Trump to speak at NRA Convention

One thing for certain, politicians and judges will surprise you. Sometimes in a bad way.
No one side really adheres to all parts of the constitution or law .
 
rickyrick said:
No one side really adheres to all parts of the constitution or law .
Click to expand...
And this is why it's so important to appoint judges and, especially, Supreme Court justices who are strict constructionists. People like Antonin Scalia, who wrote in at least one decision I've read that he didn't necessarily like the result that applying the law brought about, but his job was to apply the law.

Contrast that to the approach of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who wants to "interpret" the U.S. Constitution through the lens of what courts are doing in Europe, or Ms. Sotomayor, who is proud of making decisions on the basis of being a "wise Latina."
 
I like to read the comments to the news stories. Lately I've been pleasantly surprised at all the pro-gun comments made when guns are the issue.

But this story about Trump's speech.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-have-a-true-friend-in-white-house/ar-BBAuokQ

the comments have an almost overwhelming anti-gun flavor.

One drum beat repeated over and over and over seems to be:
"No one is coming to take away your guns."
and
"No guns were taken away during the last administration."
 
...the comments have an almost overwhelming anti-gun flavor.

One drum beat repeated over and over and over seems to be:
"No one is coming to take away your guns."
and
"No guns were taken away during the last administration."
Click to expand...

I think there is a major push among Progressive Central Control type thinkers to regain their control over media and the flow and content of news and opinion. This goes right down to the individual's ability to freely disseminate his opinion. The goal is to be able to stamp out opposing views without actually doing battle with them. Manipulation of comments and social media postings are part of this strategy.

I don't think Trump is a real Constitutionalist Champion. So far he is standing with gun owners but this is a fairly new position for him. He is essentially untested and has taken some hair-raising positions in the past. If it comes down to making a deal, I'm afraid he might be quite open to "reasonable restrictions".

I think his motivations are largely to create a legacy and gain respect that he has never fully had. He will not do that by compromising basic principles to cut a deal but rather by knowing and upholding the principles which took the nation to its greatest heights. Making deals is vastly overrated.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a Trump fan, I can't identify any of his core values. They seem to change with the wind. But if the NRA can deliver big supportive crowds that boost his ego then I imagine he'll support the cause.
 
I'm afraid that Truthtellers told the truth about this one. It was just rhetoric with no indication of proactive measures. The basic message was that I'm not Hillary so I won't do anything against you.

I'm waiting for what proactive, expansion of rights, elimination of bad laws, legislation or SCOTUS decisions to negate the oppressive state bans, etc.

The wall and ammo for ducks - so what. Even HPA is nibbling at the margins of the major constitutional issues. There needs to be a court decision or legislative clear fire wall against a new Federal AWB type ban and the increasing number of state bans. Heller didn't do it and you can argue it justified those in antigun quarters.

The conspiracy minded might think that a resolution of such issues is not high on the agenda as the threat of antigun actions is a wonderful tool for election propaganda. It is great for gun rights organization fund raising.

In a sense it is like voter ID laws. I've always wondering why after the election (where ID laws are claimed to suppress votes), there are not massive campaigns to get folks ID. Have buses in neighborhoods, go door to door to get folks to the state offices, etc. No - little is done and then the issue is brought up.

It is the same with the gun laws. A candidate will protect the RKBA but no legislative action is taken. Why, let's keep the issue hot for the election.
 
The first time in decades that a sitting president has addressed the NRA and publically pledges his commitment to the NRA and the private right of gun ownership. Sounds good to me.

And I'll bet he didn't require a $400,000 "donation" to appear and speak, either. ;)
 
^^^ It sounded good, but actions speak louder than words.

When he prods Congress into enacting national carry reciprocity, and/or repealing the Hughes Amendment, and/or repealing the NFA ... then we can legitimately say he is behind us legal gun owners.
 
I can't remember who said it but it was on meet the press some weeks back.

basically it went like this "Trump is very agreeable, he is confident and excited, he'll promise you the moon, the next day he'll betray you and he won't even know he's doing it."

Basically he tells everyone what they wanna hear, He may not even know what he's doing consciously, But he's really lite on action.

He never use to be so pro2a.. what was his awakening?
I've met many anti gunners who are now big time pro-gun and usually they have a story as to why.

I personally believe if sandy hook happened on his watch he'd be no better then Obama.
 
'Meet The Press' is not a good source to hear anything good about Trump or guns. To be credible Joe you need to provide a source who said this. OTHERWISE IT IS JUST YOUR OPINION.
Trump was the first President since Regan to speak at the NRA Conference. That impressed me. It was great for gun owners that he got Gorsuch in as Supreme Court Judge. he has reversed a lot orders that the former president put in.
In my opinion he has done a lot for this country in 100 days.
 
Last edited:
Peggy It was about a month ago, I DVR MTP but do not keep them I suppose I could scour the online library and yet Im not about too watch 4-5 hours of MTP to find it.

I did try to find the quote on google and could not find it because I could not remember it exactly.. It was a bit long to memorize.

But do we even need to track down the mystery person who said it?
Can you honestly tell me with a straight face he has not flip flopped or made excuses when things don't go his way?

