• 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!

Once again Trump talks of gun control and then chickens out due to NRA!

independentusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
9,303
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I would have bet you as soon as Trump started to talk about changing to tougher background checks that he was only speaking out of one side of his mouth and he would cave as soon as the NRA told him no. That is right, the NRA tells our great president what he can and can not do when it comes to any gun control measures. Trump is gutless for sure.
 
I would have bet you as soon as Trump started to talk about changing to tougher background checks that he was only speaking out of one side of his mouth and he would cave as soon as the NRA told him no. That is right, the NRA tells our great president what he can and can not do when it comes to any gun control measures. Trump is gutless for sure.

In reality it is the courts and the constitution. Federal power is not sufficient to demand private sales background checks
 
I would have bet you as soon as Trump started to talk about changing to tougher background checks that he was only speaking out of one side of his mouth and he would cave as soon as the NRA told him no. That is right, the NRA tells our great president what he can and can not do when it comes to any gun control measures. Trump is gutless for sure.
"Chickens out" of what? A panicked acceptance of the loony left's non-solution for mass shootings?
 
I would have bet you as soon as Trump started to talk about changing to tougher background checks that he was only speaking out of one side of his mouth and he would cave as soon as the NRA told him no. That is right, the NRA tells our great president what he can and can not do when it comes to any gun control measures. Trump is gutless for sure.

I don't know about the NRA. I do know I don't support tougher regulations in any case.

I don't like the current background check requirements. For one thing, I believe that once a person has done their time and completed all obligations of punishment, all rights should be returned including the right to self-defense. For another I don't believe it is anything but an actual record which is being maintained despite all claims otherwise, IMO a pseudo-registration.

I am not an advocate of allowing access to all forms of weaponry. I am on record as arguing the 2nd Amendment does not apply to area effect weapons (like flamethrowers, NukeBioChem), munitions (grenades/rockets/demolitions), crew-served weapons, weapons platforms (tanks, battleships, fighter jets). I think they are reasonably limited to the basic arms and armaments a common infantryman would be kitted with for everyday service.

Every time I hear about "reasonable" controls I see how they don't seem to work, thus leading to MORE "reasonable" increases in controls. Right up until the ultimate control is licensed ownership of fluff like those German "starter pistols" I've heard something about, all bark and no bite.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about the NRA. I do know I don't support tougher regulations in any case.

I don't like the current background check requirements. For one thing, I believe that once a person has done their time and completed all obligations of punishment, all rights should be returned including the right to self-defense.

I am not an advocate of allowing access to all forms of weaponry. I am on record as arguing the 2nd Amendment does not apply to area effect weapons (like flamethrowers, NukeBioChem), munitions (grenades/rockets/demolitions), crew-served weapons, weapons platforms (tanks, battleships, fighter jets). I think they are reasonably limited to the basic arms and armaments a common infantryman would be kitted with for everyday service.

Every time I hear about "reasonable" controls I see how they don't seem to work, thus leading to MORE "reasonable" increases in controls. Right up until the ultimate control is licensed ownership of fluff like those German "starter pistols," all bark and no bite.

"reasonable gun controls".....turning a right into a government granted privilege.
 
I don't know about the NRA. I do know I don't support tougher regulations in any case.

I don't like the current background check requirements. For one thing, I believe that once a person has done their time and completed all obligations of punishment, all rights should be returned including the right to self-defense. For another I don't believe it is anything but an actual record which is being maintained despite all claims otherwise, IMO a pseudo-registration.

I am not an advocate of allowing access to all forms of weaponry. I am on record as arguing the 2nd Amendment does not apply to area effect weapons (like flamethrowers, NukeBioChem), munitions (grenades/rockets/demolitions), crew-served weapons, weapons platforms (tanks, battleships, fighter jets). I think they are reasonably limited to the basic arms and armaments a common infantryman would be kitted with for everyday service.

Every time I hear about "reasonable" controls I see how they don't seem to work, thus leading to MORE "reasonable" increases in controls. Right up until the ultimate control is licensed ownership of fluff like those German "starter pistols" I've heard something about, all bark and no bite.

this is exactly the same positions I accept.
 
I would have bet you as soon as Trump started to talk about changing to tougher background checks that he was only speaking out of one side of his mouth and he would cave as soon as the NRA told him no. That is right, the NRA tells our great president what he can and can not do when it comes to any gun control measures. Trump is gutless for sure.

Trump respects our civil rights more than you do.
 
I don't know about the NRA. I do know I don't support tougher regulations in any case.

I don't like the current background check requirements. For one thing, I believe that once a person has done their time and completed all obligations of punishment, all rights should be returned including the right to self-defense. For another I don't believe it is anything but an actual record which is being maintained despite all claims otherwise, IMO a pseudo-registration.

