart.
 
Originally Posted By: Stu Farishthat deputy had one job. one. he didn't do it.


You're totally right, he did have a job to do and he didn't do it. But the FBI also had a job to do also that could have avoided the entire situation. The authorities had been notified about this guy months in advance and did nothing. It's really sad.

What's really sad about this whole thing is that not 24 hours after the shooting Geraldo Rivera is on Fox News throwing a fit about bump stocks. A few days after the shooting Jimmy Kimmel is on his show bawling about gun control, how kids are getting killed, and how semi automatic weapons should be outlawed. The same Jimmy Kimmel that has armed guards follow wherever he goes, and presumably carry semi automatic weapons.

In my opinion Trump will not turn his back on us, but I sincerely hope that there are additions and changes to the background checks for the purchase of the weapons. Maybe a purchaser needs to submit a list of medications they are on before being able to purchase a gun, or even undergo a psychiatric evaluation at the time that they renew a permit to purchase or permit to carry.

I will say one thing. I just purchased another gun last week and after I filled out my paperwork my gun guy signed his name and said thank you. I was surprised that now, in my state, he didn't have to call in a background check on the spot. Since my permit to carry was just renewed, and with a new law passed, he's not mandated to call in the background check.

I was a little surprised and was happy to be on my way quickly. That said I can't say I exactly agree with it.
 
Consider the source.

Originally Posted By: CNNTrump: Take guns first, then go to court

Newsroom
While discussing examples of state legislature on gun control, President Donald Trump proposes taking firearms away first before going through due process in court.

I watched the conference live. The subject came up during a discussion on keeping firearms out of the hands of deranged individuals, which I believe we can all agree is a worthy endeavor. God only knows, had one of the authorities in FL acted on just one of the 39 (?) visits to the shooter's home, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The president suggested that a discussion should be held between those lawmakers present as to giving LEO's authority to disarm persons deemed to be a threat to themselves or others and have them evaluated by qualified medical personnel. If deemed fit by the medical professional, firearms could be returned; if not, they would then have recourse through the courts.

CNN kinda forgot to mention the fact that he was speaking of
disarming a mentally troubled individual; not exactly confiscation IMO.

Regards,
hm
 
Originally Posted By: hm1996Consider the source.

Originally Posted By: CNNTrump: Take guns first, then go to court

Newsroom
While discussing examples of state legislature on gun control, President Donald Trump proposes taking firearms away first before going through due process in court.

CNN kinda forgot to mention the fact that he was speaking of
disarming a mentally troubled individual; not exactly confiscation IMO.

Regards,
hm



So now trump wants to throw out the 2nd AND 4th Amendment. The Trumpster Fire burns hotter and smells even worse.

It doesn't matter WHO Trump was speaking about, hm. ANY search and seizure of property can happen only after due process. Not sure how you see a siezure of personal propety without due process as being different if a person were suspected of having a mental illness? You don't believe the Constitution applies here?

So if some liberal calls the local police and says they believe you're a mentally unstable gun nut, it's fine with you if the police kick down your door and take all your guns, ammo, and accessories and hand you a piece of paper summoning you to your psychological evaluation in 2 months time? You'd consider that not to be a violation of your 4th ammend. rights?

Trump thinking 4 moves ahead. That's a good one. Trump can't think 4 minutes ahead.

I got bad news for you guys. Trump only cares about Trump and Trump wants to win a second term. You think he won't sell us out if he sees a political gain in it?

Grouse
 
Originally Posted By: The Famous GrouseOriginally Posted By: hm1996Consider the source.

Originally Posted By: CNNTrump: Take guns first, then go to court

Newsroom
While discussing examples of state legislature on gun control, President Donald Trump proposes taking firearms away first before going through due process in court.

CNN kinda forgot to mention the fact that he was speaking of
disarming a mentally troubled individual; not exactly confiscation IMO.

Regards,
hm



So now trump wants to throw out the 2nd AND 4th Amendment. The Trumpster Fire burns hotter and smells even worse.