He always says things will be easy, He promises one thing one day and the next something else.

Who cares who said it.. If it's true it's true.. having a name to go with it does not make it so now does it?

Or maybe you think I just made the whole thing up.. and if so Im ok with that.. If you really wanna know then I gave you the time frame, end of march at the latest, I believe it was this month (April) about 4 episodes back.
 
A lifetime membership in the NRA costs $1000. In Trump's case the $1000 isn't even pocket change.

Although two guns have been mentioned as being Donald's favorites for concealed carry, a S&W 38 Special and a H&K .45, I find it suspicious that a person who thrives on celebrity, has a massive ego and engages in self promotion on an unheard of scale wouldn't have the normal kinds of photos that every firearms enthusiast takes of themselves or their guns.

The fact is the membership's real worth to Donald Trump was the millions of votes garnered in the presidential election.
 
Glenn E Meyer said:
Sounds good vs. actual action is what we are talking about.

Many presidents (including recent ones) have been criticized for their talking points not translating into action.
Click to expand...

Aguila Blanca said:
^^^ It sounded good, but actions speak louder than words.

When he prods Congress into enacting national carry reciprocity, and/or repealing the Hughes Amendment, and/or repealing the NFA ... then we can legitimately say he is behind us legal gun owners.
Click to expand...

The exec is one cog in the system, an important one, but just a part. Looking to DJT to lead on the detail of legislation on 2d Am. issues is a search for failure. Execs don't pass legislation; legislators do. Instead of engaging in a sort of political category error (both as to his role and temperament), we might appreciate what we do have, an exec who picked a good Sup Ct justice (and Senate leadership who made that act matter), and who might sign any of those reforms if they arrived at his desk.

Let's also appreciate what he doesn't do. He doesn't take the opportunity of a public shooting to run to a camera to publicly weep and talk about which one of his children the victim could have been or complain that we "have to do something".
 
Last edited:
I caution posters not to attack other posters on general political issues and stick to the issue at hand - which is what will Trump do or not do for the RKBA and what are the appropriate actions.

I've deleted such and replies, so that this is just warning.
 
I am fully aware of how different Trump is from Obama (and Hillary), and I welcome the shift away from ANTI-gun statements and initiatives. That doesn't alter the fact that he ran on a PRO-Second Amendment plank, making promises of enacting national carry reciprocity and other pro-2A points. I'm well aware that the President doesn't get to make laws unilaterally (although someone seems to have forgotten to explain that to Obama) -- I studied that back in 7th grade Social Studies class in 1957 or '58 -- but presidents do generally wield a certain amount of power and "political capital." What's needed is for President Trump to learn how to leverage however much clout he has in order to drag Congress to helping bring some of those campaign promises to fruition.

The biggest hurdle to overcome is Speaker Paul Ryan, who is nominally a Republican but who does not appear to be either (a) a conservative, or (b) a friend of the 2A. Obviously, new laws have to pass both houses of Congress before they get to the President's desk. So Mr. Trump needs to find out where Ryan's bodies are buried, and find a way to get Ryan on board with the Trump administration's agenda.

I e-mail Speaker Ryan about once a week to remind him that he is (nominally) a Republican, and that the Republicans have a majority in the Congress at least in part to the election of Donald Trump as President. They (the Rs) were elected basically to follow through on Trump's campaign platform, and if they don't start to deliver SOON they face the very real possibility of losing their majority in the mid-term elections.

Ryan needs to hear this, often. I respectfully request that others on this forum consider joining me in swamping Ryan with e-mails conveying that message.
 
AB said:
What's needed is for President Trump to learn how to leverage however much clout he has in order to drag Congress to helping bring some of those campaign promises to fruition.
Click to expand...

I think that is the opposite of how this will pan out. I believe we are likely to see a congressional agenda that DJT speaks about as his "yugest most incredibly unbelievable" victories. (Although his CRA regulatory repeals are important and credit goes to exec branch people for getting that done). This means that keeping the pressure up in Congress is necessary.

I applaud your frequent emails to Paul Ryan.

I am less enthusiastic about casting those who are routinely on the same side of a political issue as "nominal" allies. Ryan is a politician who looks for compromises and has voted in support of gun owners' rights a number of times. Looking for ways to describe him as the problem isn't a path to a congressional majority on 2d Am. issues.

In looking for purity in the political process, you may also find defeat.

AB said:
They (the Rs) were elected basically to follow through on Trump's campaign platform, and if they don't start to deliver SOON they face the very real possibility of losing their majority in the mid-term elections.
Click to expand...

All those Rs were espousing their own positions based on a platform that had been set prior to DJT's nomination. Lots of Rs have substantial and frankly spoken reservations about DJT and elements of his policy. To a degree that may be historically unusual, a lot of congress may have been elected for reasons distinct from parliamentary style support of DJT.

I am not suggesting that there is no overlap in the agenda of DJT and the agenda of Congress, but that DJT's political success is at least as dependent on wooing congress as congressional fates depending on capturing him.

That separate identity isn't trivial. As much as DJT is to be lauded for naming Gorsuch, it was important for Gorsuch and repub senators to repudiate DJT's hamhanded critiques of the judiciary.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top