• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Retreats, Again, on Guns

Glitch said:
States are the only government body with the constitutional authority to impose background checks. Congress cannot. Which means that there will not be a "universal background check" because not every State will cede to the irrational whims of the anti-American left.
Click to expand...
I don’t care as much about how background checks are mandated, just that they are.
 
The responses to a number of issues by President of the United States of America Donald Trump can be predicted with a relatively high degree of success, given two pieces of information.

Piece the first. What is the issue?

Piece the second. Has President Trump spoken recently wiith someone from the NRA, with Rush Limbough or with Sean Hannity?
 
Glitch said:
The State of Alaska does not require any background checks for any purchases, not even firearms, and they never will.
Click to expand...
Never? As in never ever ever?
 
Torus34 said:
The responses to a number of issues by President of the United States of America Donald Trump can be predicted with a relatively high degree of success, given two pieces of information.

Piece the first. What is the issue?

Piece the second. Has President Trump spoken recently wiith someone from the NRA, with Rush Limbough or with Sean Hannity?
Click to expand...

Most likely Trump was informed by his staff that the Supreme Court already ruled on congressional "universal background checks" and declared them unconstitutional in 1997. Meanwhile the ignorant and completely mentally-deranged left continues to blame the NRA for an act made by the Supreme Court over two decades ago.
 
Obscurity said:
We don't have adequate laws for a modern society of connectivity that is unprecedented in human history.
Click to expand...

But that’s not what you said, so this is a different argument.

What laws do you propose that would have prevented the last three mass shootings!
 
Glitch said:
Meanwhile the ignorant and completely mentally-deranged left continues to blame the NRA for an act made by the Supreme Court over two decades ago.
Click to expand...

Hi! I would beg to differ with you with regard to the 'left'. The word 'completely' may overstate the case. It's a very rare group indeed that achieves total perfection. There are usually a few stragglers who don't completely measure up.

Regards.
 
Torus34 said:
Hi! I would beg to differ with you with regard to the 'left'. The word 'completely' may overstate the case. It's a very rare group indeed that achieves total perfection. There are usually a few stragglers who don't completely measure up.

Regards.
Click to expand...

In this particular case I was not referring to the left as being completely left. I was referring to the left as being completely mentally-deranged. By that they are obviously choosing to deliberately ignore recent history in order to push their anti-American agenda in the vain hope that others will also ignore that history.
 
Glitch said:
In this particular case I was not referring to the left as being completely left. I was referring to the left as being completely mentally-deranged. By that they are obviously choosing to deliberately ignore recent history in order to push their anti-American agenda in the vain hope that others will also ignore that history.
Click to expand...

My statement holds.

Regards.
 
Lutherf said:
How is it Constitutional for the federal government to require a background check on a private transaction between two citizens that does not involve interstate activity?
Click to expand...

I'll wager a shiny nickel the Supreme Court will let us know on that one. I wouldn't be surprised the court rules for the firearm didn't get there by magic and the same involvement in interstate activity is attached to a private sale of a FIREARM as at the store. It's the transfer of a FIREARM, not a checker board... :peace
 
Moon said:
But that’s not what you said, so this is a different argument.

What laws do you propose that would have prevented the last three mass shootings!
Click to expand...

A full gun ban along with gun siezure. Your WORST FEARS ARE REALIZED!

Lulz.
 
notquiteright said:
I'll wager a shiny nickel the Supreme Court will let us know on that one. I wouldn't be surprised the court rules for the firearm didn't get there by magic and the same involvement in interstate activity is attached to a private sale of a FIREARM as at the store. It's the transfer of a FIREARM, not a checker board... :peace
Click to expand...

They already have, 22 years ago. Congress cannot mandate that the States perform universal background checks. It is a violation of the Tenth Amendment.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Trump Retreats, Again, on Guns

Where is the president’s vaunted independence?

NFmvj8P9SSvAVukn3-Xutzl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9

When NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre calls after another mass shooting, Trump listens up.



One thing is abundantly clear ... NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre owns Donald Trump and the GOP. Trump would rather please his NRA donor than do anything to help safeguard your husband, wife, and kids.

According to numerous current polls, 88% of Americans support universal background checks and 74% of NRA members support requiring background checks for all gun sales.

Trump and the GOP do not support such commonsense gun reform. They would rather please LaPierre and gun manufacturers. Remember this betrayal on Election Day, 3 November 2020.

Related: Trump’s Phone Calls With Wayne LaPierre Reveal NRA’s Influence
Click to expand...
You guys go crazy every time Trump speaks. He said he was LOOKING at changes to background check system - including whatever "universal background checks" means, and he is. He didn't say he was going to back them or any other pan. LaPierre is voice outside the DIC echo chamber.
 
Glitch said:
First, your percentage of Americans who support background checks is completely bogus, and a deliberate lie.
Click to expand...

It's best to do your own homework. But to torpedo your Wayne LaPierre propaganda....