It doesn't matter WHO Trump was speaking about, hm. ANY search and seizure of property can happen only after due process. Not sure how you see a siezure of personal propety without due process as being different if a person were suspected of having a mental illness? You don't believe the Constitution applies here?

Grouse


So you're saying the BCS acted properly by not separating the nutjob who had been publicly threatening to become a professional school shooter and who had been the subject of some 39 complaints from his firearms?

The president was "thinking out loud" during this barnstorming session and I'd consider his thoughts to be a means of "disarming" as opposed to "confiscation". At least that's my interpretation and there is a huge difference between the two.

Regards,
hm
 
Originally Posted By: hm1996Originally Posted By: The Famous GrouseOriginally Posted By: hm1996Consider the source.

Originally Posted By: CNNTrump: Take guns first, then go to court

Newsroom
While discussing examples of state legislature on gun control, President Donald Trump proposes taking firearms away first before going through due process in court.

CNN kinda forgot to mention the fact that he was speaking of
disarming a mentally troubled individual; not exactly confiscation IMO.

Regards,
hm



So now trump wants to throw out the 2nd AND 4th Amendment. The Trumpster Fire burns hotter and smells even worse.

It doesn't matter WHO Trump was speaking about, hm. ANY search and seizure of property can happen only after due process. Not sure how you see a siezure of personal propety without due process as being different if a person were suspected of having a mental illness? You don't believe the Constitution applies here?

Grouse


So you're saying the BCS acted properly by not separating the nutjob who had been publicly threatening to become a professional school shooter and who had been the subject of some 39 complaints from his firearms?

The president was "thinking out loud" during this barnstorming session and I'd consider his thoughts to be a means of "disarming" as opposed to "confiscation". At least that's my interpretation and there is a huge difference between the two.

Regards,
hm



You're playing word games by using vague, undefined terms like "separation" and "disarming" and somehow implying that if you call it the right thing, you can do an end run around the 4th Ammend.

The 4th Ammend calls ANY government taking of property without due process "seizure". There is no time in which the government is allowed to hold your property without due process whereby it is NOT considered seizure.

I don't know if the BCS acted properly or improperly because I don't know what laws are on the books there that would have allowed them (or prevented them) from taking away guns. In general, there are many states that have laws that allow seizure of firearms if someone is accused of making terroristic threats. These states lay down the ground rules clearly so the 4th is satisfied because there IS due process.

What Trump is proposing with his "Take guns first, then go to court" is patently illegal and unconstitutional.

Grouse
 
Quote:These states lay down the ground rules clearly so the 4th is satisfied because there IS due process.

Watching the entire brainstorming session, that is actually what I suspect the president was suggesting. He was thinking out loud and suggesting disarming anyone who displayed mental problems as did the FL shooter as a way of preventing such tragedies. Not the same thing as confiscation IMO.

Of course, the liberals will do their level best to stretch the issue to include all their pet "common sense" bans, etc. Only time will tell.

Regards,
hm
 
Fox News host Tucker Carlson has dared to tell the truth about Trump. He'll probably be fired for challenging the Trumpie Lovers at Fox, but clearly, some real Conservatives have had enough of living the Trump lie.

Trump wasn't "thinking out loud". He's a self-serving New Yack politician who will say or do anything to get re-elected.

Carlson is right. Trump is no more the friend of the 2nd Amendment than Obama was, it's just that Trump continues to get a free pass and play on the denial of Conservative and Republican voters who can't bring themselves to admit that they've been had.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/03/01/tu...econd-amendment

There's no shame in admitting it, boys. Yes, the Trump-dump said all the right things. I freely admit that I wanted to believe him, but I never bought it. And now lookie, lookie. The New Yacker turns out to be anti-gun.

What a surprise! A politician moves in with all these big ideas and then gets real comfortable in the very swamp he promised to drain. Well, just re-elect me once and THEN I'll drain the swamp. No, really, it's going to be great...

Trump is a Conservative like a wolf is a vegetarian.

Grouse
 
Back
Top