I am not an advocate of allowing access to all forms of weaponry. I am on record as arguing the 2nd Amendment does not apply to area effect weapons (like flamethrowers, NukeBioChem), munitions (grenades/rockets/demolitions), crew-served weapons, weapons platforms (tanks, battleships, fighter jets). I think they are reasonably limited to the basic arms and armaments a common infantryman would be kitted with for everyday service.

Every time I hear about "reasonable" controls I see how they don't seem to work, thus leading to MORE "reasonable" increases in controls. Right up until the ultimate control is licensed ownership of fluff like those German "starter pistols" I've heard something about, all bark and no bite.

Right, and I guess you are okay with the thousands that die from guns. And do not tell me that it is people, without military style weapons capable of firing hundreds of rounds a minute and being able accept hundred round magazines, there would not be the kinds of killing going on in America today. There is an old saying, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
 
Right, and I guess you are okay with the thousands that die from guns. And do not tell me that it is people, without military style weapons capable of firing hundreds of rounds a minute and being able accept hundred round magazines, there would not be the kinds of killing going on in America today. There is an old saying, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

nothing a private citizen can buy, that was made after May 19,1986, is capable of firing hundreds of rounds in a minute. Do you think constantly posting stuff that is complete and utter dishonest BS helps your anti gun arguments?
 
Right, and I guess you are okay with the thousands that die from guns. And do not tell me that it is people, without military style weapons capable of firing hundreds of rounds a minute and being able accept hundred round magazines, there would not be the kinds of killing going on in America today. There is an old saying, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

A gun's rate of fire has nothing to do with its "style," and plenty of mass murders have been committed without AR15s. Can't you be even a little bit honest?

We're no more okay with thousands dying from gunshot wounds than you are with thousands being killed by drunk and leadfoot drivers. In what way are you part of the solution to that (or are you part of the problem)?
 
I would have bet you as soon as Trump started to talk about changing to tougher background checks that he was only speaking out of one side of his mouth and he would cave as soon as the NRA told him no. That is right, the NRA tells our great president what he can and can not do when it comes to any gun control measures. Trump is gutless for sure.

Strange, I was hoping to see some kind of proof to the claims in the OP...

Guess I was just expecting to much this time around.
Then again, telling repeated lies about the president. Seems to be the name of the game at this point.
 
I am not an advocate of allowing access to all forms of weaponry. I am on record as arguing the 2nd Amendment does not apply to area effect weapons (like flamethrowers, NukeBioChem), munitions (grenades/rockets/demolitions), crew-served weapons, weapons platforms (tanks, battleships, fighter jets). I think they are reasonably limited to the basic arms and armaments a common infantryman would be kitted with for everyday service.

Flamethrowers are legal in every state except Maryland and California. Im not sure how Maryland defines a flamethrower but in California its a flamethrower if it throws fire at least 10 feet. In all the other states flamethrowers are legal and supposedly don't even require background checks.
 
Right, and I guess you are okay with the thousands that die from guns. And do not tell me that it is people, without military style weapons capable of firing hundreds of rounds a minute and being able accept hundred round magazines, there would not be the kinds of killing going on in America today. There is an old saying, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

"Am I reading this wrong? Are you saying "do not tell me that it is people, without military style weapons, capable of firing hundreds of rounds a minute, and being able accept hundred round magazines, there would not be the kinds of killing going on in America today."

I'm not following your thought process. Can you phrase it differently?
 
I would have bet you as soon as Trump started to talk about changing to tougher background checks that he was only speaking out of one side of his mouth and he would cave as soon as the NRA told him no. That is right, the NRA tells our great president what he can and can not do when it comes to any gun control measures. Trump is gutless for sure.

Trump and the other NRA puppets will pay the price in the next election. Polling shows that people are fed up with the nonsense.

NPR Poll: After Parkland, Number of Americans Who Want Gun Restrictions Grows : NPR

The poll also found widespread bipartisan support for a range of gun-control policies, including:

requiring background checks for all gun buyers (94 percent),
adding people with mental illnesses to the federal gun background check system (92 percent),
raising the legal age to purchase guns from 18 to 21 (82 percent),
banning bump stocks (81 percent),
banning high-capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds (73 percent) and
banning assault-style weapons (72 percent).
 
Trump and the other NRA puppets will pay the price in the next election. Polling shows that people are fed up with the nonsense.

NPR Poll: After Parkland, Number of Americans Who Want Gun Restrictions Grows : NPR

The poll also found widespread bipartisan support for a range of gun-control policies, including:

requiring background checks for all gun buyers (94 percent),
adding people with mental illnesses to the federal gun background check system (92 percent),
raising the legal age to purchase guns from 18 to 21 (82 percent),
banning bump stocks (81 percent),
banning high-capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds (73 percent) and
banning assault-style weapons (72 percent).

people like you said this in 1994 too. the fact is, most anti gun sheep really are lukewarm in their support of stupid laws that are never really explained to them. Those of us who are pro gun do vote and vote against bannerrhoids
 
Back
Top Bottom