Suburban women want Congress to act on gun control, Republican poll finds

Poll: Americans, Including Republicans And Gun Owners, Broadly Support Red Flag Laws

Poll: Most Republicans support assault weapons ban, despite Trump saying 'no appetite'

The surprising support for gun control among Trump voters, in three charts

Americans Largely Support Gun Restrictions To 'Do Something' About Gun Violence

The Universal Background Check Bill Sitting on Mitch McConnell’s Desk, Explained

And as a gun owner myself, I also fully support more rigid background checks and red-flag laws.
 
Glitch said:
Except that it is not, and you deliberately lied about the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court actually tossed mandated background checks in 1997 as violating the Tenth Amendment. Nice try at spinning delibrate lies, but you've been exposed. Go read Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) and get a clue.
Click to expand...

Yet the court of appeals has upheld a state's right to require universal background checks (Washington state 2014)

You are lying about the court ruling- the Court decided the Brady Bill couldn't force the local LEO to perform background checks as part of the process. The court stated they couldn't find a Constitution text to support their opinion, they cited 'historical' understanding and practice... :confused:

They didn't claim a universal background check was unconstitutional... :peace
 
Glitch said:
They already have, 22 years ago. Congress cannot mandate that the States perform universal background checks. It is a violation of the Tenth Amendment.
Click to expand...

Answered above- they said the local LEOs can't be commandeered to perform background checks. Said NOT A THING about other forms of universal background checks... :peace
 
notquiteright said:
Yet the court of appeals has upheld a state's right to require universal background checks (Washington state 2014)

You are lying about the court ruling- the Court decided the Brady Bill couldn't force the local LEO to perform background checks as part of the process. The court stated they couldn't find a Constitution text to support their opinion, they cited 'historical' understanding and practice... :confused:

They didn't claim a universal background check was unconstitutional... :peace
Click to expand...

Of course they didn't. We still have them in some places
 
Rogue Valley said:
It's best to do your own homework. But to torpedo your Wayne LaPierre propaganda....

Suburban women want Congress to act on gun control, Republican poll finds

Poll: Americans, Including Republicans And Gun Owners, Broadly Support Red Flag Laws

Poll: Most Republicans support assault weapons ban, despite Trump saying 'no appetite'

The surprising support for gun control among Trump voters, in three charts

Americans Largely Support Gun Restrictions To 'Do Something' About Gun Violence

The Universal Background Check Bill Sitting on Mitch McConnell’s Desk, Explained

And as a gun owner myself, I also fully support more rigid background checks and red-flag laws.
Click to expand...

And they are as credible as those pollsters who assured us that Hillary would win the 2016 election by a landslide. Everyone of them a leftist propagandist site. Like I said, your sources are complete BS. The really funny thing is that everyone knows it is complete BS, except for maybe you.

There will never be background checks, much less more rigid ones. At least not in the State where I live.
 
Bullseye said:
You guys go crazy every time Trump speaks. He said he was LOOKING at changes to background check system - including whatever "universal background checks" means, and he is. He didn't say he was going to back them or any other pan. LaPierre is voice outside the DIC echo chamber.
Click to expand...

They went crazy over Trump "pondering" about payroll tax cuts too. The president is not aloud to ponder or think about things and mention it in public. :werd

Hysteria in the thought police's echo chamber is not a pretty thing to watch.
 
notquiteright said:
Answered above- they said the local LEOs can't be commandeered to perform background checks. Said NOT A THING about other forms of universal background checks... :peace
Click to expand...

Yes they did. Try reading it. Congress is prohibited from mandating that the States or local government enforce any federal law.
 
Glitch said:
Yes they did. Try reading it. Congress is prohibited from mandating that the States or local government enforce any federal law.
Click to expand...

Wait, so why is tRump trying to get local LEOs to enforce immigration policy????

It's federal vs states.... the feds can be directly contacted in a private sale (just like an FFL does) and failure to produce the proper paperwork would be a crime (like it should be for FFLs.) No state action is needed, the ruling was very precise about using local assets to enforce federal law- it however said not a blessed thing about universal background checks being unconstitutional.... nice try... :peace
 
trixare4kids said:
They went crazy over Trump "pondering" about payroll tax cuts too. The president is not aloud to ponder or think about things and mention it in public. :werd

Hysteria in the thought police's echo chamber is not a pretty thing to watch.
Click to expand...
He speaks of the top of his head sometimes (well, most times, to be fair) and Trump-watchers take it as the holy gospel; "Trump PROMISES <yadda, yadda>". Between that and the gaggle of disloyal leakers that blab every off-the-cuff conversation or internal memo as holy writ and the Trumpophobes go berserk and whip themselves into a frenzy. Sad, in a way, amusing in another.
 
Glitch said:
And they are as credible as those pollsters who assured us that Hillary would win the 2016 election by a landslide.
Click to expand...

That is your rebuttal to 6 links? And you haven't provided even 1?

:rofl
 
Glitch said:
If the meaning of the five-letter word confuses you so much I suggest you Google it and get a clue.
Click to expand...
I understand the word. You’re the one who clearly doesn’t.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom