When New Jersey Democrats put a gun control law on the ballot, after overwhelming public demand (have YOU ever been to East Orange?) for a vote, it was so poorly worded that it failed. Antique weapons would have been confiscated, Civil War replicas, etc. Vast overreach, as Obama prefers. The debacle was on "60 Minutes," tears of Niobe provided by Sen. Loretta Weinberg, the Bella of Basking Ridge.
2
No discussion of banning pressure cookers after the Boston Marathon bombing. Airplanes into buildings killed 3000 innocent people. I imagine that a suicide bomber could do as much damage in a crowded night club as a man with a rifle..The problem is not the weapon of choice...the problem is that millions of radical Islamists hate us and want to destroy us.
8
If anything, Trump will change his mind...yet AGAIN, and come out of the meeting screaming 2nd amendment rights and how everyone in the world should be able to buy military weapons, no questions asked.
8
My prediction is that as long as people can buy assault weapons, mass killings like this will keep happening.
15
Isn't it incredible that a Republican presidential candidate is willing to defy party politics and going against the grain and do the right thing for the people for once? Isn't it a good thing for the country if Trump can push NRA to compromise and accept some form of gun control as a start? So why all the rage against Trump?
8
I recall how incredulous you were when the Democrats turned Sen. Paul Wellstone's memorial service into a political pep rally, led by local sensation Al Franken, dba Stuart Smalley. How banal.
3
Don't adjust your newspapers America.
Obama liberals are angry at Donald Trump for meeting with the NRA to discuss gun control after the ISIS attack in Florida that is the worst mass shooting in American History.
Let me repeat that.
ISIS kills 49 Americans, Mr. Trump is meeting with the NRA to try and get support for gun control legislation and Obama liberals are ANGRY at Trump.
My only question is how long have Obama supporters been part of the jihad?
Obama liberals are angry at Donald Trump for meeting with the NRA to discuss gun control after the ISIS attack in Florida that is the worst mass shooting in American History.
Let me repeat that.
ISIS kills 49 Americans, Mr. Trump is meeting with the NRA to try and get support for gun control legislation and Obama liberals are ANGRY at Trump.
My only question is how long have Obama supporters been part of the jihad?
11
And the band played on....
7
It has nothing to do with the negotiation that Trump is going to win with the NRA. The fact that anyone has to negotiate with an outside group amount something that Congress should handle says lots about how awful our system is. Wish Trump would negotiate with Congress to work at least 5 day weeks , and pass some things that have to do with all of us and not just what their party platforms want.
No one is angry with Trump. We are embarrassed, annoyed, fed up, of listening to an ignorant,childish,boarish, marketing buffoon who only cares about himself and his brand. He couldn't care less especially about you, dear. ps. ISIS did not kill 49 people, an American did. As did an American mow down 23 children, An American killed Christians in their place of worship! So how long have you been supporting and been part of these hate filled murderers.?
No one is angry with Trump. We are embarrassed, annoyed, fed up, of listening to an ignorant,childish,boarish, marketing buffoon who only cares about himself and his brand. He couldn't care less especially about you, dear. ps. ISIS did not kill 49 people, an American did. As did an American mow down 23 children, An American killed Christians in their place of worship! So how long have you been supporting and been part of these hate filled murderers.?
12
Why is Trump meeting with the NRA?
Who elected the NRA to anything?
You don't need their permission and if you ask for it you are weak
Who elected the NRA to anything?
You don't need their permission and if you ask for it you are weak
21
Who elected the NAACP or any liberal issue group that Obama meets with on a regular basis . Trump is not an elected ogovernment official like Obama is...Your post make no sense.
5
I think many commenters here are applying some sort of Trumpish truthiness to his most recent policy comments on gun control and 2nd amendment rights. If you wait ten minutes he will be upholding the other positions he's had that made him the NRA poster boy of this year. His line is neither party or anti-GOP; it is simply 'let's take advantage of events and try to look presidential' because everything is all about me, Donald.
Well, this is not the issue and I'll happily eat my words if he is in any way effective on this.
The issue is that we have assault weapons available to angry, misguided people, people who intend to do harm, people who want to be famous, and on and on. We make it hard to fly if you're on a watch list with mixed results I'm sure. People are inconvenienced if they share the same name as an actual terrorist or suspicious person but they can still easily buy guns.
What's nuts is that we rend garments, and feel bad when these things happen and we look to our leaders to console. We are outraged and saddened but we don't change what we do and we repeat and repeat the murders.
For all that is life giving and loving and good, please do what needs to be done Congress and let's not destroy more families and communities in the name of the second amendment. We all have rights you know, to live is among them.
Well, this is not the issue and I'll happily eat my words if he is in any way effective on this.
The issue is that we have assault weapons available to angry, misguided people, people who intend to do harm, people who want to be famous, and on and on. We make it hard to fly if you're on a watch list with mixed results I'm sure. People are inconvenienced if they share the same name as an actual terrorist or suspicious person but they can still easily buy guns.
What's nuts is that we rend garments, and feel bad when these things happen and we look to our leaders to console. We are outraged and saddened but we don't change what we do and we repeat and repeat the murders.
For all that is life giving and loving and good, please do what needs to be done Congress and let's not destroy more families and communities in the name of the second amendment. We all have rights you know, to live is among them.
5
Until we have control of our borders, a legal ban on automatic weapons will be meaningless. Anyone who wants such a weapon will buy it on the black market, just like the illegal drugs that pour into our country.
3
Which isn't a good reason for throwing up our hands in capitulation and not ban them. We don't allow people to carry around bazookas, and missiles and grenades, which are all tools of war, and we shouldn't be letting people buy assault rifles, either. It won't be an end to mass shootings, but the beginning of an end of mass shootings.
12
Fences makes good neighbors. Walls, even better neighbors.
3
I'm for both. Why aren't you?
1
Unfortunately it is now clear that Trump is mentally ill.
6
Not so. Like Hamlet, Donald is merely "holding up the mirror to Nature." Dat being us. The Liberal's favorite trope, after "WWJD?" is: "We have met the enemy, and it is us." - (c) Walt Kelly. We all be mental now, y'all! Like TMZ, or the Jersey shore, are.
3
By your standards, trying to assist in solving a problem is evidence of mental illness? You Brits are a strange lot..
4
Trump has continually touted the fact that he is not beholden to any special interests, so why is he even talking to the NRA? He seems to be soliciting their support or rather, trying to forestall their opposition to his candidacy.
More than 80% of all Americans favor sensible gun control, including Republicans and Independents. But Congress is terrorized by the NRA so they won't do anything meaningful. So is Trump talking to the NRA a palliative move? Is he telling them to go along with some cosmetic approval in order to garner their support for his candidacy? Will he guarantee them that under a Trump presidency they have nothing to fear about confiscation of their beloved murder assault weapons?
This is a very curious move on his part, and anyone who thinks that this will lead to real reform is delusional.
More than 80% of all Americans favor sensible gun control, including Republicans and Independents. But Congress is terrorized by the NRA so they won't do anything meaningful. So is Trump talking to the NRA a palliative move? Is he telling them to go along with some cosmetic approval in order to garner their support for his candidacy? Will he guarantee them that under a Trump presidency they have nothing to fear about confiscation of their beloved murder assault weapons?
This is a very curious move on his part, and anyone who thinks that this will lead to real reform is delusional.
7
Mr. Trump is seizing the opportunity to look "presidential". I don't believe for a moment that the NRA is having a change of heart on this one. "Moral" and Christian platitudes will flow forth from the GOP as to the "common sense" the NRA is showing, and Trump is alledgedly guiding. However I feel that both of these entities are reaching deep into each others' pockets and pulling out what they want. And chillingly, neither is a sitting member of any part of the US government.
9
For once, Trump is about to encounter folks that can be even nastier and crazier than himself. Best of luck Don. And welcome to the true soul of today's GOP.
14
What folks is he going to encounter? The editorial board of the NYT and its readers? (smile).
6
Trump is going to score a major coup with the NRA and make Clinton and Obama look incompetent in the process. In the mean time Clinton will continue to droll on about how she supports LGBT rights and causes while her family foundation has accepted millions from Saudi Arabia and other anti-homosexual governments. The NY Times and her supporters will remain silent.
11
I've been saying this all day Mei Mei.
This is yet another Trump political win.
This is yet another Trump political win.
4
I'm on the "no fly list." They won't admit that there is one, they won't tell you why you are on it, and they won't take you off. If, after you complain, and they find that you are somehow on the list in error, they issue you a "redress number" to use when buying tickets. There is no accusation, no due process, no opportunity to be heard, and no judge involved.
Whether it's a no-fly list, or a watch list, or whatever name they want call it and pretend doesn't exist, it's a pain in the butt!
Personal experience, folks. You don't want any "rights" taken away if you somehow end up on a list that you can't get off of or find out why you are on it!
Whether it's a no-fly list, or a watch list, or whatever name they want call it and pretend doesn't exist, it's a pain in the butt!
Personal experience, folks. You don't want any "rights" taken away if you somehow end up on a list that you can't get off of or find out why you are on it!
5
Instead of a "redress number" the government should have given you a million dollar compensation (Baltimore gave six million to a dead drug dealer's family) plus any legal fees that you might have incurred and fired the useless, parasitic bureaucrat who put you on the list.
4
They've got Hillary planted on a stool, spread leg'd in shorts, hi-tops, towel around her neck, gaze fixed like a cat on a canary but impishly, band-aided on her nose and forehead, on a stool, arms extended laterally on the ropes, and boxing gloves on and ready to whale: The Main Event. Ding ding! The highlight of the New Yorker is solely the cover, I toss the rest. Joke! Been not the same since Updike died.
Pauline Kael, NY'er movie critic, 1972: "I can't believe Nixon won. All my friends voted for McGovern!"
Pauline Kael, NY'er movie critic, 1972: "I can't believe Nixon won. All my friends voted for McGovern!"
5
The NRA isn't waiting for Trump's advice. They've already left a robo call denouncing any gun restrictions and I'm a lifelong Democrat so you know the NRA feels threatened by the middle path being discussed.
Write or call your elected federal officials and tell them you've had enough of the NRA stonewalling.
Write or call your elected federal officials and tell them you've had enough of the NRA stonewalling.
7
Call the NRA itself. Your timid politicians cannot be trusted.
6
The NRA released the following statement on their website regarding the terror watch list:
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2016
Fairfax, Va.— The executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement regarding terror watchlists:
We are happy to meet with Donald Trump. The NRA's position on this issue has not changed. The NRA believes that terrorists should not be allowed to purchase or possess firearms, period. Anyone on a terror watchlist who tries to buy a gun should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the sale delayed while the investigation is ongoing. If an investigation uncovers evidence of terrorist activity or involvement, the government should be allowed to immediately go to court, block the sale, and arrest the terrorist. At the same time, due process protections should be put in place that allow law-abiding Americans who are wrongly put on a watchlist to be removed. That has been the position of Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and a majority of the U.S. Senate. Sadly, President Obama and his allies would prefer to play politics with this issue.
Why not pass this?? It's a good step.
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2016
Fairfax, Va.— The executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement regarding terror watchlists:
We are happy to meet with Donald Trump. The NRA's position on this issue has not changed. The NRA believes that terrorists should not be allowed to purchase or possess firearms, period. Anyone on a terror watchlist who tries to buy a gun should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the sale delayed while the investigation is ongoing. If an investigation uncovers evidence of terrorist activity or involvement, the government should be allowed to immediately go to court, block the sale, and arrest the terrorist. At the same time, due process protections should be put in place that allow law-abiding Americans who are wrongly put on a watchlist to be removed. That has been the position of Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and a majority of the U.S. Senate. Sadly, President Obama and his allies would prefer to play politics with this issue.
Why not pass this?? It's a good step.
3
"...He said that the carnage could have been minimized “if some of those great people that were in that club that night had guns strapped to their waist or strapped to their ankle, and if the bullets were going in the other direction...”
Spoken like a truly uninformed person. To get the shooter down without increasing the carnage means getting in really close, so close that one is likely to be killed, so most people are going to duck and hide. If they had guns and shoot them they would not stand up and aim at the shooter as they would at a gun range. They would just point the gun in the general direction of the shooter without aiming and shoot or they would pop up firing and duck back down. In a crowded place like that club other innocent bystanders would be more likely to be shot than the shooter. Typically in fire fights, even most rounds do not hit the intended targets for a whole lot of reasons and with people so close together, the more bullets, the more wounded and killed.
Spoken like a truly uninformed person. To get the shooter down without increasing the carnage means getting in really close, so close that one is likely to be killed, so most people are going to duck and hide. If they had guns and shoot them they would not stand up and aim at the shooter as they would at a gun range. They would just point the gun in the general direction of the shooter without aiming and shoot or they would pop up firing and duck back down. In a crowded place like that club other innocent bystanders would be more likely to be shot than the shooter. Typically in fire fights, even most rounds do not hit the intended targets for a whole lot of reasons and with people so close together, the more bullets, the more wounded and killed.
10
If we had a Congress with a spine, we'd have statistics on gun use, for defense, in public, rounds fired, etc...of course the NRA blocks such action. So our only statistics on defensive gun use is self reported surveys. A true analysis would likely show that with millions of more guns carried in public, the unintended victims will skyrocket...yet, maybe somewhere, sometime, one assailant wouldl be brought down a bit earlier...heavy cost to pay for "safety". Sell it to the victims parents.
3
@casual obsever
"To get the shooter down without increasing the carnage means getting in really close"
Really?
And your expertise on ballistics and self defense tactics is from where?
I own a 9mm pistol, I'm not a great shot but I've shot a few thousand rounds and generally can hit what I'm aiming at.
Of course distance matters... it always does despite what you may have been told...
I can hit a man sized target
@100 yards with some consistency
@50 yards with more consistency
@25 yards with even more consistency
A 9mm round which is not all that powerful is most likely lethal to 200+ yards to a human.
I doubt that the dimensions on the main floor of that club was larger than 25-30 yards
The dimensions in the bathroom where he killed several folks maybe 10 yards (30 feet or ~9 meters)
In a stress situation, your accuracy probably drops by at least 50% that's for both parties the Good Guy with a Gun and the Bad Guy with a Gun.
(I put that in because the Gun Grabbers have this thing called the Gun Grabbers Rules of Marksmanship - which somehow allows the bad guy to defy physics)
Ever watched a video of an actual confrontation?
People get a whole lot less aggressive with a firearm when someone starts shooting back at them...
They stop walking and shooting and start ducking and hiding
Good Guy - Bad Guy both generally start looking for cover
REAL QUICK
Well if the Bad Guy is looking for cover that is a win for everyone who is unfortunate enough to be in that club
"To get the shooter down without increasing the carnage means getting in really close"
Really?
And your expertise on ballistics and self defense tactics is from where?
I own a 9mm pistol, I'm not a great shot but I've shot a few thousand rounds and generally can hit what I'm aiming at.
Of course distance matters... it always does despite what you may have been told...
I can hit a man sized target
@100 yards with some consistency
@50 yards with more consistency
@25 yards with even more consistency
A 9mm round which is not all that powerful is most likely lethal to 200+ yards to a human.
I doubt that the dimensions on the main floor of that club was larger than 25-30 yards
The dimensions in the bathroom where he killed several folks maybe 10 yards (30 feet or ~9 meters)
In a stress situation, your accuracy probably drops by at least 50% that's for both parties the Good Guy with a Gun and the Bad Guy with a Gun.
(I put that in because the Gun Grabbers have this thing called the Gun Grabbers Rules of Marksmanship - which somehow allows the bad guy to defy physics)
Ever watched a video of an actual confrontation?
People get a whole lot less aggressive with a firearm when someone starts shooting back at them...
They stop walking and shooting and start ducking and hiding
Good Guy - Bad Guy both generally start looking for cover
REAL QUICK
Well if the Bad Guy is looking for cover that is a win for everyone who is unfortunate enough to be in that club
5
There was a case some years ago when a man with a gun saved a woman from assault and rape. The problem is that his gun was illegal in New York and there was a minimum sentence of one year (I think) for having that gun.
This created a problem. Should the state have gone after the guy for having that gun? After he could just have let the woman be assaulted and no one would know he had a gun.
I don't know if he did go to prison but the law did require that he must.
This created a problem. Should the state have gone after the guy for having that gun? After he could just have let the woman be assaulted and no one would know he had a gun.
I don't know if he did go to prison but the law did require that he must.
3
States should place a special tax on the purchase of guns for the benefit of counseling and support for victims and non-violence education. Also, gun owners should carry insurance for accidents and intentional acts to cover medical costs and funerals. May be a hefty insurance rate, but I bet they would pay it for the privilege of having a firearm.
7
@Jolene
Do you plan on placing a tax on people who exercise their 1st Amendment rights?
Do you plan on requiring that people register with the Government in advance if they want to use their Right to a Speedy Trial?
If they haven't registered does that mean they cant insist on the right to a Speedy Trial.
Should Donald Trump who is running for President have to get insurance to protect "us all" in case one of his whackado followers goes off the deep end?
If I as a gun owner am placed in the unfortunate position of having to defend myself and you at some Bar or Club or Shopping Center
should you be liable to the Criminal/Whackado's/Terrorists family because I was defending you and myself?
Since I don't have any insurance or assets and your rich or have "deep pockets" the attorneys for the whackado's family go after you, so should you be required to get "defendee's" insurance just in case?
Do you plan on placing a tax on people who exercise their 1st Amendment rights?
Do you plan on requiring that people register with the Government in advance if they want to use their Right to a Speedy Trial?
If they haven't registered does that mean they cant insist on the right to a Speedy Trial.
Should Donald Trump who is running for President have to get insurance to protect "us all" in case one of his whackado followers goes off the deep end?
If I as a gun owner am placed in the unfortunate position of having to defend myself and you at some Bar or Club or Shopping Center
should you be liable to the Criminal/Whackado's/Terrorists family because I was defending you and myself?
Since I don't have any insurance or assets and your rich or have "deep pockets" the attorneys for the whackado's family go after you, so should you be required to get "defendee's" insurance just in case?
5
They already do. I got a $35 traffic infraction, not a rolling violation, and tacked on to it was $210.00, far more than "court costs." Court clerk read off several abuse programs, safe driving, a plethora of victims and survivor's groups... each getting a small cut of the MILLION$ in ticket fines paid. On top of 7.75% sales tax (8.75 in our county) and 13% +/- state income tax. Democrats sure like to spend other folks' money. Making the Univ of California tuition go up by 25% in 5 years, underway now. Tax, then spend. Repeat.
2
" the attorneys for the whackado's family go after you, so should you be required to get "defendee's" insurance just in case?"
The family of the drug dealer killed in Baltimore got six million dollars from the city, many times more that he could have ever earned. If he had been a victim of the 9/11 attack I doubt that his family would have gotten more than a few thousand dollars.
The family of the drug dealer killed in Baltimore got six million dollars from the city, many times more that he could have ever earned. If he had been a victim of the 9/11 attack I doubt that his family would have gotten more than a few thousand dollars.
2
Another sign Trump completely miscalculated effects from killings--after first coming out saying assault weapons realized public opinion was overwhelmingly against him and NRA, reverses, just more of the sociopathic, fascist subplot to everything he does.
4
As opposed to Donald doing something that makes eminent good sense for a deal-making pragmatist? In the same way Henry Kissinger opened up China.
P.S.: Note how many times has Crooked Hillary's position changed on so many topics. Coal, guns, war, cyber-hacking by foreign powers, yes to Chuck Todd re: transcripts then No transcripts - like Rosemary Woods. Finally: "everybody does it." Oh, sure.
P.S.: Note how many times has Crooked Hillary's position changed on so many topics. Coal, guns, war, cyber-hacking by foreign powers, yes to Chuck Todd re: transcripts then No transcripts - like Rosemary Woods. Finally: "everybody does it." Oh, sure.
4
Using Trump logic on immigration: Let's stop all gun sales until we can figure out what is going on.
11
But only for those guns that were made illegally, without a visa.
4
Another brilliant aspect of Trump's gun control plan with the NRA?
Trump is staying out of Washington DC politics and the Oval Office until it's his turn to BE president.
Trump is negotiating with the NRA as a citizen, on behalf of the LGBT community and victims of gun violence in (my) Black Community.
And Obama is verbally attacking Trump as if Trump is already in the White House.
Booyah!
Trump is staying out of Washington DC politics and the Oval Office until it's his turn to BE president.
Trump is negotiating with the NRA as a citizen, on behalf of the LGBT community and victims of gun violence in (my) Black Community.
And Obama is verbally attacking Trump as if Trump is already in the White House.
Booyah!
5
That's three nonsensical comments in quick succession, the speed of the silliness again indicating that DCB is in fact Trump.
Look Trump, give it a rest, without facts or reputable sources your polemic is unconvincing. And maybe switch to decaf too.
Look Trump, give it a rest, without facts or reputable sources your polemic is unconvincing. And maybe switch to decaf too.
6
You're right Dan!
Non-reputable sources confirm that as of June 16, 2016 Donald Trump is not President of the United States and cannot meet with the NRA to seek gun control legislative support as anything other than a citizen of the United States.
Let's wait for the confirmed sources before we fly off the handle saying things like Trump is meeting with the NRA as a private citizen.
No seriously, do all Obama liberals think like Dan?
Non-reputable sources confirm that as of June 16, 2016 Donald Trump is not President of the United States and cannot meet with the NRA to seek gun control legislative support as anything other than a citizen of the United States.
Let's wait for the confirmed sources before we fly off the handle saying things like Trump is meeting with the NRA as a private citizen.
No seriously, do all Obama liberals think like Dan?
3
DCB, I didn't claim that he's not a citizen, although I've never seen his birth certificate, so I'm not saying so, but there's plenty of reason to believe he's not a citizen. But he's certainly not negotiating with the NRA, nor doing it on behalf of the LGBT community, nor for black people. He doesn't care about the LGBT community or black people, and has made that quite clear for years.
And he's not really negotiating. Neither he nor the NRA have the ability to propose new laws or regulations, neither one has any role in government, and any agreement between them carries as much weight as an agreement between me and you would (not that I'm expecting one).
And really, switch to decaf, your temper will improve.
And he's not really negotiating. Neither he nor the NRA have the ability to propose new laws or regulations, neither one has any role in government, and any agreement between them carries as much weight as an agreement between me and you would (not that I'm expecting one).
And really, switch to decaf, your temper will improve.
1
Utilizing no fly lists and requiring universal background checks are both well and good but in my view the big issue is whether or not we should allow people to purchase or possess military style assault weapons. The proliferation of such weapons not only makes people in public places exponentially more vulnerable, it risks the lives of first responders whose more conventional weapons may be no match for a criminal's firepower. A case in point is the North Hollywood shootout in February of 1997. Reinstate the assault weapons ban!!
8
Trump is not a party man. He is not beholden to any party unlike Hillary Clinton who is and what she says reflects that. She will parrot whatever nonsense the Party comes up with. So BLM is a vaild movement and when Ms. Clinton tries to say differently she gets force walked back from that. Her email problems can never be properly addressed because it would offend the Party. The ACA was and is a disaster but that truth cannot be spoken either.
The last non-party person we had as President was Eisenhower. That turned out pretty well. Trump 2016
The last non-party person we had as President was Eisenhower. That turned out pretty well. Trump 2016
3
Trump is a thin skinned liar and a complete fraud. Besides, the U.S. is already the haven of bigots and racists that hate the black president and the woman running for the office and pretend that somehow the horrible state of this country is the fault of those that care and know as opposed to those that don't care and are wholesale ignorant of what truly matters. That stupid neo-conservative trope is old and tired, like most of the people spouting it and most of the decent people in the is county and in the world don't want to hear it anymore. You may think that calling someone a liberal and secretly wishing you could beat them over the head with a baseball bat because the don't subscribe to white supremacy, but you would be very, very wrong and in November, we will prove it. Meanwhile you can to to a trump rally and yell inanities to your hollow hearts content.
1
It's an ill wind that does not blow someone some good. Trump's adept pulse reading of his audiences detects that restricting sales of firearms from people suspected of terrorism or of supporting terrorism is a popular idea, which to promote is in his political interests. It also makes common sense. However, once more, Trump fails to grasp the technicalities. Gun ownership is not licensed and guns are not registered like auto drivers and automobiles, so these measures would require more evidence of threat to the public than being on these lists, which are not based upon proof of likely malicious intent but concern about intent, which is a lot less than probable cause.
I will return to Cornyn and Mruphy but first:
For the five hundred and thirty seventh time: A semi automatic is not - IS NOT - an assault rifle. If you and I were to go hunting for an elk to load our freezer - you might choose a beautifully wood stocked Remington 750 - a semi-automatic. Maybe you would choose it chambered for a .308 or a 30-06. Maybe you would choose to purchase a magazine that holds ten cartridges. The point?
If you are going hunting, the Remington 750 or any other semi-automatic, such as an AR-15, suitably chambered for the game you are after, is perfect. You will want to have a real assault rifle - A FULLY AUTOMATIC - if going into battle against an armed enemy.
When I read the words, "assault rifle," I immediately ask if the writer's argument is based upon fact or hyperbole or ignorance. Most often, by a huge margin, the writer is either ignorant or disingenuous.
But forget all of that.
The most important weapon is the one you are carrying when confronted by a person who is murdering the people about you and you are his next intended victim. There are among the survivors of Orlando, those that wish they had carried their pistol with them early Sunday morning. The outcome could have been completely different.
YES, OF COURSE, place restrictions on suspects such as those on no fly lists. It they attempt to purchase a weapon, investigate them. I think Cornyn's three day period is far too short. A month at the outside limit seems suitable.
For the five hundred and thirty seventh time: A semi automatic is not - IS NOT - an assault rifle. If you and I were to go hunting for an elk to load our freezer - you might choose a beautifully wood stocked Remington 750 - a semi-automatic. Maybe you would choose it chambered for a .308 or a 30-06. Maybe you would choose to purchase a magazine that holds ten cartridges. The point?
If you are going hunting, the Remington 750 or any other semi-automatic, such as an AR-15, suitably chambered for the game you are after, is perfect. You will want to have a real assault rifle - A FULLY AUTOMATIC - if going into battle against an armed enemy.
When I read the words, "assault rifle," I immediately ask if the writer's argument is based upon fact or hyperbole or ignorance. Most often, by a huge margin, the writer is either ignorant or disingenuous.
But forget all of that.
The most important weapon is the one you are carrying when confronted by a person who is murdering the people about you and you are his next intended victim. There are among the survivors of Orlando, those that wish they had carried their pistol with them early Sunday morning. The outcome could have been completely different.
YES, OF COURSE, place restrictions on suspects such as those on no fly lists. It they attempt to purchase a weapon, investigate them. I think Cornyn's three day period is far too short. A month at the outside limit seems suitable.
6
The AR-15/M-16 is an assault rifle. It was designed for war, manufactured for combat, and has for several years now been marketed to civilians as an assault weapon. Regardless of whether you think it's suitable for hunting game animals, its reason for being is to quickly kill large numbers of humans.
The distinction between full and semi-auto is virtually meaningless. The military commonly uses its weaponry as semi-automatic weapons.
The distinction between full and semi-auto is virtually meaningless. The military commonly uses its weaponry as semi-automatic weapons.
I can tell you have not yet read Ann Coulter's insightful book, "How to Talk to a Liberal." It's got as much good advice as the Farmer's Almanac.
4
"its reason for being is to quickly kill large numbers of humans."
-- Then prove it. Fire up the ACLU. But SCOTUS says otherwise.
* * *
"The distinction between full and semi-auto is virtually meaningless"
-- No it's not. It means you can only buy a semi-auto gun, as the Liberals demanded.
-- Then prove it. Fire up the ACLU. But SCOTUS says otherwise.
* * *
"The distinction between full and semi-auto is virtually meaningless"
-- No it's not. It means you can only buy a semi-auto gun, as the Liberals demanded.
4
Donald Trump defies establishment politics to reach bipartisan compromise on guns.
Obama liberals outraged.
Obama liberals outraged.
5
Right winger still doesn't understand anything believes he knows everything.
6
Will terrorists turn to explosives when they can't find the gun to do the job? Should we all carry explosives? Is that the new Social Contract?
3
Las time I checked, about 3 years ago, they still sold stun guns here, with proper ID, for about $75.00. A top seller.
Relax Obama liberals.
Trump will get this deal done for America and you all can go back to calling him racist, sexist, anti-Nabisco cookie-ist in a few days.
Trump will get this deal done for America and you all can go back to calling him racist, sexist, anti-Nabisco cookie-ist in a few days.
4
I'm not an Obama liberal but an intelligent moderate who can see how Drumpf plays people like you for a sucker.
8
You mean the same way Barack Obama has for 8 years.
And what's intelligent about living in a free country unwilling or intellectually unable to have an actual political ideology?
You're a moderate what?
And what's intelligent about living in a free country unwilling or intellectually unable to have an actual political ideology?
You're a moderate what?
4
I posted a reply to someone listed as MEI MEI from "China" where the fact that you can't get the NYTimes online and the colloquial use of English indicated that it was an NRA (Me Me) American supporter should have thrown their whole argument out. The comment never appeared. All of my other comments did appear.
1
Gunmudder
Probably a commie plot.
I just cant tell you which commie is responsible as this forum is
L O A D E D! with 'em
Cheers
Probably a commie plot.
I just cant tell you which commie is responsible as this forum is
L O A D E D! with 'em
Cheers
1
Do you all not understand that the NRA and Republicans just want "due process" for those put on the list!!!!!......Right now there are more than 800,000 names on the list for God's sake......If you just give the government the freedom to add anyone to the list without due process to get off the list they can add ANYONE's name and deny their basic rights!!!!.......NONE of us want bad people to have guns and there are laws on the books that will stop this, but, if you just let the government do whatever they want and have no process to fix it then I would even vote NO on the bill!!! What would happen if YOUR rights were just taken away "by mistake" and there was no way to fix it in a timely manner??? Would you just shrug your shoulders and say "well it's for the best I guess".
4
Are you okay, David? You sound upset.
No, the Republicans don't just want due process. They want due process "in three days," which is impossible with "800,000 names. Please inform yourself. The Republicans are trying to kill the bill because they've taken millions from the NRA and they are beholden to them. Here's the list of senators who have taken money:
http://reverbpress.com/politics/nra-pays-senators-millions/
No, the Republicans don't just want due process. They want due process "in three days," which is impossible with "800,000 names. Please inform yourself. The Republicans are trying to kill the bill because they've taken millions from the NRA and they are beholden to them. Here's the list of senators who have taken money:
http://reverbpress.com/politics/nra-pays-senators-millions/
3
How many Superdelegates does the NRA have?
2
OK! So terrorists or those on the watchlist will be barred from buying arms. But how can you definitely know someone is a terrorist or never have been on a watchlist? The only solution is to ban all military style guns and have a very rigid, exhaustive screening of people who apply for a license for gun ownership. Bottom line ban all weapons, weapons of real mass destruction that they are. Retire the 2nd Amendment because it's purpose as our forefathers envisioned has become moot. It is way past time to end these massacres of innocents. More power to Senator Christopher Murphy from Connecticut. I do not know how Republicans can live themselves. They and the NRA have blood on their hands.
2
We don't know from this story if The Donald has veered from anything. He could be in line with the GOP/NRA "probable cause" proposal. And the posturing doesn't stop with The Donald. Assault type weapons must be outlawed. Period. Sales of ammunition in large quantities must be brought under control like certain classes of drugs. To link mass killings to terrorism is meaningless when the only difference between a mass murderer and a domestic terrorist is whether or not the perpetrator expressed affinity with or allegiance to a terrorist cause or entity. Was the gator who took that child an evil gator or an Isis gator?
1
The ironic thing is plenty of democrats possess firearms because they too do not have confidence in the current administration to protect them.
3
David Geffen's fear of assault was so great that he fenced off the public access path that ran alongside his Malibu manse from PCH to the beach, per Calif. public access laws. He was sued, and forced to tolerate the local yobs again. David, the "get off my lawn!" egalitarian.
2
Call it a 'mass shooting fueled by Islamic ideas or 'extremist islamist terrorism (extreme of what norm)' , what difference does it make? It now seems that the Orlando shooter was gay & decided to make it right with god by killing 49 people who were in no way responsible for his sexual orientation or the religiously inspired guilt he felt because of it. We need to face the fact that Islam is, today, a dangerous ideology. I don't know what we can or should do about that. I do know that our political leaders are not helping us, by denying that fact, & instead decrying the demonization of a billion people. I don't think I'm demonizing them when I require that they respect women, gays, & the right of all of us to freedom of speech and of expression, & stop responding to speech & expression that they disapprove of with violence. Common sense dictates that we ban assault rifles, not merely try to prevent those on a 'terrorist watch list' from possessing them. & of course we'll be lucky if it becomes illegal for convicted murderers to be prevented from owning them
5
Apparently for the IRA, there is no legitimate reason to restrict weapon sales. Using their absurd absolute demand for no restrictions, anyone would have a 2nd amendment right to nuclear and chemical weapons as long as it came from a device that mimicked a gun.
For those who think Donald can "negotiate" this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for a good sale price.
For those who think Donald can "negotiate" this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for a good sale price.
3
“I will be meeting with the N.R.A., who has endorsed me, about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no-fly list, to buy guns,”
Yep... he has to ask permission from the NRA.
Yep... he has to ask permission from the NRA.
5
Two miserable Americans in the same room, alone! If Donald wants big bucks from the NRA, he'd better tell Wayne in the meeting that he's lying in public to curry favor, then lie again about his position when he comes out so as not to lose the votes of NRA members. NRA money trumps the conscience of virtually all GOP members of Congress, NRA money trumps reason, let's see if the NRA trumps Trump.
3
Poor Donald said, "that more gun ownership was the answer, not less...the carnage could have been minimized 'if some of those great people that were in that club that night had guns strapped to their waist or strapped to their ankle....'"
Hello, Donald! Normal people don't want to carry guns when they go out in public. They don't want to go out dancing and carry a gun. What a moron!
Hello, Donald! Normal people don't want to carry guns when they go out in public. They don't want to go out dancing and carry a gun. What a moron!
9
Donald J. Trump of The Common Sense Party, a mélange of voters, gig-oriented, not bound by the old certainties. The UnSilent Majority. In that, Donald and Bernie are kindred spirits, one flapping his lips, the other flapping his arms. Bernie was briefly bruited as Donalds's VP, but rejected as "too New Yorky" a ticket, more than Trump & VP Christie, even. WWBD? He can't be submissive to Der Komissar w/o disgracing Socialism itself. Trump's poll numbers are down from misplaced anger at Orlando massacre, but no one can discount his warnings about Immigration (yes, I know this 1 Muslim was home-grown) and the Wall. Several weeks ago 2 or 3 tunnels were found near San Diego Co. border, with rails & electric, and large enough for weapons & chemicals, or drugs, whatever has been ordered by the Hispanic-American cartel members. You can tunnel beneath a fence, but not under the foundation of a Wall, with sensors.
2
So how do you propose securing our thousands of miles of coastline?
Since hyperbole is Trump's stock-in-trade, maybe Hillary should give him a taste of his own medicine. She should say:
"Crooked Donald Trump wants to abolish the Second Amendment. He wants to totally abolish it; repeal every single word."
"Crooked Donald Trump wants to take your guns away, all of your guns, and he wants to take the bullets away."
"Crooked Donald Trump wants to abolish the Second Amendment. He wants to totally abolish it; repeal every single word."
"Crooked Donald Trump wants to take your guns away, all of your guns, and he wants to take the bullets away."
5
It's a little alarming the number of commenters who are taking Trump's statements about gun control at face value. When has he ever, ever, been truthful or straightforward (see various fact checkers for his almost perfect record on lying or gross distortion of issues). Besides the obvious problem of Trump inviting the NRA to write policy, some are allowing themselves to be suckered in by a facile promise that in this case appeals to the left--make no mistake, this is what a demagogue does.
9
On hot button issues, Trump innovates. He's entrepreneurial, and a pragmatist. He left the Democrats slack-jawed when he complimented Planned Parenthood. He's flexible, where Hillary is rigid, tethered to "the base" and its clapped-out animosities. Wayne LaPierre is a reasonable man, or else I'd be concerned for my youngest sister Stacey & fam, his neighbors for 20 years now. Wayne is steely, Donald is volcanic. Donald's punching up. He'll wrangle some concessions from Wayne, who can spin it as a Virtue, though born of Necessity.
3
Well now we know who calls the shots. Not the Congress, not the Senate. Not the President. Not the courts. Certainly not the voters. Even Donald Trump goes on beaded knee to the Almighty NRA to ask if maybe we could stop terrorists from getting guns. The NRA is now the boss of us.
6
The Obama Administration is spending billions on stopping terrorism in this country all the while not knowing who is even in this country with almost one-half million overstaying their visas and the borders wide open. Really gun control isn't the crucial issue; terrorists and criminals will get weapons. If politicians are afraid to know and control who is in this country we will never be safe. If they continue to allow people to immigrate without knowing who they are we won't be safe. Many terrorists parents came here and they did not assimilate so they never felt like they were Americans first. Their kids didn't either. Trump proposes many common sense ideas that most people can agree with. The NRA agrees that people on the terrorist watch list should be investigated before being allowed to buy a gun. Why not pass that law as a first step instead of making this political?
2
This is a brilliant political move by Donald Trump, and another end-around of the establishment news media and it's Wile E. Coyote attempts to end the Trump campaign over the last 12 months.
Beep Beep.
Beep Beep.
4
Delusional. He's falling like a rock in the polls who knows what he believes besides The Cult of Donald. He's a fascist who will do anything to further his Cult of Personality. "Brilliant" no, fascist, yes.
4
It's allus good to scan through some of the sillier comments here, as it saves me having to check out Breitbart and the Blaze and Rush to see what the party line is today.
Apparently, the Prez won't meet with the NRA and all the assault weapons are made in Mexico, or would be if we lived in a different dimension or something.
Oh, and here's the NRA's very own Chris Cox, yelling about how nah, they ain't innarested in meeting with the President, that big commie.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2016/01/07/nra-top-lobbyist-on-declining-t...
Apparently, the Prez won't meet with the NRA and all the assault weapons are made in Mexico, or would be if we lived in a different dimension or something.
Oh, and here's the NRA's very own Chris Cox, yelling about how nah, they ain't innarested in meeting with the President, that big commie.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2016/01/07/nra-top-lobbyist-on-declining-t...
1
GOP & NRA, oh boo hoo hoo, even Betty Boop never squirted tears so copiously as the Democrats, who gelded themselves by letting the GOP take Congress in 2010, a rout, and letting the Senate go GOP in 2014, an even larger rout, and by then the GOP also had 37 governors and many legislatures, too. Democrat turnout in Nov. 2012 = 42%.
Want to change things, Democrats? Try capitalizing upon the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, it's only been here since 1965, Obama van Winkle.
Want to change things, Democrats? Try capitalizing upon the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, it's only been here since 1965, Obama van Winkle.
2
Another stunt by Trump to dominate news cycle. So what is new.
4
I find it mind-boggling that an UNELECTED private citizen thinks so highly of himself and his business acumen that he's consulting with a PRIVATE BUSINESS to determine such important PUBLIC policy.
The comments just write themselves...
The comments just write themselves...
6
Why does this article make it appear that the Donald is doing something wrong? He's criticized if he does and he's criticized if he doesn't. Once again this is dishonest and misleading reporting that further underscores the unreliability of what was once a solid, reliable news source. He is seeking a way to prevent potential terrorists from obtaining assault weapons and you are reporting on it has if he has gone and broken his word. There are millions of Trump supporters who support the second amendment who actually see this as a reasonable and practical solution but this news source sees it as a problem.
I can't help but wonder if this sort of flagrant bias against Trump won't backfire. This sort of mean spirited and unfair reporting is generating alot of ill will among voters who might not otherwise vote for Trump but may be motivated to out of resentment for the type of coverage the candidate has been receiving from this and other long established news sources. You may not realize it but you are insulting the intelligence of millions of independent voters who are able to see through the bias. Or maybe you do, but you just don't care.
I can't help but wonder if this sort of flagrant bias against Trump won't backfire. This sort of mean spirited and unfair reporting is generating alot of ill will among voters who might not otherwise vote for Trump but may be motivated to out of resentment for the type of coverage the candidate has been receiving from this and other long established news sources. You may not realize it but you are insulting the intelligence of millions of independent voters who are able to see through the bias. Or maybe you do, but you just don't care.
3
@Peter
"Why does this article make it appear that the Donald is doing something wrong?"
Leftist fear...
"Why does this article make it appear that the Donald is doing something wrong?"
Leftist fear...
2
The only fear is if the market for guns goes underground , away from the radar screen of the law, then the situation could further deteriorate. Again, would the law be permitted to confiscate all the guns already owned by individuals ? Otherwise some may be left with guns and others will become easy victims of the existing gun owners. That is not equality. This is not anything against the gun control laws but the administration should be aware of all these hiccups to implementing any reform. Remember the prohibition law and its terrible consequences in the 1930s?
3
I just received a phone call from a terrorist organization that wants to make sure that terrorists in the USA can buy all the guns they want to. The call was quite terrifying to me. I am really worried now that terrorists can reach into my own home and terrorize me with such robo-calls. At least they left their name: National Rifle Association.
9
He has to get their permission before he does something?
8
For goodness sake we banned lawn darts because they were dangerous!
8
These comments miss the point entirely.
1
Funniest thing I've read on these comments in a long time. I need some of that Green Mountain air. I miss it.
Bill
Bill
1
How about meeting with Congress, or better yet, the 90% of the American populace who support some measure of gun control?
Instead he meets with the NRA, to do what, kiss its hand and ask for its blessing?
If this doesn't speak squarely to the special interest corruption of politics problem in America, I don't know what could.
Instead he meets with the NRA, to do what, kiss its hand and ask for its blessing?
If this doesn't speak squarely to the special interest corruption of politics problem in America, I don't know what could.
8
Because Trump, unlike Obama knows how to get things done.
Why wade into the establishment cesspool of partisan politics Obama's created?
Why wade into the establishment cesspool of partisan politics Obama's created?
2
DCB, Trump doesn't know how to get things done. His Trump U. was a scam built on lies. His businesses mostly fail. He's all about glitz and self-promotion, he lies all the time, and nothing he's put forth as a policy has any chance of working in the real world. Also he refuses to listen to experts and has little clue about the world generally.
I wonder if it's possible for you to stop spouting silly defenses of this ignorant fascist, and just relax for awhile? If he's really your chosen fuehrer then his reign is assured, right, so you can calm down and get back to barristering.
I wonder if it's possible for you to stop spouting silly defenses of this ignorant fascist, and just relax for awhile? If he's really your chosen fuehrer then his reign is assured, right, so you can calm down and get back to barristering.
2
Clinton is like the feckless mayor, and Trump is like Dirty Harry. He’ll clean up Washington—and don’t ask too many questions about how he does it.
5
Hey GOP establishment: you really think you'll be able to keep this guy under control? He doesn't car what you think and you can't even say his name in public.
7
Hey Clintonista: you really think we cannot keep Donald under control better than you kept impeached Bill Clinton under control? How novel.
2
NRA worries as to "due process", as do I. But let's start with the due process right to bring a lawsuit against gun manufactuers. NRA isn't nearly as worried about those due process rights. What they do believe is that every time there is a mass murder or someone talks common sense gun safety, they do very well. The Mateen's and Lanza's of the world do them a great favor. Mr. Murphy's filibuster will probably add a point or two to sales.
6
Mrs. Lanza bought the gun(s), and was an NRA or NRA-type enthusiast, as are 1000s of others in the Connecticut River valley, birthplace of America's gun industry. In fact, with Avco Lycoming and Sikorsky, and New London, you could say the Nutmeg State loves the military-industrial complex; it protects them while shopping at Stu Leonard's, darling.
This will be the only person whho will DARE veer fom the elites' party line this year. The cool, smooth socialist in the White House or Hillary the Coronated will never so much as make a peep differing from progressive political correctness, which is why failure dogs them like beggar lice.
7
READERS, please notice one thing between Barack Obama and Don Trump)"
Obama glides in over a period of days and gets his arms around these poor, suffering survivors. They wind up loving him.
This is not something Mr. Trump can learn. Nor can Hillary Clinton. Maybe you can. The Colonel cannot say, but The Colonel is knowing this feeling for people in grief is one of the features that won Barack the presidency.
If Barack Obama were coming to the end of his term in Latin America, he would be reelected (perhaps, even if he was a thief). -The Colonel
Obama glides in over a period of days and gets his arms around these poor, suffering survivors. They wind up loving him.
This is not something Mr. Trump can learn. Nor can Hillary Clinton. Maybe you can. The Colonel cannot say, but The Colonel is knowing this feeling for people in grief is one of the features that won Barack the presidency.
If Barack Obama were coming to the end of his term in Latin America, he would be reelected (perhaps, even if he was a thief). -The Colonel
I agree with most of what you say, but you are absolutely wrong about Hillary Clinton. She does not need to "learn" that kind of empathy. She already has it.
1
R U sitting down? On the evening of the Newtown massacre, despite objections about optics, Obama flew away to a $ fund-raiser $. Maintaining the record he set in his first term for spending more time in office at fund-raisers than did - still sitting down? - Clinton and Bush respectively in their first terms.
Case closed.
Case closed.
2
I failed to note what was so egregious --- Obama did more fund raising than Clinton and Bush COMBINED. A record-setting amount of time away from the office, an avatar of Little Marco.
2
There is so much wrong with Trump's reaction, not the least of which is his announcing something on Twitter about gun control that we are left struggling to comprehend the specifics of. Twitter! And respected news organizations such as the NYT are are accepting a puerile Tweet as a substantial policy proposal, headlining that it "veers" from GOP and NRA.
Why are news and opinion writers not pointing out that Trump is going to the NRA instead of to the GOP Congressional leaders of his own party, to lead a push for changes? He seems to be badly admitting that it will be the NRA pulling the strings.
And so much for Trump's claims he will not deal with lobbyists.
Why are news and opinion writers not pointing out that Trump is going to the NRA instead of to the GOP Congressional leaders of his own party, to lead a push for changes? He seems to be badly admitting that it will be the NRA pulling the strings.
And so much for Trump's claims he will not deal with lobbyists.
11
The NRA owns the GOP congressional leaders. He could just be cutting out the middle man.
2
Do we the public or even the lawmakers involved with this bill even know what they are talking about? The "No Fly" list??? Who and how do you get on that, how do you get off that?? Do you know? I do not know. But we are going to make law on that basis?? Stop chewing around the edges. It is common sense that every gun buyer should have a background check and to be honest, that background check should be repeated every five years or so. Things change people change - for the better or worse. Give honest law abiding citizens the ungrudging right to own firearms - they are your friends and allies, and maybe we can all agree (well not all) that it is in our universal common good to take real steps to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, terrorists and politicians.
7
You write, "Give honest law abiding citizens the ungrudging right to own firearms ." Who's going to determine whether someone is honest enough to buy a gun? The gun seller? The NRA? The buyer?
We can all stand to learn more and know more about terror watch lists, no fly lists, and what gets a person on and off such a list. Knowledge can only be empowering. But once you know that, once you trust that, someone is not safe to fly or is under credible suspicion or terror, and you deem that process fair, it is only logical that that person should not be allowed to buy or be in possession of any fire-arms. That's common sense. An honest law abiding gun owner would not be threatened by such a law but only strengthened by not getting lumped in to the same group that commits mass murder. And of course it's important to know and monitor that just because you don't agree with your government, you can still own a gun. That should never constitute being put on a terror watch list. I want to hear from responsible gun owners who are willing to ally with people who want more gun control to come up with fair, honest, sensible laws that protect the rights of the gun owners and the victims an public.
1
Hahaha...Donald gets to show us all how his negotiations skills deal with another odious person like LaPierre who has todate seems capable of selling his mother rather than changing any stance even hinting at gun control. Is Trump trying to dilute/abandon the 2nd Amendment (as he says Hilary wants to do)? Cant make this stuff up.
11
I've met him a few times at my sister's family events, they're neighbors for 20 years now. He's like Clark Kent, mild-mannered, and for the American way. His wife is a better shot, I noticed on ESPN when they were on safari.
2
This disagreement between Trumps latest stated position of gun control and the NRA's continued terrorist helping dogma is a real test of Trump's reputation as a deal maker and a maverick who is not beholden to special interests. He has actually painted himself into a corner from which he is unlikely to escape. To come out of this ok he must convince the NRA to support his desire to prevent those on the terrorist watch list from purchasing a gun. If he doesn't his reputation as a deal maker will take a serious blow. If he doesn't and then caves to the NRA he can't claim that he isn't influenced by special interests. None of this will matter to his die hard supporters of course, but it should matter to independent voters. Trump has accidentally put himself in the position to be proven a fraud.
9
Good point.
Ha! It would break no ice if Trump is exposed as a fraud, but he's too crafty to be nailed by this particular issue. His tweet said "I will be meeting" and those words he'll point to when people accuse him of not going through with the motions. We all know he says more than what he means - half of what comes out of his mouth is bluster. No one is actually dumb enough to believe that this is anything more than a gesture, the latest in his vague implications that he's willing to entertain positions unorthodox for a Republican, even on guns.
On the other hand, this may have been crippling to his campaign if he were running against anyone other than old Hillary who isn't exactly the most consistent candidate either.
On the other hand, this may have been crippling to his campaign if he were running against anyone other than old Hillary who isn't exactly the most consistent candidate either.
Seeing that the tide of public opinion is for this, wouldn't it be strange if the NRA came to its senses and agreed it was the tight thing to do. The unfortunate outcome is that it would give a boost to Trump's claim that he is the ultimate deal maker.
2
You go first: make Planned Parenthood come to its senses, and the GOP will be shamed into making the NRA do the same. Get back to us asap.
2
One issue with gun control generally is the refusal to fund reasonable activities such as automating generation and access to the lists of those who should not own firearms. Also refusing funding for research on firearms by the CDC and other government agencies.
Until congress funds the means to actually do anything constructive in 72 hours for a security check, legislation with the loophole that an incomplete check is an automatic pass is passing a lie.
Republicans need to show us the money before we should show them anything but contempt for their devious nonsense on even the minimal gun control proposals they "support" so far.
Funding and appropriate time limits should also be included on terrorist watch list challenges and no-fly list challenges. I still remember the delight many Republicans expressed when Senator Edward Kennedy was "mistaken" for someone on the no-fly list several times. While this did not prevent an iconic millionaire US Senator from actually boarding an aircraft, it did take 5 weeks or so before he was "cleared". One can only imagine the time and funds it would take an ordinary citizen to be "cleared".
Without funding, a rapid and accurate ability to allow or prohibit a firearms transaction is not possible. Gun owners should welcome such a process (I would favor one that allowed a licensed gun dealer to get instant approval for most purchasers and most purchases, will still providing strong verification.)
Until congress funds the means to actually do anything constructive in 72 hours for a security check, legislation with the loophole that an incomplete check is an automatic pass is passing a lie.
Republicans need to show us the money before we should show them anything but contempt for their devious nonsense on even the minimal gun control proposals they "support" so far.
Funding and appropriate time limits should also be included on terrorist watch list challenges and no-fly list challenges. I still remember the delight many Republicans expressed when Senator Edward Kennedy was "mistaken" for someone on the no-fly list several times. While this did not prevent an iconic millionaire US Senator from actually boarding an aircraft, it did take 5 weeks or so before he was "cleared". One can only imagine the time and funds it would take an ordinary citizen to be "cleared".
Without funding, a rapid and accurate ability to allow or prohibit a firearms transaction is not possible. Gun owners should welcome such a process (I would favor one that allowed a licensed gun dealer to get instant approval for most purchasers and most purchases, will still providing strong verification.)
reminds me of McCain's attempt to get in the middle of the banking crisis - as a savior. the problem with this for trump is that he walks out with nothing. no art of the deal here
2
You don't know Trump very well.
@davej
At least he's trying. Teddy Roosevelt would have appreciated that. "It is not the critic who counts ...The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..."
At least he's trying. Teddy Roosevelt would have appreciated that. "It is not the critic who counts ...The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..."
2
While I'm not a supporter, this is an example of is refreshing about Trump's campaign. I'd say the same thing about Bernie Sanders' campaign, whose general support for gun ownership rights is at odds with the expected Democrat position. Yet the establishment of both parties rejects both of these candidate (the Republicans, less successfully).
The Electorate has become so divided and entrenched that we look at the policies of our parties and believe we see a coherent worldview when what we are actually seeing is a mismatched set of priories, driven by special interests, money and politicking.
The Electorate has become so divided and entrenched that we look at the policies of our parties and believe we see a coherent worldview when what we are actually seeing is a mismatched set of priories, driven by special interests, money and politicking.
4
Why do we not concentrate on the words "Well REGULATED militia" !
Where are the regulations about gun ownership ?
Its that simple.
Where are the regulations about gun ownership ?
Its that simple.
14
Because it's an utterly useless argument and distraction. Go look up the eighteenth century usage of "well regulated", I'll wait.
2
So simple even a cave man would be familiar with New York's Sullivan Laws, or repressive laws in Chicago, Boston, San Francisco that US Courts deemed "an infringement." Like having only 1 abortion clinic every 200 miles in Texas - an infringement. A friend got an extra 5 yrs in NV prison for using a gun to do a crime; many states have mandatory minimums like that.
3
@quandary
How well did those restrictive gun laws work in San Bernardino?
Did you know it was illegal to bring a gun into that Conference Center.
Do you know that in SF your chance of getting a concealed carry license is probably worse than your odds of winning the lottery?
Except for Dianne Feinstein, she got one - no problem for her - she's special.
Did you happen to see the guy the TV Station interviewed after San Bernardino tragedy?
He was apparently locked in the Bathroom and either Mr or Mrs Whackado tried to get in.
The guy was thinking about nothing else but how he wished he had a gun.
Thanks to Dianne Feinstein and Gavin Newsom and Kamila Harris and the rest of the Left Wing Gun Grabbers no one in that room had a means or capability to stop the "Happy Couple"
I wonder if I could ask you a question "Quandary"
Do you think that guy in that Bathroom in San Bernardino was thinking only people in the "militia" should be allowed to have a firearm for self defense?
How well did those restrictive gun laws work in San Bernardino?
Did you know it was illegal to bring a gun into that Conference Center.
Do you know that in SF your chance of getting a concealed carry license is probably worse than your odds of winning the lottery?
Except for Dianne Feinstein, she got one - no problem for her - she's special.
Did you happen to see the guy the TV Station interviewed after San Bernardino tragedy?
He was apparently locked in the Bathroom and either Mr or Mrs Whackado tried to get in.
The guy was thinking about nothing else but how he wished he had a gun.
Thanks to Dianne Feinstein and Gavin Newsom and Kamila Harris and the rest of the Left Wing Gun Grabbers no one in that room had a means or capability to stop the "Happy Couple"
I wonder if I could ask you a question "Quandary"
Do you think that guy in that Bathroom in San Bernardino was thinking only people in the "militia" should be allowed to have a firearm for self defense?
5
why a muslim should own a gun in US?
1
For protection like everyone else claims?
Whoah there Bob, if you're saying we should deny anyone the right to own a gun due to their religion alone, then the first religion banned from gun ownership would have to be Christianity. Christians have carried out approximately 99% of the gun homicides in the country, and so if we outlaw any group by their religion, it'd have to be Christians.
2
because Muslims are Americans, and Americans can own guns
3
In an era when we have given up so many rights in the name of safety and grossly abused the so-called 'Patriot Act,' it's astounding to me that anyone could possibly object to restricting gun purchases for anyone under suspicion for terrorist connections. It's a start, but doesn't go far enough. There is no need for anyone to own military weapons, and nothing in the Constitution indicates otherwise. Even more disturbing to me is the idea that a Presidential candidate would talk about meeting with the NRA to 'discuss' what our national policies should be. Talk about proving the point that the gun lobby writes the laws in this country. Trump is just another sellout, even if it's pushing for something that has been demanded by the majority in this country for years. He wants that NRA endorsement and he NEEDS that NRA money.
7
The Republican Party is the political wing of the NRA.
Always remember that, Mr. Trump.
Always remember that, Mr. Trump.
12
For the "revolutionary" Democrats, BLM is the armorer, Earth First! the bomb makers, and Occupy the hooligans. Egged on by Bernie to make riots at Dona'ds campaign rallies. Bernie Mussolini! The Democrats chant for cops to be killed in their NYC parade, and voila! 2 NYPD (minorities, to boot) are assassinated while parked in the patrol car. Did you cheer, Malcom? Like the Muslims of Jersey City cheered?, according to NY media reports.
2
So Donald Trump, after declaring himself to be the only candidate who isn't in the pockets of special interests, goes straight to the gun manufacturers' lobby to "negotiate" his position du jour. Of course, the NRA is an organization that only purports to represent responsible gun owners, when poll information from its own membership indicates that they, along with 80% of the country support universal background checks and other common sense measures. The Republicans in Congress, who exist only to serve the gun lobby and other special interest groups are completely exposed with their presumptive nominee's brazen pandering. At the same time, Trump is out on the campaign trail stoking hysteria with the complete falsehood that Hillary Clinton, a candidate who has formulated a sensible gun control plan, wants to revoke the Second Amendment. This is just the latest publicity stunt from a candidate who jumps from one media carnival ride to the next. What a disaster for Republicans. Poor Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are going to have to extend their "no comment on Donald Trump" policy well into November.
12
All comments beginning with "So Donald Trump..." are much too prolix, just stringing together headlines and tropes from the web, leapfrogging from one conclusory bromide to the next, as in a lily pond. "More matter, less art."
2
@Charles
They use a "paint by numbers" model. No facts or thought required...
They use a "paint by numbers" model. No facts or thought required...
1
Clearly you are the indefatigable Trump supporter or your on the pay roll of the orange savior. Better than the minimum wage?
1
Now that we know the guns Mateen purchased, the question is where did he get the money to buy them. These are very expensive guns. It seems odd that a guy working as a low level security guard with a wife and kid would spend over $2000 on two guns.
3
Most of them I see drive high-end imports, usually a Mercedes, as in the Middle East. Lots of Iranians, glossy and bejeweled.
1
He probably just put them on his credit card(s) knowing that he would never have to pay for them.
1
The fact that Democrats do not want to work with the presumptive nominee of the other party which has the majority, shows that they are simply using this bill as a political issue to trip their opponents. Would this bill have prevented a man like Mateen who was once under suspicion but not charged, from buying the AR-15?
4
Focusing on the gun control aspect exclusively is a feel-good, simplistic reaction to this tragedy.
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons - like the inconvenience of acquiring illegal drugs. We should make it inconvenient for criminals to get drugs and guns, but recognize that it will do little to assuage the problem.
States that make it difficult to buy guns have criminals bringing in guns from other states. The country as a whole, which has made many drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico next door. That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border security with Mexico. Best investment ever. Otherwise we will simply be shifting gun manufacturing to Mexico.
Additionally, the overwhelming majority of victims of homicidal (not suicidal) gun violence in America are inner-city minorities. Liberals allege to be concerned with the struggles of minorities. The wall will reduce illegal drugs (and future illegal assault weapons) and will benefit inner-city minorities in a historic way. I can not understand why Republicans do not support an assault weapon ban. I also do not understand why Democrats are not the ones clamoring for a much stronger border with Mexico to help our inner-cities.
And don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons - like the inconvenience of acquiring illegal drugs. We should make it inconvenient for criminals to get drugs and guns, but recognize that it will do little to assuage the problem.
States that make it difficult to buy guns have criminals bringing in guns from other states. The country as a whole, which has made many drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico next door. That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border security with Mexico. Best investment ever. Otherwise we will simply be shifting gun manufacturing to Mexico.
Additionally, the overwhelming majority of victims of homicidal (not suicidal) gun violence in America are inner-city minorities. Liberals allege to be concerned with the struggles of minorities. The wall will reduce illegal drugs (and future illegal assault weapons) and will benefit inner-city minorities in a historic way. I can not understand why Republicans do not support an assault weapon ban. I also do not understand why Democrats are not the ones clamoring for a much stronger border with Mexico to help our inner-cities.
And don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
3
Who's in charge here? The NRA's response makes it sound like the NRA creates and blesses legislation and laws. The people and, yes, the government tell THEM what to do, not the other way around. What if the automotive industry said "no thanks" to a safety issue that made our highways more dangerous? This dance needs to end. No citizen needs the capability to shoot dozens of people within minutes - those weapons should only be accessible to the police and the military. As for Trump, he will emerge from this saying he's the only one who can make this "deal" but only if he's elected. He'll use it as a ransom chip. Don't buy it.
6
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
With the foundation of the established patriarchy showing signs of wear (not actually crumbling, yet) even the NRA can smell the broken wind of change wafting through their halls. Sensibility might have a chance for a while. Meanwhile, no amendments will be trounced. No guns are confiscated, no Sharia law instituted. The gun lobby appears to be faltering in its hard-line position, but this is just a head fake. They still win. More assault weapons are sold in the next month on the fear of restrictions than in the prior year.
But we don't care if they win. We just want the killing to stop.
With the foundation of the established patriarchy showing signs of wear (not actually crumbling, yet) even the NRA can smell the broken wind of change wafting through their halls. Sensibility might have a chance for a while. Meanwhile, no amendments will be trounced. No guns are confiscated, no Sharia law instituted. The gun lobby appears to be faltering in its hard-line position, but this is just a head fake. They still win. More assault weapons are sold in the next month on the fear of restrictions than in the prior year.
But we don't care if they win. We just want the killing to stop.
2
I can't stand this second amendment nostalgia anymore. If Americas founders would have lived today they would never ever included such paragraph. You blame Muslims who stick to ancient outdated sharia laws, but stick to a fundamental from 1785. A constitution which doesn't address today's realities must be changed - or it becomes fundamentalism.
8
If the government worshiping progressives want to deny guns to those on the no-fly list then the government should be responsible for the accuracy of this list. Anyone who is mistakenly put on this list should receive at least one million dollars tax free compensation plus legal fees from the government and the bureaucrat responsible for putting their name on the list should loose their job and pension and be ineligible for any further government employment. As the saying goes "expecting efficiency or accuracy from a bureaucracy is the definition of insanity".
1
The Constitution is not a sacred text divined from the heavens. It, like all other human documents needs to placed in the context of the time it was written and the realities of today. The 2nd amendment is one of those things. I wish the forefathers had specifically mentioned muskets.
4
Weapons of war for sale. A divestment movement, boycotts, and other forms of pressure on the manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of these war weapons should commence immediately.
4
Trump is doing nothing differently than what President Obama did before launching the Affordable Care Act. He made a deal with the pharmaceutical companies and other powerful industry players who would fight any healthcare reform that squeezed their profits. No point trying to get any law passed if it doesn't pass muster with those special interests who have Congress members on their payrolls. This is why Bernie Sanders' "ranted" about the necessity of getting big money out of the election and lawmaking process. And Bernie was called "unrealistic." The NRA is not just about Second Amendment rights, BTW but about protecting the profits of gun manufacturers and sellers.
3
It seems that Trump is taking more and more Progressive positions. Yet they still call for his persecution. Ironically the progressive proposals seek to punish those who have been found innocent of terrorist activity. Who is the terrorist here?
1
It’s a waste of time to try and negotiate with the NRA. Their bottom line is money, not the 2nd amendment. That part is what they feed their supporters so they line them up as a barrier.
But the NRA is not invincible. It’s power can be curtailed with organization and commitment from both aisles. The Democrat and Republican leadership OWE Americans bipartisanship on this one. And we owe that to one another. These are our communities and our kids under fire.
The Boston Globe has a good editorial on this.
MAKE IT STOP. http://apps.bostonglobe.com/graphics/2016/06/make-it-stop/
But the NRA is not invincible. It’s power can be curtailed with organization and commitment from both aisles. The Democrat and Republican leadership OWE Americans bipartisanship on this one. And we owe that to one another. These are our communities and our kids under fire.
The Boston Globe has a good editorial on this.
MAKE IT STOP. http://apps.bostonglobe.com/graphics/2016/06/make-it-stop/
11
The gun control debate will not be resolved because opposing factions fundamentally disagree on the Second Amendment's purpose. I lay out briefly my own view. For a democracy, the right to bear arms is structurally necessary. The Founders' intent in drafting the Constitution and establishing the federal government was to limit tyranny and abuse of power through checks and balances. The Second Amendment was intended as a check by the people against federal government overreach. The Second Amendment's primary purpose is not to protect the right to hunt, but to insure that the federal government cannot prevent its citizenry from standing up to government tyranny. Even now the world is rife with examples of tyrannical governments that run roughshod over the will of the people through brute military and/or police force. The Second Amendment is intended as a structural check against this type of abuse. The Founders believed strongly in the idea of government by, for and of the people and understood that any government that has the ability to infringe the right to bear arms is structurally flawed. This is why so many who share my view strongly oppose the right of the FBI, an arm of the Federal Government, to develop a list with no transparency and no due process, and to deny individuals on the list the right to bear arms. The potential for abuse is obvious. The failure by so many to understand or even acknowledge this viewpoint makes a meaningful debate virtually impossible.
4
I say you can have all the muskets you want! If you were the best there was at the time the second amendment was written, you could load, fire and reload three times in a minute. Do you really think the founding fathers could have envisioned the assault weapons of today. The 2nd amendment, as written, is vague to begin with. Probably intentionally. In any event, what of the phrase "well regulated militia" that the NRA just ignores. Every yahoo with an AR-15, to my way of thinking, does not constitute a well regulated militia.
Actually, the explicit purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that there was a good supply available of armed, trained men who could provide their own weapon and ammo and were capable of serving in a "well-regulated militia," either against raiders or against a foreign power.
You could look it up, rather than just making stuff up: Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton feared what they called "the tyranny of the majority," and never intended to simply pass out military weaponry hither and yon.
But prove me wrong: quote where they said that.
Oh, this also just in:
1. The Pilgrims were a buncha religious fanatics who came here to get away from a British government that didn't permit them to persecute others.
2. The Gadsden Flag? SYmbol of national unity, not some cockamamie version of states' rights.
You could look it up, rather than just making stuff up: Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton feared what they called "the tyranny of the majority," and never intended to simply pass out military weaponry hither and yon.
But prove me wrong: quote where they said that.
Oh, this also just in:
1. The Pilgrims were a buncha religious fanatics who came here to get away from a British government that didn't permit them to persecute others.
2. The Gadsden Flag? SYmbol of national unity, not some cockamamie version of states' rights.
"This is why so many who share my view strongly oppose the right of the FBI, an arm of the Federal Government, to develop a list with no transparency and no due process, and to deny individuals on the list the right to bear arms."
Look, JJ, I understand your argument and agree with much of what you say. But surely there must be a way for reasonable people, of differing views, to sit down and formulate an appropriate listing methodology that will pass Constitutional muster and provide adequate due process safeguards. The only thing that can prevent that from happening is unyielding "my way only" partisan intransigence by the right and the left... There has to be some give, and I say that as life long gun owner.
Look, JJ, I understand your argument and agree with much of what you say. But surely there must be a way for reasonable people, of differing views, to sit down and formulate an appropriate listing methodology that will pass Constitutional muster and provide adequate due process safeguards. The only thing that can prevent that from happening is unyielding "my way only" partisan intransigence by the right and the left... There has to be some give, and I say that as life long gun owner.
1
This candidate is a fraud or should I say this person is a fraudulent candidate. He has nothing to offer except shooting from the hip and dribbling from the mouth his toxic slim. Am I supposed to be impressed and comforted that he is "taking on" the NRA? Please spare me the newsprint.
Next thing we know, you'll be telling us he is a "maverick" in the "spirit of John McCain" or some such garbage.
"If I only had a brain" should be his campaign theme song. Although please forgive me. I don't intend to disparage The Tin Man! He had class and qualities! This guy, as they say in New York, is a bum. Next up, Make America Armed!
Next thing we know, you'll be telling us he is a "maverick" in the "spirit of John McCain" or some such garbage.
"If I only had a brain" should be his campaign theme song. Although please forgive me. I don't intend to disparage The Tin Man! He had class and qualities! This guy, as they say in New York, is a bum. Next up, Make America Armed!
3
Make up your mind, city by the bay: Do you want the NRA to make concessions, or not? Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
2
Man oh Man....the last thing Mrs. Clinton needs is for the Trumpster in the Dumpster to move the unmovable NRA off its hard bitten position on who may own a gun - which is (unequivocally) everyone. We hardly need him to get credit for that sort of coup.
2
Not to worry.
1
I wouldn't worry: given his history of being a lousy bargainer, and the NRA's history of being nuts, the most that'll happen is that Trump'll just tell some whopping lie, then move on the the next vicious little set of dimbulb insults.
1
"We hardly need him to get credit for that sort of coup."
No need to wonder about your priorities, Gil. Party first. Gun control? Not so much, unless the Left gets credit...
No need to wonder about your priorities, Gil. Party first. Gun control? Not so much, unless the Left gets credit...
2
At 2:02 a.m. on a muggy night in central Florida, a gunman traded shots with an off-duty police officer, slipped into an Orlando nightclub with a rifle and killed at least 50 people in the most lethal mass shooting in U.S. history.
There was a trained good guy with a gun present. He was outgunned by the mass murderer. Is Donald Trump suggesting that we all should be participating in an endless arms race of gun fire-power, in order for the public to protect itself?
There was a trained good guy with a gun present. He was outgunned by the mass murderer. Is Donald Trump suggesting that we all should be participating in an endless arms race of gun fire-power, in order for the public to protect itself?
5
Trump has an opinion that makes some sense?
Sure, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day.
Sure, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day.
5
Unless you also vastly improve the border security with Mexico, focusing on the gun control aspect of this is a feel-good, simplistic, and mostly useless exercise.
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons. Like the inconvenience of acquiring illegal drugs - easy, with current border security.
States that make it difficult to buy guns just shift the import to other states. The country as a whole, which has made drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico.
Banning assault weapons without a wall will do little. Solved just enough to add an additional sparkle of meaningless feel-goodism to the "progressive" veneer, without risking the all important flow of future Dem voters from Mexico.
That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border security with Mexico. Best investment ever.
Don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons. Like the inconvenience of acquiring illegal drugs - easy, with current border security.
States that make it difficult to buy guns just shift the import to other states. The country as a whole, which has made drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico.
Banning assault weapons without a wall will do little. Solved just enough to add an additional sparkle of meaningless feel-goodism to the "progressive" veneer, without risking the all important flow of future Dem voters from Mexico.
That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border security with Mexico. Best investment ever.
Don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
3
Mind you, none of these shooters are buying their guns illegally, and the weapons aren't coming from Mexico.
What the hay, though: why not jist whomp up more of the xenophobia that whomped up McVeigh and Roor and Breivik? BOund to help.
What the hay, though: why not jist whomp up more of the xenophobia that whomped up McVeigh and Roor and Breivik? BOund to help.
It's always "THE MEXICANS" with you people, isn't it?
2
@Robert
You clearly didn't have enough time to read what I wrote about a two step process before the knee-jerk conservative bash reaction kicked in.
You clearly didn't have enough time to read what I wrote about a two step process before the knee-jerk conservative bash reaction kicked in.
2
It's it is a gutsy move....if he doesn't pull it off, then his " greatest deal maker " is blown to pieces.
He should prevail, or he looks like...
He should prevail, or he looks like...
1
Of course, if you really want him to change things or see him fail at it - you'll have to help him get into office.
2
Folks, it's the assault weapons stupid!
3
If Donald Trump can get "meaningful" gun control legislation passed before the presidential election I will vote for him.
1
15 Democratic senators voted against the assault weapons ban in 2013. Too bad the Democrats couldn't rein in their members at that time, as they have in the 2016 primaries. Let's not attack Republicans on this issue in lock-step manner. Anything less than a well-written law to ban these weapons is a failure of our representatives to fulfill their constitutional duties. Any Republican who wants to help get it done should be given the chance.
5
Focusing on the gun control aspect is a feel-good, simplistic, and mostly useless reaction to this tragedy, unless you add another factor.
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons. It will mean that they have to acquire an illegal substance instead of a legal one. Like the inconvenience of acquiring drugs. We should make it inconvenient for criminals to get drugs and guns, but recognize that it will do little to help.
States that make it difficult to buy guns just shift the import to other states. The country as a whole, which has made drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico.
That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border security with Mexico. Best investment ever.
The wall will reduce illegal drugs (and future illegal assault weapons) and will benefit minorities (who are the victims of homicide in much higher percentages than anyone else) in a historic way.
I do not understand why Democrats are not the ones clamoring for a much stronger border with Mexico to help minority communities they allege to advocate for. And don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
Are the likely Democrat votes of the children of illegal Mexican immigrants worth more than the blood spilled every day in South Side Chicago?
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons. It will mean that they have to acquire an illegal substance instead of a legal one. Like the inconvenience of acquiring drugs. We should make it inconvenient for criminals to get drugs and guns, but recognize that it will do little to help.
States that make it difficult to buy guns just shift the import to other states. The country as a whole, which has made drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico.
That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border security with Mexico. Best investment ever.
The wall will reduce illegal drugs (and future illegal assault weapons) and will benefit minorities (who are the victims of homicide in much higher percentages than anyone else) in a historic way.
I do not understand why Democrats are not the ones clamoring for a much stronger border with Mexico to help minority communities they allege to advocate for. And don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
Are the likely Democrat votes of the children of illegal Mexican immigrants worth more than the blood spilled every day in South Side Chicago?
5
It's weird how there's like eight comments here that say exactly, point for point, what you say here.
That the big thing on Rush today, or is this just another example of how rabidly politically-correct the Right really is these days?
That the big thing on Rush today, or is this just another example of how rabidly politically-correct the Right really is these days?
1
Democrats care nothing for poor Americans. They are pro-government, not pro-citizen. Which their policies fully bear out. Much of Trumps novelty and his air of scandal is that he advocates for the American underclass. Some of whom do not even have PhDs or ivy league degrees. Much to the horror of elites. What we have learned is, even most very rich people are considered part of the underclass, and are considered ineligible to speak publicly.
4
Sorry! But focusing on only the so-called "no fly list" is LAME. Spare me the "oh it's a first step" argument. What needs to happen is military style guns need to be BANNED for civilian use and possession of them a crime. But if you want to get to the root of the problem it's MONEY IN POLITICS - that allows the gun lobby to buy our government officials.
8
No wonder the FBI can't follow all the terrorists... they're too busy nailing politicians taking suitcases of cash from NRA lobbyists - same way they snagged John DeLorean. Right?
2
This proposal is a great start toward controlling the sale of guns to probable terrorists - but the government might find serious fault with it because the terror watch list almost certainly encompasses more individuals and groups than the ones Trump has in mind -- that is, foreigners or U.S. citizens acting on behalf of foreign Islamic terror organizations. Such a ban might entail a massive release of covertly held information over time.
It might be also that the identities of some of those individuals and groups who are on the terror list are also on another, more secret list - or lists - and those identities are government secrets and confined to use by federal, state and local authorities in detecting crimes and solving them.
It shouldn't be forgotten that the Orlando gunman claimed he had explosives with him - so the terror list ban would have to include also any materials remotely usable in making destructive devices or homemade firearms, not just finished manufactured products offered for retail sale. Casting such a wide net might annoy the business community. And it might have the effect of generating an underground black market in weaponry.
So criticism as to the practicality of this terror list ban from law enforcement and intelligence agencies and from commercial interests beyond just gun manufacturers or retailers might squelch it - but this policy proposal coming from a leading Republican, Donald Trump, is, to repeat, still an encouraging beginning.
It might be also that the identities of some of those individuals and groups who are on the terror list are also on another, more secret list - or lists - and those identities are government secrets and confined to use by federal, state and local authorities in detecting crimes and solving them.
It shouldn't be forgotten that the Orlando gunman claimed he had explosives with him - so the terror list ban would have to include also any materials remotely usable in making destructive devices or homemade firearms, not just finished manufactured products offered for retail sale. Casting such a wide net might annoy the business community. And it might have the effect of generating an underground black market in weaponry.
So criticism as to the practicality of this terror list ban from law enforcement and intelligence agencies and from commercial interests beyond just gun manufacturers or retailers might squelch it - but this policy proposal coming from a leading Republican, Donald Trump, is, to repeat, still an encouraging beginning.
1
The only purpose of a gun is to kill, maim or threaten. Yet it is defended and protected as if it were more valuable than life.
8
I favor gun control and all, but sometimes, it's worth your life to be able to kill an aggressor who would otherwise kill you. If I lived a half hour from the nearest neighbor, I would certainly have a gun in my home, just in case.
The failure of the government to properly investigate this lone wolf terrorist is epic and telling. Two FBI investigations FAILED to turn up links to terrorist organizations, his unconcealed hatred toward homosexuals, the mental and physical abuse of his first wife, his discipline at school, failure to gain entry to a police training program....Florida failed to investigate and properly vet this terrorist before issuing a fire arm permit and a security guard carry permit. I shake my head in disbelief. Of course the politicians and talking heads are upset, they have been embarrassed by the abject failure of the apparatus they control to get the job. Their answer is to immediately trample on the rights of the citizens for a feel good measure after the fox has already entered the hen house.
4
"...Mr. Trump said Wednesday that more gun ownership was the answer...“if some of those great people that were in that club that night had guns strapped to their waist or strapped to their ankle, and if the bullets were going in the other direction.”
Is Donald Trump actually advocating mixing guns with alcohol...'a little carnage to go with that pitcher?' Is there anybody else on the pro-gun side that endorses carrying firearms in bars - I don't think so.
Is Donald Trump actually advocating mixing guns with alcohol...'a little carnage to go with that pitcher?' Is there anybody else on the pro-gun side that endorses carrying firearms in bars - I don't think so.
3
Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you will ever use it. People, unless they are criminals, carry guns for protection. That is the reason for having a gun. If a patron had a gun at that night club it could have made a difference.
1
Well we have a choice we can listen to the Left Wing "Namby Pambies"
They don't want to allow anyone to defend themselves under any situation, but if they're forced to accept a law that allows citizens the right to self defense aka concealed carry they want to make sure that those who choose to exercise their right of self defense can do that no where except maybe their home.
So the FL Legislature made the mistake of listening to them and created a Gun Free Zone at Clubs and Bars.
The Criminal/Whackado/Terrorist went looking for an easy target.
Well what's easier than a place were a whole bunch of folks gather and none of them have guns and it's Guaranteed thanks to the "Namby Pamby-ists"
In my State there is no such moronic restriction placed on citizens.
It really is a simple concept.
If you're a concealed carry licensee you're required to be responsible no matter what your location is.
It doesn't matter if you're at a bar or a school or the shopping mall or your house, You are responsible to act with respect.
The benefit of this approach is the whackado has no idea if he goes into a club in OR with 200 people in it how many of those are capable of self defense..
And being the coward that they usually are...
He looks for the easier target.
Maybe he has to move to San Bernardino, CA or Orlando, FL
Maybe he picks a small community college in OR because he knows most students don't have CC licenses and certainly no left wing liberal gun grabbing instructors will.
They don't want to allow anyone to defend themselves under any situation, but if they're forced to accept a law that allows citizens the right to self defense aka concealed carry they want to make sure that those who choose to exercise their right of self defense can do that no where except maybe their home.
So the FL Legislature made the mistake of listening to them and created a Gun Free Zone at Clubs and Bars.
The Criminal/Whackado/Terrorist went looking for an easy target.
Well what's easier than a place were a whole bunch of folks gather and none of them have guns and it's Guaranteed thanks to the "Namby Pamby-ists"
In my State there is no such moronic restriction placed on citizens.
It really is a simple concept.
If you're a concealed carry licensee you're required to be responsible no matter what your location is.
It doesn't matter if you're at a bar or a school or the shopping mall or your house, You are responsible to act with respect.
The benefit of this approach is the whackado has no idea if he goes into a club in OR with 200 people in it how many of those are capable of self defense..
And being the coward that they usually are...
He looks for the easier target.
Maybe he has to move to San Bernardino, CA or Orlando, FL
Maybe he picks a small community college in OR because he knows most students don't have CC licenses and certainly no left wing liberal gun grabbing instructors will.
1
The right to bear arms may be needed by police authorities, and by the military. The right to bear arms may be used by families for their protection. The right to bear arms is also used by criminals, the mafia, the Mexican Mafia, drug cartels, drug traffickers, street gangs, the "hell angel's" and other motorcycle gangs, rapists, aryan nation racist groups, skinhead racist groups, KKK, neo nazi groups, and muslim terrlorists. These criminals will always have weapons legally or illegally.
The 18th amendment to the constitution didn't work as booze was sold illegally and Americans continued drinking booze illegally. So the government made booze legal again. Marijuana (pot) has been illegal, but now the state of Washington made it legal. Perhaps heroin and cocaine are next in line to be made legal. Legalizing homosexuality also legalizes pedophilia. So making guns illegal will work, right?
We can not cover every contingency. A perfect example are terrorists. After 9/11 all airports, passengers, and luggage are searched, the pilots cabin is locked, and Osama Bin Laden is dead. This means no more terrorists attacks, right?
School children could be psychologically tested from grades 1 to 12, but that would violate their constitutional rights.
Lastly, the government and the media needs to stop telling psychiatrists and psychologists what forms of therapy they need to use or not use, and what disorders to remove from the DSM. That nonsense needs to stop.
The 18th amendment to the constitution didn't work as booze was sold illegally and Americans continued drinking booze illegally. So the government made booze legal again. Marijuana (pot) has been illegal, but now the state of Washington made it legal. Perhaps heroin and cocaine are next in line to be made legal. Legalizing homosexuality also legalizes pedophilia. So making guns illegal will work, right?
We can not cover every contingency. A perfect example are terrorists. After 9/11 all airports, passengers, and luggage are searched, the pilots cabin is locked, and Osama Bin Laden is dead. This means no more terrorists attacks, right?
School children could be psychologically tested from grades 1 to 12, but that would violate their constitutional rights.
Lastly, the government and the media needs to stop telling psychiatrists and psychologists what forms of therapy they need to use or not use, and what disorders to remove from the DSM. That nonsense needs to stop.
1
Odd how some people seem to recognize the issues but recommend.......nothing.
What part of "assault style rifles with mega capacity mags" don't you understand! Quit going all over the map to omit your glaring fallacy. My Taurus 45 "Judge" with 5 shot capacity could not have killed that many people. It is however, satisfactory for my personal home and field protection, especially when loaded with the variety of ammo available in .410 configuration. PLU are a disgrace to responsible gun owners.
1
Just so's ya know in case it's an issue for ya, pedophilia isn't legal anywhere. Oh, and the weapons are GOING to Mexico, not coming feom Mexico, the APA would laugh itself silly if government tried to tell them what to put in the DSM, stuff like that.
2
I hope he's actually standing up to the NRA. If so, I salute him. It's about time a leading Republican tells the NRA to stuff it.
But knowing Trump, this is just political. He's marched in lockstep with the gun crazies for as long as I can remember.
But knowing Trump, this is just political. He's marched in lockstep with the gun crazies for as long as I can remember.
3
"But knowing Trump, this is just political."
Here's a tip, Dan. Rarely, if ever, does a political figure -- particularly one running for the presidency -- do anything involving a matter of public concern without having in mind the political consequences of the action. So who cares what the motivation might be, IF it works, or even if it just has a chance of working. It's better than sitting around doing nothing except finger pointing...
Here's a tip, Dan. Rarely, if ever, does a political figure -- particularly one running for the presidency -- do anything involving a matter of public concern without having in mind the political consequences of the action. So who cares what the motivation might be, IF it works, or even if it just has a chance of working. It's better than sitting around doing nothing except finger pointing...
1
Enough of Mr. Trump's shameful opportunistic declarations regarding what we should "believe" he will do. Kudos to Senators Murphy and Feinstein for working hard to pass a universal background check bill that includes no guns for suspected terrorists. It doesn't go far enough but it's a step in the right direction. We need a ban on assault rifles too. No individual citizen needs one. As others have said, the loss of the "right" to shoot them on a range pales in comparison to the loss of 49 lives and so many more devastated in this latest mass shooting. Come on, America, if 80% of us believe that this is the right thing to do, then let's tell our Congress members so and finally move forward in the fight against massacres.
4
The 2nd Amendment is NOT a "party line". Get it?
Let me ask an honest question: liberals and leftists talk a good game about rights, but think "no fly lists" and "no buy lists" are ok? Your rights are taken away without even a warrant, let alone a trial with a jury of your peers. How is that moral, let alone legal? TED KENNEDY, whom EVERYONE KNEW ON SIGHT, was on the "no fly list", and it took HIM 6 months to get off....think you'd fare BETTER? The murderer in Orlando was not on a "no fly list", and so this faux fix would not have stopped the killer. In the case of leftists, I understand the viewpoint: everything they say is an abject lie, their positions always contradict each other, and their goal is total control over others.
Firearms deaths are DOWN. Mass shootings are DOWN. This is from your govts own statistics. So why are you racing with hysteria to take away RIGHTS? Likely because you "don't like" guns. Hear me now and believe me later: if you demand and are successful in destroying others' rights because you don't "like" that right, someone is going to use the same rationale to destroy rights you DO care about.
Let me ask an honest question: liberals and leftists talk a good game about rights, but think "no fly lists" and "no buy lists" are ok? Your rights are taken away without even a warrant, let alone a trial with a jury of your peers. How is that moral, let alone legal? TED KENNEDY, whom EVERYONE KNEW ON SIGHT, was on the "no fly list", and it took HIM 6 months to get off....think you'd fare BETTER? The murderer in Orlando was not on a "no fly list", and so this faux fix would not have stopped the killer. In the case of leftists, I understand the viewpoint: everything they say is an abject lie, their positions always contradict each other, and their goal is total control over others.
Firearms deaths are DOWN. Mass shootings are DOWN. This is from your govts own statistics. So why are you racing with hysteria to take away RIGHTS? Likely because you "don't like" guns. Hear me now and believe me later: if you demand and are successful in destroying others' rights because you don't "like" that right, someone is going to use the same rationale to destroy rights you DO care about.
2
I wonder Vlad how much time, thought, and energy you spend writing and arguing about Americans First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment Rights, which are drafted in equally categorical and broad language as our Second Amendment Right, but which have been limited in countless way by the Supreme Court over the past 225 years. I'm betting you doing get at all exorcised about those restrictions on our rights.
4
Do people objecting to "no fly list" and "terrorist watch lists" INSIST we repeal the "Patriot Act"? That would be their most logical response, not that logic is part of the discussion.
A LOT. jeg. I see where you are so disingenuous that you could not answer a simple question.
You, unlike I, LOVED it when the fascists (clinton's the first I remember) told you it's ok to protest, as long as you are in the "free speech zone". The only free speech zone I recognize are the boundaries of the US and her territories. That's just one of many of my Constitutional views, so now you know.
Perhaps instead of acting like a snarky child, you could not make strawmen and pretentiously pretend to know my mind?
You, unlike I, LOVED it when the fascists (clinton's the first I remember) told you it's ok to protest, as long as you are in the "free speech zone". The only free speech zone I recognize are the boundaries of the US and her territories. That's just one of many of my Constitutional views, so now you know.
Perhaps instead of acting like a snarky child, you could not make strawmen and pretentiously pretend to know my mind?
2
How about the American people start a grass-roots organization more powerful than the NRA? :
American for responsible gun ownership.
Hopefully, we would have 100 million plus members to their measly 5 million members.
Why are 5 million people allowed to have such a strong lobbing body and virtually dictate gun legislation in this country when there are over 300 million people in America? And why is this organization granted tax-free status? They are political lobbyists.
Time to wake up, Americans.
American for responsible gun ownership.
Hopefully, we would have 100 million plus members to their measly 5 million members.
Why are 5 million people allowed to have such a strong lobbing body and virtually dictate gun legislation in this country when there are over 300 million people in America? And why is this organization granted tax-free status? They are political lobbyists.
Time to wake up, Americans.
3
This craven gambit is a pathetic attempt to "pivot" to something reasonable-sounding after this pathetic huckster shamed himself -- and the nation -- with his "it's all about me" response to the slayings in Orlando.
And the NRA is trying to pivot with him, by making a show of reasonableness.
Despicable! We know what the NRA has become -- a marketing arm of the gun manufacturers. And the shape-shifting candidate will do or say anything if he thinks it benefits him. Or changes his poll numbers.
One little, incremental concession to "reassure" Americans that the candidate is worthy of public office, or the NRA credible.
I'm not fooled, nor should you be.
And the NRA is trying to pivot with him, by making a show of reasonableness.
Despicable! We know what the NRA has become -- a marketing arm of the gun manufacturers. And the shape-shifting candidate will do or say anything if he thinks it benefits him. Or changes his poll numbers.
One little, incremental concession to "reassure" Americans that the candidate is worthy of public office, or the NRA credible.
I'm not fooled, nor should you be.
2
Sounds to me as if Mr. Trump is asking for the NRA's permission to have an opinion that doesn't follow its dogma. Great leadership style. Are you afraid they'll dock your allowance?
2
Yes. & he's afraid the Clintons will dock his allowance if he's not sufficiently outrageous, insulting & generally unacceptable.
2
These comments show a lack of reasoning. The fact that criminals shouldn't have guns should not be confused with my right, as a law abiding citizen, to bear arms. Scare tactics are being used to impel people to give up rights that can't be taken away. Think people! Criminals are literally bringing guns to a knife fight. By bearing arms rightfully, regular citizens can level the playing field.
1
But "regular citizens" NEVER "level the playing field". You seem unable to grasp the reality of an instant attack by someone armed with an assault rifle (or any firearm). No one says. "OK, now draw!" Living in a fantasy world of movie and tv action conveniently ignores reality.
2
I'm curious to see what the fine print of whatever legislation is proposed.
The platform for many reforms and laws are based on things everyone wants, and everyone votes on those broad ideas - everyone wants national security! (Patriot act), everyone wants children to have an equal opportunity! (No child left behind) However, there are often addendums and not-so-relevant additions that lawmakers with an agenda slip in, and we've seen the ugly results from voting on the idea but not reading the fine print.
With the Sandy Hook shooting, legislatures tried to pass multiple laws that were billed as "common sense gun laws." If you read the fine print, many of these laws actually made it close to impossible to own firearms.
For example, the law passed by NY state limited firearms to 7 bullets per magazine. They did not realize that almost no firearms were designed with magazines that held less than 10.
Another law proposed a one time registration of all firearms and used that as a platform ("We're not trying to take your guns away, it's just a registration"). The fine print stated that the firearms are non transferrable. That is to say, they can never be family heirlooms, sell them, or give them away, if you don't want them, you have to turn them in, which effectively made it confiscation by attrition.
There is a reason many gunowners don't trust gun control movements.
I think it is time for both sides to be honest with one another and not pull that kind of stuff.
The platform for many reforms and laws are based on things everyone wants, and everyone votes on those broad ideas - everyone wants national security! (Patriot act), everyone wants children to have an equal opportunity! (No child left behind) However, there are often addendums and not-so-relevant additions that lawmakers with an agenda slip in, and we've seen the ugly results from voting on the idea but not reading the fine print.
With the Sandy Hook shooting, legislatures tried to pass multiple laws that were billed as "common sense gun laws." If you read the fine print, many of these laws actually made it close to impossible to own firearms.
For example, the law passed by NY state limited firearms to 7 bullets per magazine. They did not realize that almost no firearms were designed with magazines that held less than 10.
Another law proposed a one time registration of all firearms and used that as a platform ("We're not trying to take your guns away, it's just a registration"). The fine print stated that the firearms are non transferrable. That is to say, they can never be family heirlooms, sell them, or give them away, if you don't want them, you have to turn them in, which effectively made it confiscation by attrition.
There is a reason many gunowners don't trust gun control movements.
I think it is time for both sides to be honest with one another and not pull that kind of stuff.
2
"Another law proposed a one time registration of all firearms and used that as a platform ("We're not trying to take your guns away, it's just a registration"). The fine print stated that the firearms are non transferrable. That is to say, they can never be family heirlooms, sell them, or give them away, if you don't want them, you have to turn them in, which effectively made it confiscation by attrition. "
Did it pass? NO. So quit bring it up as a way to sidetrack the issue.
Did it pass? NO. So quit bring it up as a way to sidetrack the issue.
1
Does it really matter what Trump does? He's a con man, a spoiled man-child, a bully, and doesn't have a clue what to do. He's a joke, folks, and anyone who supports his ridiculous notions will be considered fools for backing this guy.
Those now supporting Trump will be looked on in the not too distant future much like the white supremacists who wore the pointy white hoods of the KKK. You are on the wrong side of history and haven't realized it yet.
Trump supporters are being trumped, and someday you'll have to explain to your children where you stood in the 2016 election. Hey Mom and Dad, what did you do when Donald Trump roamed the earth? Where did you stand? I'd love to be in on that conversation.
DD
Manhattan
DD
Manhattan
Those now supporting Trump will be looked on in the not too distant future much like the white supremacists who wore the pointy white hoods of the KKK. You are on the wrong side of history and haven't realized it yet.
Trump supporters are being trumped, and someday you'll have to explain to your children where you stood in the 2016 election. Hey Mom and Dad, what did you do when Donald Trump roamed the earth? Where did you stand? I'd love to be in on that conversation.
DD
Manhattan
DD
Manhattan
4
You rightly bring up the KKK for comparison. Let's not forget that Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, and everyone else who supports Trump must look in the mirror and realize that they have chosen to stand on the same side as two KKK grand wizards, who also support Trump.
3
Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton once heaped praise for late Klan leader Sen. Robert Byrd.In a video uploaded to the State Department’s official YouTube page on June 28, 2010, Clinton commemorated late Sen. Byrd by saying, “Today our country has lost a true American original, my friend and mentor Robert Byrd." She went on to give effusive praise for Byrd.
While Byrd later renounced his affiliation of the KKK, calling it “the worsts mistake of my life,” the West Virginia Senator also voted “no” against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I don't see your mentioning Hillary and the KKK.
While Byrd later renounced his affiliation of the KKK, calling it “the worsts mistake of my life,” the West Virginia Senator also voted “no” against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I don't see your mentioning Hillary and the KKK.
2
Dear Connie:
You just mentioned it. Are you satisfied now? Does that clear the air for you? That fact has been well documented and know since Hillary entered the Senate in 2001.
And the history of Senator Byrd has been known for ages as has his deepest regrets. Do wish to bring up a dead Senator who tried to make amends for his nefarious deeds decades ago, and then attempt to somehow attach Hillary to his deeds?
Now, that I found astounding. I guess you can find Hillary responsible for all the evil in the world, huh? Perhaps you'd be happy to know that when Hillary entered the Senate she also befriended Republicans who voted to impeach her husband. What to make of that, Connie? How can we use that to discredit Hillary? Let us count the conspiracies.
How about we stick to the story, which is about Trump veering from the party line instead of finding countless other ways in which Hillary is the devil incarnate?
DD
Manhattan
You just mentioned it. Are you satisfied now? Does that clear the air for you? That fact has been well documented and know since Hillary entered the Senate in 2001.
And the history of Senator Byrd has been known for ages as has his deepest regrets. Do wish to bring up a dead Senator who tried to make amends for his nefarious deeds decades ago, and then attempt to somehow attach Hillary to his deeds?
Now, that I found astounding. I guess you can find Hillary responsible for all the evil in the world, huh? Perhaps you'd be happy to know that when Hillary entered the Senate she also befriended Republicans who voted to impeach her husband. What to make of that, Connie? How can we use that to discredit Hillary? Let us count the conspiracies.
How about we stick to the story, which is about Trump veering from the party line instead of finding countless other ways in which Hillary is the devil incarnate?
DD
Manhattan
1
Donald Trump has no authority to negotiate with the NRA.
3
Incredulosity, Obama has not bothered to talk to the NRA.
Someone has to do it, no?
This is simply amazing. Trump is doing something which is actually constructive and NYT readers who are used to hate him are in a bind.
They cannot say that getting NRA to agree to some form of gun control is a bad thing - for that does sound a bit stupid.
But they want to complain about Trump, so they nitpick about the WAY he is doing it.
If a man says something good and does something good but you do not like him then what do you do? You can always complain about the color of his tie.
Don't you guys want to put the welfare of the nation before your hatred of Trump and the Republicans?
Someone has to do it, no?
This is simply amazing. Trump is doing something which is actually constructive and NYT readers who are used to hate him are in a bind.
They cannot say that getting NRA to agree to some form of gun control is a bad thing - for that does sound a bit stupid.
But they want to complain about Trump, so they nitpick about the WAY he is doing it.
If a man says something good and does something good but you do not like him then what do you do? You can always complain about the color of his tie.
Don't you guys want to put the welfare of the nation before your hatred of Trump and the Republicans?
3
And the NRA has no authority to dictate what America's gun policies will be. So it substitutes political contributions and "punishment" to get what it wants.
1
"Don't you guys want to put the welfare of the nation before your hatred of Trump and the Republicans?"
No.
No.
4
S0 he says the PC thing today in the wake of the Orlando shootings, and if he is elected he will do the opposite. That is what he is famous for, contradicting himself.
2
As nutty as he is, if he made gun control part of his platform, I'd have to seriously consider voting for him.
3
Duh. Do you understand what you just said.
1
You can get gun control without the nutty by voting Democratic.
1
Dear Pat,
Don't seriously consider voting for him. If he makes gun control part of his platform, then know that he will change his mind about it within the month, and that none of his policies so far have any specifics to them or any indication that they could work. Also he lies almost all the time, so really, don't fall for it.
Don't seriously consider voting for him. If he makes gun control part of his platform, then know that he will change his mind about it within the month, and that none of his policies so far have any specifics to them or any indication that they could work. Also he lies almost all the time, so really, don't fall for it.
Trump is trying to make a deal with the NRA as a campaign trick. If he gets one, he will claim victory; if he loses he will claim unreasonable opposition to his allies in the NRA. But if he gets concessions it is really proof of one thing only: Trump really is the Manchurian Candidate. With friends like his, what hope is there for democracy?
I had the same thought: Trump is finangling for something he can claim credit for by going to the NRA. To show off his "negotiating" skills. But remember that, although he's cunning, he's not very smart. Democrats will have a field day criticizing his dealings with a lobbyist organization, tacit admission NRA pulls GOP congressional strings.
If Trump were a real leader, he would be asking his supporters who are NRA members to call for an NRA change in policy, and for the Congressional leaders of his party to take action.
If Trump were a real leader, he would be asking his supporters who are NRA members to call for an NRA change in policy, and for the Congressional leaders of his party to take action.
Throughout much of the Republican nominating contest, Trump was able to control events and the news cycle, either on t.v., in the debates, or through Twitter. Trump is now on a bigger stage, one approaching the level on which the President operates. At this altitude, events more than the man dictate the narrative and the news cycle, and it is here that Trumps absence of ideas, lack of conviction, and weak organizational skills become glaring. Add to this Trump's singular aim to keep attention on himself, and he is without vocal surrogates who can help broadcast his message. Trump is indeed an unconventional candidate, but this trait is turning into a great liability in the general election.
3
Banning purchases for those on the terror or no-fly list is not a constitutional solution.
The focus should be on first time gun purchasers and those purchasing semi-automatic weapons. Require a 30 day waiting period. Create a licensing and safety process controlled by local law enforcement. Notify the FBI if someone on the terror or no-fly list tries to make a purchase. Tie legal liability to the purchaser so that private sales, transfers, and thefts are better tracked. Start an annual buyback program in cities with the worst gun problems.
These are all sensible solutions that can be selected cafeteria style or applied as one package. This plan doesn't attempt to ban any types of weapons and it doesn't deny due process to a list of racially profiled citizens.
The focus should be on first time gun purchasers and those purchasing semi-automatic weapons. Require a 30 day waiting period. Create a licensing and safety process controlled by local law enforcement. Notify the FBI if someone on the terror or no-fly list tries to make a purchase. Tie legal liability to the purchaser so that private sales, transfers, and thefts are better tracked. Start an annual buyback program in cities with the worst gun problems.
These are all sensible solutions that can be selected cafeteria style or applied as one package. This plan doesn't attempt to ban any types of weapons and it doesn't deny due process to a list of racially profiled citizens.
2
I was curious about the numbers of gun violence. Gun violence has been occurring for years, predominantly in poor neighborhoods across the country. 75% of gun-related violence takes place in just 5% of US zip codes. The National Academy of Science and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention came up with this conclusion– the numbers don’t support either assertion that
more regulations and fewer guns make us safer
or that more guns and fewer regulations make us safer. The data doesn’t support either assertion, meaning there must be other factors at work. The governments numbers last year were that 3.8 people per 100,000 in the US die each year from non-suicide gun violence. Terror-related deaths are effectively 0.0. Compare that to deaths by other means. 11.6 per 100,000 die in traffic related deaths and 169.8 people per 100,000 die from heart disease. We are spending billions toward reducing terrorism which of course is a problem but are we focusing as much on other more deadly causes? We need common sense gun laws, many of which are already on the books. We need to enforce these laws. If 75% of gun violence occurs in 5% of zip codes shouldn't we focus attention there to bring the number down?
more regulations and fewer guns make us safer
or that more guns and fewer regulations make us safer. The data doesn’t support either assertion, meaning there must be other factors at work. The governments numbers last year were that 3.8 people per 100,000 in the US die each year from non-suicide gun violence. Terror-related deaths are effectively 0.0. Compare that to deaths by other means. 11.6 per 100,000 die in traffic related deaths and 169.8 people per 100,000 die from heart disease. We are spending billions toward reducing terrorism which of course is a problem but are we focusing as much on other more deadly causes? We need common sense gun laws, many of which are already on the books. We need to enforce these laws. If 75% of gun violence occurs in 5% of zip codes shouldn't we focus attention there to bring the number down?
2
No, the laws aren't on the books. For example, thanks to weak laws in Illinois and Indiana, firearms can easily flow into Chicago.
And regulation of firearms does work where it exists, which is not so much in the US.
And regulation of firearms does work where it exists, which is not so much in the US.
ISIS and other terror groups literally point to the lax gun laws in the U.S to let their supporters know how easy it is to carry out a mass shooting here. But the GOP doesn't care.
Republicans are apparently more afraid of the NRA than of ISIS.
Republicans are apparently more afraid of the NRA than of ISIS.
4
I believe, at this point, the discussion should be around the firing power that, a US citizen, could have per a firearm. If you desperately need an assault weapon, then you may have to argue your case for such a need.
The second amendment should not be undermined by the Democrats and it should not be exaggerated by the NRA or the Republican Party.
It isn't an easy debate, but it is time to have that debate, however, we do need a cooling period, as emotions are high at this time post Orlando.
The second amendment should not be undermined by the Democrats and it should not be exaggerated by the NRA or the Republican Party.
It isn't an easy debate, but it is time to have that debate, however, we do need a cooling period, as emotions are high at this time post Orlando.
1
A cooling off period is what people who think they have a right to mega shot rifles is what you are asking for and it only has to do with your desire to have no one limit your freedom. Sorry, from the time when the second person in history moved into Texas laws were required!
As he has after other mass shootings, Mr. Trump said Wednesday that more gun ownership was the answer, not less. He said that the carnage could have been minimized “if some of those great people that were in that club that night had guns strapped to their waist or strapped to their ankle, and if the bullets were going in the other direction.”
Yeah, how did that work out in the bar in Waco?
Yeah, how did that work out in the bar in Waco?
5
The majority of comments seem to be aghast at Trump talking to the NRA.
Given the President's incompetence, someone has to step up.
If you're so concerned about terrorist suspects not being able to legally acquire firearms, why would you care how it's accomplished? Or that Trump is involved?
Given the President's incompetence, someone has to step up.
If you're so concerned about terrorist suspects not being able to legally acquire firearms, why would you care how it's accomplished? Or that Trump is involved?
2
The NRA is a dangerous organization allowing Terrorists to obtain weapons that threaten the life of ordinary citizens. It is an organization that misinterprets the Constitution to profit from Gun Sales. The fact that Trump proposes a ban for Terrorists is just a mouth piece, he will change it in a moment when its suits his agenda. The next democratic Congress (hopefully) will have enough votes to implement serious protection for every American and security be the top priority and if necessary a change to the 2nd amendment.
Well if he says he is going to do something, I'm sure it will get done. Actual facts of the political situation be damned.
1
If anyone thinks that the NRA is going to negotiate a possible restriction on the purchase of fire arms with DT you are not thinking clearly. Neither DT, nor the NRA, seeks to benefit at all from taking these steps. DT 's supporters would go crazy if he tried to restrict gun purchase in any way, shape, or form. Right now gun sales are soaring, and DT saying he will meet with the NRA in regard to restrictions, this is propelling those sales 10 fold. That's it. Money making. This meeting will result in absolutely no change. Unless the gun makers start losing money they will NEVER appear to support any gun reform. The NRA is going to skewer DT if he tries to cross them. Never going to happen.
1
This Trump guy changes his mind as much as I change my underwear . More guns would have made this safer ? Where does he get this stuff from ? After Australia had 1 mass shooting they worked on gun control and have not had a mass shooting since . Canada had the same amount of shooting in the last 20 Years as the USA had in the last 7 Days . Why would more guns make it better ? Would more cars on the road make it safer to drive ? Why has the NRA so much power that they can control what is going on ?
4
This is a stunt from Trump because the NRA will not agree.
2
Every time there is a proposal to limit gun sales, purchases of guns go off the charts. Obama, while well intentioned, may be the best gun salesman of all time. Pandora's box has been open for a long time and constant threats of closing it without actually closing it are not helping the problem.
1
Trump is a New Yorker, He's starting to think the GOP is more crazy than he is. We knew that along time ago.
1
For the record, I want to see assault rifles and high magazine clips banned. My view of the Second Amendment, which is consistent with American history until the Heller case, is that their is no absolute right to private ownership and the intent of the Amendment was to protect states in maintaining their militias. In essesnce, Scalia and his 4 buddies created a new constitutional right.
However, I believe a government imposed no-fly list is unconstitutional. Where is the due process? So, if the courts are expanding gun rights it seems unlikely that this dubious principle can be applied to gun ownership.
However, I believe a government imposed no-fly list is unconstitutional. Where is the due process? So, if the courts are expanding gun rights it seems unlikely that this dubious principle can be applied to gun ownership.
1
A stopped clock is right twice a day. That exceeds Donald Trumps rate.
1
Propaganda is a key to all of this, and Trump is a master at it, like any good neo-Fascist. Good or bad, he always goes for the emotional effect. After effectively scaring all of us-- we're either scared of "them" or scared of him-- he appears suddenly reasonable to soothe our fears. It's a clever tactic, to talk about gun control (appeasing the moderates) with the NRA (appeasing the right-wing). What actually comes of it all is irrelevant; he's impulsively (and effectively) going for emotional impact.
4
Nothing comes out of Donald Trump's mouth that doesn't change in the next 60 seconds if he thinks it's politically expedient to say something different. Trump wanders between the boundary fences searching for what his mindless slaves will cheer for. For Trump to decide anything, he'd have to have policies and positions. He doesn't. So for the news media to say theire's fire when Trump is only blowing smoke just shows how ignorant they are in reporting this stuff.
4
Beautiful! The New York Times used to be the pinnacle of news reporting. Today, in 2016 - it takes a random TWEET by Donald Trump - and builds a 1,376-word essay around it - 100% of which is pure conjecture.
2
Sounds like just another Trump statement that doesn't jibe with what he's said before, doesn't have any specifics to it, doesn't have any indication of how it would be put into place, and hasn't been created by diligent, methodical analysis.
In other words it's just another clueless thing he's said off the top of his head in an attempt to get votes. Tells us nothing about what he'd actually do, or what he actually thinks, so like everything else he says, it's irrelevant.
In other words it's just another clueless thing he's said off the top of his head in an attempt to get votes. Tells us nothing about what he'd actually do, or what he actually thinks, so like everything else he says, it's irrelevant.
3
I see many comments noting how Trump is right on this. Hardly. Trump is years late to the movement. But even this opportunistic dolt can see which way the wind is blowing. Meanwhile, the NRA leadership is realizing it is the latest to feel the consequence of The Donald's mercurial, unpredictable orange sticky, gooey sap embrace. As Paul Ryan could have warned, it's hard to wash off.
2
This smells like political theater. Given The Donald's well-know habit of flip-flopping(then blaming someone else for misunderstanding), I'd prefer to see a deal in writing--especially if it involves the NRA.
1
Trump’s publicity-driven overture to the NRA should not mask the fact that, after Orlando, his basic response was that, had people attending the nightclub been armed, things would have been different. Basically the NRA talking point that more “good guys with guns” was what was needed.
Fundamentally, alcohol and firearms are not a good mix. And a loud, dark crowded nightclub with a motivated killer and armed civilians all shooting sounds like a script for even more carnage.
Fundamentally, alcohol and firearms are not a good mix. And a loud, dark crowded nightclub with a motivated killer and armed civilians all shooting sounds like a script for even more carnage.
4
I can't believe as a country we continue to have this conversation. I grew up in a rural area in a house full of guns, and was taught very early how to handle and respect them.
While I think we have far too many guns in this country, if you want to carry a standard handgun to protect yourself, fine. A shotgun or standard long rifle for hunting, fine. BUT- Can't we get agreement to get military-designed assault killing weapons out of the hands of non-military people? This has gone too far....
While I think we have far too many guns in this country, if you want to carry a standard handgun to protect yourself, fine. A shotgun or standard long rifle for hunting, fine. BUT- Can't we get agreement to get military-designed assault killing weapons out of the hands of non-military people? This has gone too far....
3
I am sorry, but I think the headline is a bit misleading. I don't think Trump has EVER said he supports it no matter what - he said he would ask the NRA. So isn't he just asking him for their permission and then absent that - he doesn't support it? Is the dog wagging the tail, or the tail wagging the dog?
3
Even when Trump attempts to be reasonable, to buck the right's absolute refusal to preventing one person getting a gun who is not a certified homicidal maniac, it is more for display than effect.
He could have adopted the position that pinko Bill O'Reilly has elaborated to Steven Colbert. It was first to restore the ban on selling assault rifles, in addition to enhancing the effectiveness of no sale lists. This would have gone further than any other of the Republican candidates he faced and make people take notice.
But of course this would have required actually digging into the subject, looking at other countries, and our own history. His tepid move, off the top of his head as always, only shows that has neither the skills or inclination to do the serious work of being a national leader.
Yet, he has gone further than almost all other Republican office holders.
AlRodbell.com
He could have adopted the position that pinko Bill O'Reilly has elaborated to Steven Colbert. It was first to restore the ban on selling assault rifles, in addition to enhancing the effectiveness of no sale lists. This would have gone further than any other of the Republican candidates he faced and make people take notice.
But of course this would have required actually digging into the subject, looking at other countries, and our own history. His tepid move, off the top of his head as always, only shows that has neither the skills or inclination to do the serious work of being a national leader.
Yet, he has gone further than almost all other Republican office holders.
AlRodbell.com
1
'What, Trump wants to abolish the second amendment now ?!!! Exclaims an incredulous former Trumpian. "I better hurry to get my rocket propelled grenade launcher before is too late"
2
It is time to reinstitute the ban on assault weapons in this country. Who decided that the special interests of the NRA and gun manufacturers are more important than the rights of citizens to safe and non-lethal public places? There is nothing in the second amendment specifying anything about assault rifles.
4
Bernie Sanders called for the end of 'automatic weapons' in our country. Tom Brokaw referred to the AR15 as the AR14, after proudly stating he was a gun owner. Many media outlets portray the AR-15 as a military weapon. It is not. It is not an 'assault weapon'. It is a semi-automatic rifle. The media, the NYT included, continues to portray this rifle as a military rifle. After 30 years in the military, I can tell you two things: 1. The US Army does not refer to any of its weapons as 'assault rifles'. Please stop using this pejorative term. 2. Most media types and the average person has no idea the difference between an automatic weapon and a semi-automatic weapon. The AR-15 is NOT a military rifle.
2
Your point being? No matter what you call it, the "average person" has enough common sense to know that any machine that fires a large number of bullets at high velocity in a short period of time is not something that civilians should have access to. Period. Call it what you will.
First time Trump has done something right
1
Why are we crediting Donald Trump if the NRA changes their tune? Tens of millions of people have been saying this for decades. Trump simply sees which way the wind is blowing and goes with the flow. He demonstrates no leadership, is a bad business person (the leading credential he boasts) and an overall bad person/citizen.
2
Because in 24 hours Donald Trump has done more on gun control than Barack Obama has in 8 years.
2
DCBarrister, your comments get more ludicrous by the minute!
3
Number of times Donald Trump has met directly with NRA leaders about gun control in a respectful, open way in the last 12 months:
3
Number of times Barack Obama has met with NRA leaders about gun control in a respectful open way in 8 years:
ZERO.
3
Number of times Barack Obama has met with NRA leaders about gun control in a respectful open way in 8 years:
ZERO.
1
If more gun ownership was the answer (per Trump), why not allow guns (just to be fair and to follow his logic) to be carried by all licensed-gun owners (not just the police) at all public events like at football game events or the Republican Convention so people can protect themselves from gun licensed lunatics.
This finally should be the time that there can be some reasonable compromise on the terror watch list. Keeping terrorists from legally buying guns should be a high priority, just as high as protecting every American's constitutional right to due process and to keep and bear arms.
If the three-day "holding period" suggested by Republicans isn't enough, the Democrats should offer an alternative, not a winner-tale-all proposal but a real compromise. This shouldn't be that hard.
I want my Second Amendment and due process rights protected, by all means, but surely the entire body of Congress is not so stupid that it cannot come up with a way to fix this problem. It is time to stop blaming the NRA (not even among the top 200 donors to politicians) and start blaming Congress for not doing its job. If enough NRA A+ members of Congress supported a true, viable compromise, you can be sure the NRA won't work for their ouster over one vote.
If the three-day "holding period" suggested by Republicans isn't enough, the Democrats should offer an alternative, not a winner-tale-all proposal but a real compromise. This shouldn't be that hard.
I want my Second Amendment and due process rights protected, by all means, but surely the entire body of Congress is not so stupid that it cannot come up with a way to fix this problem. It is time to stop blaming the NRA (not even among the top 200 donors to politicians) and start blaming Congress for not doing its job. If enough NRA A+ members of Congress supported a true, viable compromise, you can be sure the NRA won't work for their ouster over one vote.
1
As a pathological liar, Teleprompter Trump has never been a straight shooter.
With his machine gun delivery of wild delusion, and dishonesty and nasty insults, Unfit Trump reminds us constantly of his lack of intellectual fire power.
Given his clear bigotry, clear authoritarian behavior and stated intentions makes it clear he not Presidential caliber.
With his defeat the Motherland will merely suffer a flesh wound to the body politic.
His candidacy shows that the body politic is riddled with racists and the glorious "low educated".
With his machine gun delivery of wild delusion, and dishonesty and nasty insults, Unfit Trump reminds us constantly of his lack of intellectual fire power.
Given his clear bigotry, clear authoritarian behavior and stated intentions makes it clear he not Presidential caliber.
With his defeat the Motherland will merely suffer a flesh wound to the body politic.
His candidacy shows that the body politic is riddled with racists and the glorious "low educated".
1
What's interesting about Donald Trump's latest ploy is he's always drawn to the centers of power in our dysfunctional society. So he went to the N.R.A., the premier gun lobby. It acts essentially as a shadow government on gun control issues. It sets the agenda with its legion of lobbyists.
Reporters asked Willy Sutton, the "gentleman" bank robber from the 1930s during the 1930s, "Why do you rob banks?" "That's where the money is," he replied.
Trump publicly acknowledges that's where the money is. So he went to the N.R.A. The gun lobby keeps politicians on a short leash. As any docile pet knows, you never bite the hand that feeds you.
I don't Trump's strategy will work. The N.R.A. will never waver though he's scored another PR coup He's the deal-maker par of business. He avoids red tape we know as the federal government. It's show over substance. But so was his TV reality show. And that's enough for his loyal followers.
Reporters asked Willy Sutton, the "gentleman" bank robber from the 1930s during the 1930s, "Why do you rob banks?" "That's where the money is," he replied.
Trump publicly acknowledges that's where the money is. So he went to the N.R.A. The gun lobby keeps politicians on a short leash. As any docile pet knows, you never bite the hand that feeds you.
I don't Trump's strategy will work. The N.R.A. will never waver though he's scored another PR coup He's the deal-maker par of business. He avoids red tape we know as the federal government. It's show over substance. But so was his TV reality show. And that's enough for his loyal followers.
2
Why doesn't the NRA and its ilk ever lecture its members and supporters who are irresponsible with their guns?
Why is it when I want to do something about not being a casualty, or involved at all, in a mass murder, I get slammed, but Joe and Susie Public and their trigger itches?
Free passes all around.
Of course.
Why is it when I want to do something about not being a casualty, or involved at all, in a mass murder, I get slammed, but Joe and Susie Public and their trigger itches?
Free passes all around.
Of course.
1
Why when the issue is whether to curtail traditional civil liberties in the face of terrorism the response is "then the terrorists win", but that is not the case with the Second Amendment?
I don't own guns but imagine a lot of law abiding gun owners are asking themselves why their liberty is being curtailed in the face of domestic and international terrorism--isn't that what the terrorists are trying to do?
In that light, I can see why the call to ban Muslim immigration is appealing--it's like saying we can only have a truly free society if everyone accepts their responsibility to play by the rules. But if you import a bunch of theocratic fundamentalists whose beliefs are at odds with our liberal secular values, then we are forced to give up our freedoms to accommodate the arrival of this new threat and tension. So don't import them in the first place and we'd be better off as as whole.
I don't own guns but imagine a lot of law abiding gun owners are asking themselves why their liberty is being curtailed in the face of domestic and international terrorism--isn't that what the terrorists are trying to do?
In that light, I can see why the call to ban Muslim immigration is appealing--it's like saying we can only have a truly free society if everyone accepts their responsibility to play by the rules. But if you import a bunch of theocratic fundamentalists whose beliefs are at odds with our liberal secular values, then we are forced to give up our freedoms to accommodate the arrival of this new threat and tension. So don't import them in the first place and we'd be better off as as whole.
2
trump is a gnat on the wall , trying to suck up news cycles.
1
How did the term "arms" in the Second Amendment end up meaning "gun" ?
Nukes are arms. So are rocket launchers, mustard gas, and flamethrowers.
We've already drawn a line prohibiting "THE PEOPLE" from bearing nukes, so how is adjusting that line some sort of repudiation of the Second Amendment that we haven't already instituted ?
Nukes are arms. So are rocket launchers, mustard gas, and flamethrowers.
We've already drawn a line prohibiting "THE PEOPLE" from bearing nukes, so how is adjusting that line some sort of repudiation of the Second Amendment that we haven't already instituted ?
1
Give this maniac a week or two and he will change his position, will recommend arming everyone, and will deny that he ever suggested limiting guns. The man is certifiably crazy and should be confined to a padded cell where he can snarl and tweet at himself in a mirror.
2
Reminds me - even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
1
In the gun control issue better than 90% of Americans are for "sensible" gun control, such as banning assault weapons & armor piercing & high velocity bullets, all are not required for hunting or for personal protection, but comes handy to kill, and massacring PEOPLE.
The Republican party is not against it, in principle. They are the passive accomplices of the NRA strongman, who is actually the most powerful single person who causes these carnage, from New town to Orlando. If the assault weapons were made illegal to be sold, those massacres wouldn't have happened. We should let HIM know that he is an "enemy of humanity," with his Hitler-style hair-combing.
Indeed, with his "dictatorship" of NRA, what would eventually happen is, Americans would lose their second amendment right to be legitimate gun owners, for hunting & personal protection in remote rural areas.
The Republican party is not against it, in principle. They are the passive accomplices of the NRA strongman, who is actually the most powerful single person who causes these carnage, from New town to Orlando. If the assault weapons were made illegal to be sold, those massacres wouldn't have happened. We should let HIM know that he is an "enemy of humanity," with his Hitler-style hair-combing.
Indeed, with his "dictatorship" of NRA, what would eventually happen is, Americans would lose their second amendment right to be legitimate gun owners, for hunting & personal protection in remote rural areas.
1
Why "veers" and not " diverges?"
All this mythology around the 2nd amendment is fairly recent history - the 1970s, to be exact. That's when the NRA decided to change itself from a run of the mill ownership advocacy and gun safety organization into the politically crusading juggernaut we see today. Common sense and the truth were jettisoned not long thereafter.
And this is all especially telling considering the original reason behind the enactment of the 2nd amendment: to pacify southern founding fathers that their state militias - used primarily for quelling slave uprisings - could not be subsumed under an overall federal militia that could be beholden to abolitionists, thereby weakening slave holders rights over their 'property'.
This explains why in the first phrase it uses the word 'state', not 'country'. The founders were keenly aware of the meaning in that difference. Furthermore, I'm sure I don't have to remind anyone that it goes on to use the words "well regulated", not just 'regulated', and nowhere uses the words 'people', 'persons' or 'individuals', but refers to "The People" and "militia".
It should be obvious to anyone that the language clearly does not protect the rights of *individuals* to own guns, especially when looking at the original reasons and intent of the founding fathers.
Claiming anything else is just making up, out of whole cloth.
And this is all especially telling considering the original reason behind the enactment of the 2nd amendment: to pacify southern founding fathers that their state militias - used primarily for quelling slave uprisings - could not be subsumed under an overall federal militia that could be beholden to abolitionists, thereby weakening slave holders rights over their 'property'.
This explains why in the first phrase it uses the word 'state', not 'country'. The founders were keenly aware of the meaning in that difference. Furthermore, I'm sure I don't have to remind anyone that it goes on to use the words "well regulated", not just 'regulated', and nowhere uses the words 'people', 'persons' or 'individuals', but refers to "The People" and "militia".
It should be obvious to anyone that the language clearly does not protect the rights of *individuals* to own guns, especially when looking at the original reasons and intent of the founding fathers.
Claiming anything else is just making up, out of whole cloth.
1
The Second Amendment. when written, applied to Blunderbusses (slight exaggeration). Will the logic used by the NRA apply to Ray Guns when we invent them? One AR-15 or AK-47 in the hand of the British in 1776 could have lost us the War of Independence... The change in technologies and capabilities could not have been imagined by the founders. Please it's time to rewrite or re-interpret the intent
1
The NRA are nothing but shills for the gun industry who pay for them. They do not represent my interests as a sportsman (and owner of multiple firearms)). We need sensible gun controls now so that we do not have invasive and ineffective gun controls (think Dodd-Frank) in the future - you'd think the gun makers would see this and get their NRA mouthpieces to start being more sensible. Having a president whose son was imprisoned for gun violence does not enhance the NRA's credibility.
1
Let me get this straight. Republicans want us to go to war in the Middle East to stop Isis. They want to beef up surveillance of potential terrorists. They want thousands more guarding the borders to prevent terrorists from entering the county. BUT, they don't want to do anything to prevent them from getting weapons in the States. That's what I like coherence and total strategy. If only Republicans had the effectiveness of he NRA, they would rule the country.
4
Ooh let me help Frank! I get paid to explain things to people.
Republicans (i.e. sane Americans) want to fight ISIS someplace else besides the streets and communities in the USA. "Weapons" are manufactured in the United States and/or sold by American businesses in the United States or regulated by American laws on commercial activity.
Undocumented illegals enter the United States illegally, refuse to leave and under Obama's amnesty, get more government subsidized financial assistance, liberties and perks than 90% of African Americans who are here as descendants of slaves.
Can a 30 year old Black man walk into a bank and get a mortgage for a new house with the typical financial history of an African American his age?
We know a 30 year old undocumented illegal with either no credit history in America or using forged documents can, and have.
The reason the NRA is so effective? They take no prisoners. Here in Washington DC, the NRA has powerful, K-Street money lining all the right pockets on both sides of the aisle, in Hollywood and throughout the news and entertainment media.
Greed is apolitical.
Republicans (i.e. sane Americans) want to fight ISIS someplace else besides the streets and communities in the USA. "Weapons" are manufactured in the United States and/or sold by American businesses in the United States or regulated by American laws on commercial activity.
Undocumented illegals enter the United States illegally, refuse to leave and under Obama's amnesty, get more government subsidized financial assistance, liberties and perks than 90% of African Americans who are here as descendants of slaves.
Can a 30 year old Black man walk into a bank and get a mortgage for a new house with the typical financial history of an African American his age?
We know a 30 year old undocumented illegal with either no credit history in America or using forged documents can, and have.
The reason the NRA is so effective? They take no prisoners. Here in Washington DC, the NRA has powerful, K-Street money lining all the right pockets on both sides of the aisle, in Hollywood and throughout the news and entertainment media.
Greed is apolitical.
2
DC, You do have a point but I think you're off the mark a little too much.
Statistics show undocumented immigrants commit less crime than ordinary Americans. They do jobs others don't want. They contribute to America far more than they "take" from America. They are treated worse than blacks have been way back. They do not have an "entitled" mentality. Some 2 million Mexican Americans were deported during the Depression era, many of whom were US born!
The problems of black America are to a substantial extent are their own making. Then leaders like Al Sharpton make the matter worse. There is of course, white indifference. They do not employ more police to patrol high crime areas. Some may even think "if they want to kill each other, let them kill each other. We have done enough for them."
One reason Democrats don't get white working class vote is because they think, Democrats don't care about them; they only care about blacks, which is not totally untrue.
(By the way, I'm a liberal Democrats, an Indian American. The only complaint I have against president Obama is that he messed up the Middle East situation. Otherwise he would go down in history as among few greatest presidents, regardless what you & Republicans say about him.)
Then again, it was totally unnecessary to go for a path to citizenship for 11 million+ illegal immigrants. Make them legal; most of them would be completely satisfied. Because the citizenship clause, they got nothing.
Statistics show undocumented immigrants commit less crime than ordinary Americans. They do jobs others don't want. They contribute to America far more than they "take" from America. They are treated worse than blacks have been way back. They do not have an "entitled" mentality. Some 2 million Mexican Americans were deported during the Depression era, many of whom were US born!
The problems of black America are to a substantial extent are their own making. Then leaders like Al Sharpton make the matter worse. There is of course, white indifference. They do not employ more police to patrol high crime areas. Some may even think "if they want to kill each other, let them kill each other. We have done enough for them."
One reason Democrats don't get white working class vote is because they think, Democrats don't care about them; they only care about blacks, which is not totally untrue.
(By the way, I'm a liberal Democrats, an Indian American. The only complaint I have against president Obama is that he messed up the Middle East situation. Otherwise he would go down in history as among few greatest presidents, regardless what you & Republicans say about him.)
Then again, it was totally unnecessary to go for a path to citizenship for 11 million+ illegal immigrants. Make them legal; most of them would be completely satisfied. Because the citizenship clause, they got nothing.
I respect your opinions. But I've seen way too much suffering, dying and tragedy in the Black Community during the Obama presidency to crown him one of the greatest presidents. The greatest president doesn't sit in the White House, a $6 cab ride from the poorest Black community in Washington DC doing nothing for 8 years and never setting foot there.
Al Sharpton is an Obama WH insider. I'll just leave that one there, you can figure out the rest.
Any crime committed by undocumented illegals is too many. They're not even supposed to BE here, let alone committing crimes. Worse? The statistics on crime you cite rely on complete prosecution, and we know how often undocumented illegals skip out on court dates or are not caught.
As a Black lawyer with a degree in American History, I like many legal scholars with my background, remember what the 14th amendment really was, and that it has nothing to do with the abuses and distortions that have been used to exploit our laws. "Born" with regard to the 14th Amendment was never meant to allow people to enter the USA illegally, give birth to children and stay by some notion that the child was instantly a US citizen. Until the late 1900s, the 14th Amendment was openly described in history books as the "Reconstruction" Amendment because the SOLE intent of the 14th amendment was to grant US citizen rights to the children of slaves, who were free after the Civil War and the 13th Amendment.
Make them legal? Why?
Al Sharpton is an Obama WH insider. I'll just leave that one there, you can figure out the rest.
Any crime committed by undocumented illegals is too many. They're not even supposed to BE here, let alone committing crimes. Worse? The statistics on crime you cite rely on complete prosecution, and we know how often undocumented illegals skip out on court dates or are not caught.
As a Black lawyer with a degree in American History, I like many legal scholars with my background, remember what the 14th amendment really was, and that it has nothing to do with the abuses and distortions that have been used to exploit our laws. "Born" with regard to the 14th Amendment was never meant to allow people to enter the USA illegally, give birth to children and stay by some notion that the child was instantly a US citizen. Until the late 1900s, the 14th Amendment was openly described in history books as the "Reconstruction" Amendment because the SOLE intent of the 14th amendment was to grant US citizen rights to the children of slaves, who were free after the Civil War and the 13th Amendment.
Make them legal? Why?
2
Now,if Democrats would admit they do background checks to bring in more money to govt.Why do Democrats do continuous background checks?I mean,if you pass a background check and a few months later you want to make another purchase,another $25 and background check is required.If Dems are serious,maybe a background check and $25,good for 5 years.Dems have to show they don't want to ban all guns and ammo and aren't out to just tax them out of existence.We need some compromise.Guns aren't 100% bad,like cigarettes.
3
um, because you can commit a violent crime or have new information show up on your most recent background check, that's why. Banks and credit agencies don't run checks once every five years-they do it when needed. Obviously.
And veering from the Republicans is a good thing. The establishment Republican Party has litmus tests, for many issues, especially the NRA that are awful. Mr. Trump is open to reason and he has the courage to take on the NRA and its nonsense.
4
Dear NYT Reader,
Sorry but that's rather naïve. Trump has given no indication of being open to reason, he never accepts advice from anyone. He does not appear to have the courage to take on the NRA because, thus far, he has done nothing at all about improving gun control. This statement is just a crowd-pleaser and like everything else he says, he's willing to walk it back or directly contradict it within a week.
Sorry but that's rather naïve. Trump has given no indication of being open to reason, he never accepts advice from anyone. He does not appear to have the courage to take on the NRA because, thus far, he has done nothing at all about improving gun control. This statement is just a crowd-pleaser and like everything else he says, he's willing to walk it back or directly contradict it within a week.
2
NYT Reader, Actually, Donald Trump is an unusually gifted man. He is not evil, but he acts as one, largely, I believe because he is hypomanic. He can't control, or REGULATE his responses. He says dump things and also makes irrational decisions all because of his hypomania.
If he were to take about 300 mg of lithium, or its equivalent daily, he would be mellow, and far more rational, and can make good decisions for the country, if he were to become president (I'm a liberal, Hillary supporter & an admirer of Bernie) in the unlikely event. It would give him more dignity in gestures & responses and he would be a successful business man; he would have been far more successful, if his hypomania were treated with "hypo" dose of a mood stabilizer. He also needs to sleep at least 5 hrs. - the other day on Morning Joe, Mika was saying he was "delirious," from sleep deprivation, which probably's true.
If he were to take about 300 mg of lithium, or its equivalent daily, he would be mellow, and far more rational, and can make good decisions for the country, if he were to become president (I'm a liberal, Hillary supporter & an admirer of Bernie) in the unlikely event. It would give him more dignity in gestures & responses and he would be a successful business man; he would have been far more successful, if his hypomania were treated with "hypo" dose of a mood stabilizer. He also needs to sleep at least 5 hrs. - the other day on Morning Joe, Mika was saying he was "delirious," from sleep deprivation, which probably's true.
3
NYT Reader, Barack Obama isn't a gifted man.
As a Black lawyer in Washington DC, I had the opportunity to work as a judicial clerk for a trial judge in criminal courts for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. After months of testimony from law enforcement, mental health and counseling experts, I believe Obama's bizarre, arrogant, sociopath, mania-driven behavior is consistent with Ambien abuse. See Tiger Woods before his dramatic fall from grace if you need a visual.
It is the worst kept secret here in Washington DC that Obama uses prescription drugs for "sleep issues" and Ambien is the most prescribed medication in that class and most abused.
I am a registered Republican, because after meeting Obama in 2004, I realized that I respect my racial heritage too much to stay in the same political party as a biracial con artist who used the color of my skin to get into the WH for his own ends.
As a Black lawyer in Washington DC, I had the opportunity to work as a judicial clerk for a trial judge in criminal courts for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. After months of testimony from law enforcement, mental health and counseling experts, I believe Obama's bizarre, arrogant, sociopath, mania-driven behavior is consistent with Ambien abuse. See Tiger Woods before his dramatic fall from grace if you need a visual.
It is the worst kept secret here in Washington DC that Obama uses prescription drugs for "sleep issues" and Ambien is the most prescribed medication in that class and most abused.
I am a registered Republican, because after meeting Obama in 2004, I realized that I respect my racial heritage too much to stay in the same political party as a biracial con artist who used the color of my skin to get into the WH for his own ends.
1
Trump proves yet again he's an outsider running against the rigged, crooked system. The media should be grateful that a New York City Democrat won the Republican primary instead of demonizing him to ensure a Hillary presidency.
7
So Trump met with the ED of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action on Tuesday and didn't discuss "no fly-no buy" legislation? What a missed opportunity! Trump then announces on Wednesday morning that he will Be meeting with the NRA to discuss the legislation, though judging by the NRA's response the meeting has not yet been scheduled. I can see it all now: Congress fails yet again to pass a gun control law; Trump negotiates a deal where the NRA agrees not to work against legislation closing the so-called "terror gap"; Trump presents himself as a savior because only he can make the NRA see sense; Trump gets elected President; gun legislation never sees the light of day.
3
My 'fear' now is the NRA may give a little to DT and that may well spark many more 'followers' because 'he got something done - he IS a great deal maker' - arghhhhhhhhhh! I cannot think of a more despicable person or his actions than the republican't presumptuous (sic!) nominee. If one's 'heritage' (e.g. Federal District Court Judge Curiel) is of concern, then shouldn't we be concerned of DT's German heritage? [Of course not, but why doesn't some bozo like me at least throw that same 'argument' back at him - yeah, I know, it's juvenile but that's the level DT plays on. Hey, my Dad was born in Italy, 1913, my Mom's of Irish/Welsh heritage - sheesh - we're ALL from 'elsewhere'. And didn't we 'take' the western half of what's not the USA from Mexico by war, etc.?]
I suspect this may be a bit too much of a rant and will accept the NYT editors' decision if they decide not to publish this - I'll understand and support that decision if that occurs. I respect the NYT and agree with the vast majority (but not all) of positions its editorial staff takes.
Best regards to all
R. Galli
Edison, NJ
I suspect this may be a bit too much of a rant and will accept the NYT editors' decision if they decide not to publish this - I'll understand and support that decision if that occurs. I respect the NYT and agree with the vast majority (but not all) of positions its editorial staff takes.
Best regards to all
R. Galli
Edison, NJ
6
So the fear that keeps Obama liberals up at night breaking out in cold sweat is the notion that things actually get done here in Washington DC, as opposed to Obama's 8 year apology/late night comedy show/ESPN bracketology/Selfie tour?
Got it.
Got it.
1
DCB, once again your ravings make no sense. Come clean now, you're actually Trump himself, right? There has been a heck of a lot done in Washington, I don't know if you've ever heard of the ACA, gay marriage getting approved federally, bin laden getting killed, and so on, but it's all happened recently.
DCBarrister, "Got it"...no you don't get it....your President was stonewalled by the Republicans on day 1.....they have not given him an inch....but notwithstanding he has managed to be an excellent President ....and historians will record that.
1
Don't gun owners see through Trump when he says, "I'm going to save YOUR Second Amendment," instead of "OUR Second Amendment"?
Clearly he doesn't actually see himself as the tried-and-true, red-white-and-blue gun enthusiast that he's been pretending to be. The guy is a fraud from hair to bone spur.
Clearly he doesn't actually see himself as the tried-and-true, red-white-and-blue gun enthusiast that he's been pretending to be. The guy is a fraud from hair to bone spur.
3
Fraud to the nth degree, but you do mean from "fake" hair to bone spur, don't you?
1
Am I the only one who sees the simple act of repealing the second amendment as being the answer to the problem? Limit gun purchases? For what benefit? This guy may have been crazy but apparently his wife/ex-wife wasn't and was stocking him up anyway. The second amendment served a useful purpose when it was ratified but as times have changed its purpose has been outdated. The United States is far and away the most gun crazed nation in the supposed Western World. Those who love guns defend their positions with outdated logic. Guns have one singular purpose and that is to kill. Target practice is a side line. I like to drive my car fast and at what some would say is in crazy ways. They are illegal by laws passed. The concept that everyone deserves the right to own a gun needs to be readdressed. In the 21st century gun ownership is so sadly outdated and the people of the Untied States need to wake up and realize that. In most nations of Europe gun ownership is severely limited and their gun related death rates are far far lower than in the US. The New York Times had published a chart showing the standings of Europe vs the US and we are probably at a point comparable to the countries in the Middle East!
I spent 12 months of my life hunting human beings in Viet Nam so I am vey aware of what guns can do. I'd wager that a large majority of us who have been in combat have a completely different opinion on guns than the rest of the country.
I spent 12 months of my life hunting human beings in Viet Nam so I am vey aware of what guns can do. I'd wager that a large majority of us who have been in combat have a completely different opinion on guns than the rest of the country.
23
Thank you for your service and your unique perspective. I'm convinced that many of those who hold the Second Amendment sacrosanct completely misunderstand the original intent of the law, perverting it so that some of our fellow citizens can indulge in a firearms fetish. As you know first-hand. war is a terrible thing. In the 1960's, political leaders failed to show the courage they expected from you and many other brave Americans when they subjected you to the quagmire that was Vietnam. Let us hope that today's leaders do not repeat their mistakes, and belatedly find the courage to stop enabling a similar slaughter on our own shores.
When it comes to his policy positions, I'd say that "careens" is a more accurate description than "veers."
7
Trump is a lunatic. No matter what he says, his ideas and plans would destroy the democratic republic that has been the United States since 1776. He will not become benign nor less narcissistic and would thoroughly disembowel any human principles that might be found in the Republican Party. It would be self-delusional to think he could ever represent any rational and moral American. He would do everything he can, however, to further the interests of the wealthy, which is witnessed by his refusal to show his tax returns, which likely would show he pays no taxes. An audit does not prevent making public one's tax returns! He is lying and is an inveterate firmly established liar.
14
Trump already has the endorsement the NRA. So, is Trump meeting with them behind closed doors to get their approval so they can fake Trump being the kind of guy that gets things done, but the supposed deal does not do a thing about guns at all? Trump didn’t need Mexico’s approval to tell them that they were going to build him a wall.
1
Reality check if our government stopped letting felons out jail who pose greatest risk to terrorize us wont be any problems .Also if person isnt bad enough going into jail there most likely to get education an become super preditor. Too much tolerance an little action going on .Donald isnt liked by media thats for sure an they running the show or who owns media is . Never know these days everrything for sale midas well put sign up front white house for sale. When people vote i hope those who getting hand outs realize our for fathers brought us here an its our responsibilty to insure our children have same or better rights. Dont sell out to those who promise ya free ride when they get into office going to be alot different cause nothing is free
1
I object to the headline that Trump is breaking with GOP on gun control, when the article itself clearly says we don't know which of the dueling bills Trump supports! It also gives the impression Trump is an independent thinker, when later he always comes out and backs the GOP position!
2
Donald Trump did not say that he was going to meet with GOP leadership or top-ranking members of the House and Senate to discuss gun control. Instead, he says he will meet with the NRA.
We already knew that every elected Republican, and many Democrats, take their marching orders from the NRA, but this makes it official. Why bother with Congress? You want to discuss drug policy, don't waste your time with your elected representatives; go to the people who tell your elected representatives what to do: Pharma. You want energy policy, do like Cheney and convene a secret meeting of fossil fuel company leaders.
We already knew that every elected Republican, and many Democrats, take their marching orders from the NRA, but this makes it official. Why bother with Congress? You want to discuss drug policy, don't waste your time with your elected representatives; go to the people who tell your elected representatives what to do: Pharma. You want energy policy, do like Cheney and convene a secret meeting of fossil fuel company leaders.
8
That Trump announced he would be meeting with the execrable NRA is not that surprising. The organization funds politicians, after all, mostly on the GOP side.
That newscasters this morning announced NRA claims that no discussion of assault rifles -- NO discussion -- occurred during that meeting is also not surprising. Because Trump was not going there to tease out a way to save American lives. He was meeting NRA bigwigs because it made him look good -- and for money, which his campaign needs if Trump is to be repaid the loans he made to it.
That newscasters this morning announced NRA claims that no discussion of assault rifles -- NO discussion -- occurred during that meeting is also not surprising. Because Trump was not going there to tease out a way to save American lives. He was meeting NRA bigwigs because it made him look good -- and for money, which his campaign needs if Trump is to be repaid the loans he made to it.
5
Assault weapons were created for the purpose of killing as many people as soon as possible. It's absurd that these guns should be available to anyone, never mind those on terrorist watch lists.
7
The AR15 is NOT an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle. It just looks like a military version. Stop your ignorant rants against this fine rifle. You clearly don't know anything about weapons so you should not speak on the subject. You are one of the 'afraids'.
1
All Trump is doing is expressing a view that is held by the vast majority of Americans. He knows it will be a popular statement, and it enables him to demonstrate his leadership and deal-making ability if he can get the NRA to back down a step. It also buttresses his claim of independence from lobbying groups. So, it is hardly a brilliant tactical move, but rather obvious. In fact, he has voiced support for stronger gun control measures such as universal background checks before, which he now apparently repudiates.
It will be interesting to see if the NRA plays along. They might, if for no other reason than they hate to lose, as they well may on this one. Trump's move may help the measure succeed, as it could provide some cover for House and Senate Republicans to support it.
As the article points out, though, the Senate has a choice between two measures, a stronger one and a weaker. If the NRA does agree to this, they will undoubtedly throw their weight behind Cornyn's weaker bill. And given Congress as it is, I'm sure they'd like to pass a weak bill that enables them to say they've done something.
Unfortunately, without universal background checks, neither bill really makes a difference. Someone would still be able to get a gun from a gun show, a private individual, or over the internet, and the seller wouldn't find out they'd sold it to someone on the watch list until they hear about it on the news after some tragedy.
It will be interesting to see if the NRA plays along. They might, if for no other reason than they hate to lose, as they well may on this one. Trump's move may help the measure succeed, as it could provide some cover for House and Senate Republicans to support it.
As the article points out, though, the Senate has a choice between two measures, a stronger one and a weaker. If the NRA does agree to this, they will undoubtedly throw their weight behind Cornyn's weaker bill. And given Congress as it is, I'm sure they'd like to pass a weak bill that enables them to say they've done something.
Unfortunately, without universal background checks, neither bill really makes a difference. Someone would still be able to get a gun from a gun show, a private individual, or over the internet, and the seller wouldn't find out they'd sold it to someone on the watch list until they hear about it on the news after some tragedy.
4
Devils advocate here, but, just being declared a suspect of something does not take your Constitutional rights, whatever they may be, away. The whole point of the NRAs position is to be a credible deterrent to government overreach. Doubtless an overreaching government would just declare you a suspect, and put you in jail somewhere without due process. For more information, look at China, for an extreme example of state mafia philosophy and practice. Although the NRA is wrong, they do have a point that we are not China.
1
Why is there no discussion on the WORLDWIDE problem. It is NOT guns, it is radical Islamic terrorism. Paris has very strict gun laws and so did Belgium. How did that work for them? If some of the attendees at the bar had a gun, maybe the result would have been different. Bad guys will get ahold of a gun, legal or not. We need to discuss both but the left always wants to push their agenda. It is always there way or the highway. Obama just uses his pen and does what he pleases.
1
"Paris has very strict gun laws and so did Belgium. How did that work for them?"
Better than it does here.
The Belgian attack was a bomb, genius. And Paris has far fewer gun deaths per capita than we do.
These attacks started with the rise of Trump and it is not a coincidence. Legitimizing hatred and violence leads to hatred and violence.
Better than it does here.
The Belgian attack was a bomb, genius. And Paris has far fewer gun deaths per capita than we do.
These attacks started with the rise of Trump and it is not a coincidence. Legitimizing hatred and violence leads to hatred and violence.
2
Wake me up when something's done about the guns!
1
And thus the "general election" pivot by Trump and Clinton begins. We may expect Trump to veer more to the Left, and Clinton to veer more to the Right. Ain't politicians and their "principles" grand?
2
Well, a good start to resolving "terror and hate" related violence would be to take a look at the world as it is. It's fraught. On edge. Tribal. Devoid of any sense of innocence - unless you believe in fairies. People shouting. Hatred flowing. Until our entire world aims towards a more enlightened and respectful view of life and seeks to attain it, the world will continue on this dangerous trajectory. The whole world needs a day of silent contemplation on what really matters. Love. Family. Peace. Food on the table. Child education, safe environments... Impossible, of course.
Come now, let's be serious. Little Donny has no interest one way or another. Should the political winds shift by this afternoon, so will his opinion on gun control. One can already detect his escape route when he says the true solution is more guns. Too much credit where it is not do.
3
Take this guy off your front page!!
5
sorry to dispute... but keeping weapons out of the hands of people on the terror watch list is not the "center of the gun-control debate." It's way out on the marginal fringe. But such is the dialogue in this country that any slight concession is progress. pitiful.
What we need now is to pass Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) Firearm Risk Protection Act, a bill that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance. If you had to show proof of insurance to buy ammunition, that would insure coverage.
Then, the actuaries would price the risk: responsible people would have a low premium. Less responsible people would pay more. This is a market-driven solution to a social problem. The NRA would make a killing on safety classes and insurance sales.
What we need now is to pass Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) Firearm Risk Protection Act, a bill that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance. If you had to show proof of insurance to buy ammunition, that would insure coverage.
Then, the actuaries would price the risk: responsible people would have a low premium. Less responsible people would pay more. This is a market-driven solution to a social problem. The NRA would make a killing on safety classes and insurance sales.
5
In an ideal world, no politician would have to ask a special-interest group before proposing policy changes, but considering this is not an ideal world, it's probably a good thing that Trump is getting the NRA on board on this. If the NRA supports a gun reform, the gun reform is more likely to be made.
2
Donald Trump does not represent me and the NRA certainly does not. Trump is not fit to lead and the NRA is not a direct member of Congress, although some members of Congress do represent the NRA rather than its constituents.
Furthermore neither Trump nor the NRA are ethically, morally or legally in a position to make decisions on behalf of the public. Both the man and the organization are rancid and vile, the latter complicit in the murders in Orlando, Newtown, Santa Barbara etc.
Furthermore neither Trump nor the NRA are ethically, morally or legally in a position to make decisions on behalf of the public. Both the man and the organization are rancid and vile, the latter complicit in the murders in Orlando, Newtown, Santa Barbara etc.
7
Someone--maybe the Times--should ask the NRA if they've receive any request from Trump's organization for a meeting. Trump makes lots of statements about what he's going to do (like donating money to veterans charities), but has a documented tendency to not follow through. A man whose statements prove false over 70% of the time should be vigorously fact-checked. More and more Americans are finally getting wise to his act.
3
>> "“I will be meeting with the N.R.A., who has endorsed me"
The NRA is not a person, it's a thing. He's supposed to say "which has endorsed me". To add to the pile of reasons this guy should not be president: he can't speak English properly.
>> "I have a very good brain"
Apparently not. He speaks like a 9-year-old.
The NRA is not a person, it's a thing. He's supposed to say "which has endorsed me". To add to the pile of reasons this guy should not be president: he can't speak English properly.
>> "I have a very good brain"
Apparently not. He speaks like a 9-year-old.
7
Quotes of President Obama containing grammar errors.
“I have to say that nobody was more surprised than me about winning the Nobel Prize for peace.”
“Well, first of all, I do continue to believe that the greatest threat to United States security are the terrorist networks like al Qaeda …”
“I can tell you that if it was me, I would resign,” Obama said.
You don't like Trump. Fine. But it appears that there are a host of Presidents who don't speak "good"
And don't have much number savvy either.
... uh, because, you know, i-i-it is just wonderful to be back in Oregon, and over the last 15 months we've traveled ... uh to every corner of the United States. Uh, I've now been in fifty ... ss-seven? states. I think one left to go. Uh, one left to go -- eh, Alaska and Hawaii I was not allowed to go to, even though I really wanted to visit but my staff would not, uh, justify it."
“I have to say that nobody was more surprised than me about winning the Nobel Prize for peace.”
“Well, first of all, I do continue to believe that the greatest threat to United States security are the terrorist networks like al Qaeda …”
“I can tell you that if it was me, I would resign,” Obama said.
You don't like Trump. Fine. But it appears that there are a host of Presidents who don't speak "good"
And don't have much number savvy either.
... uh, because, you know, i-i-it is just wonderful to be back in Oregon, and over the last 15 months we've traveled ... uh to every corner of the United States. Uh, I've now been in fifty ... ss-seven? states. I think one left to go. Uh, one left to go -- eh, Alaska and Hawaii I was not allowed to go to, even though I really wanted to visit but my staff would not, uh, justify it."
2
That's all you're got out of the thousands of speeches he has made? Pathetic comment, Heddy Greer.
1
This article is yet another example of how even the NYT essayists are complicit in keeping Trump on the front pages without regard to any reasonable judgment whether the underlying story warrants such coverage. Trump's tweet creates both the headline and structure of the essay yet it is only a tweet, and what substance the article contains is about the filibuster by the Democrats and the party's proposed legislation.
I'm some form of 2A advocate, b/c that was our original contract, and b/c the Bill of Rights does not GRANT rights, it preserves them, as preexisting.
Guns are enabled, by our national ancestry the English Bill of Rights.
I submit, I need as much justification to exercise 2A as 1A - let's have background checks to read, or write, a newspaper.
'pen is mightier than the sword?'
=
Gun laws have pretty much zero impact on gun availability;
The perception if not reality, of self defense, is a pretty serious hurdle to restriction
-
HOWEVER, since so many of our shooters were known to our 'authorities'
(1) our authorities are useless
(2) what new authority do our authorities need?
=
I sort of like 'suspiciousness' or 'dangerousness'
=
SO, if you want MY buy-in, come back with a proposal
-that would have disarmed the Fort Hood shooter IN ADVANCE
-that would have locked up the Orlando shooter IN ADVANCE -that classifies rhetoric and rhetoricians of Islam IN ADVANCE as incitement, clear and present danger
Gun'fire in a crowded theater' as it were
=
When your side can stop Fort Hood, come back to me
Along the way maybe we will enforce the gun laws we have, 10,000s of 'little murders,'
You know 'stop and frisk, race- based (actually epidemiologically- based)
I am a 2Aa 'fanatic?'
Your side are 1A 'fanatics,' 4A 'fanatics,' 14A 'fanatics'
Start by criminalizing an ideology that flies a flag 'death to the great Satan' and ACTS on it
Where is the fatwa?
Guns are enabled, by our national ancestry the English Bill of Rights.
I submit, I need as much justification to exercise 2A as 1A - let's have background checks to read, or write, a newspaper.
'pen is mightier than the sword?'
=
Gun laws have pretty much zero impact on gun availability;
The perception if not reality, of self defense, is a pretty serious hurdle to restriction
-
HOWEVER, since so many of our shooters were known to our 'authorities'
(1) our authorities are useless
(2) what new authority do our authorities need?
=
I sort of like 'suspiciousness' or 'dangerousness'
=
SO, if you want MY buy-in, come back with a proposal
-that would have disarmed the Fort Hood shooter IN ADVANCE
-that would have locked up the Orlando shooter IN ADVANCE -that classifies rhetoric and rhetoricians of Islam IN ADVANCE as incitement, clear and present danger
Gun'fire in a crowded theater' as it were
=
When your side can stop Fort Hood, come back to me
Along the way maybe we will enforce the gun laws we have, 10,000s of 'little murders,'
You know 'stop and frisk, race- based (actually epidemiologically- based)
I am a 2Aa 'fanatic?'
Your side are 1A 'fanatics,' 4A 'fanatics,' 14A 'fanatics'
Start by criminalizing an ideology that flies a flag 'death to the great Satan' and ACTS on it
Where is the fatwa?
1
Trump already has the endorsement the NRA. So, is Trump meeting with them behind closed doors to get their approval to get craft something that fakes Trump being the kind of guy that gets things done and it does not really do anything at all about guns? Trump didn’t need Mexico’s approval to tell them that they were going to build him a wall.
Who elected the NRA? Disturbing that this candidate thinks the NRA is who he needs to consult with for changing U.S. laws and policy. Or is it not about changing laws, but rather just to secure his funding for his campaign?
1
'I will meet with the NRA'.
That is the problem in a nutshell.
The NRA was not elected by the people. The NRA does not speak for the people. The NRA is an interest group, why do they have a seat at any table when policy is being discussed.
If the NRA encouraged it's membership to write their Congressmen it would be one thing. The NRA meeting with (and handing an envelope to) a Congressman is another.
I know it's naive, but that's not democracy. That's not 'exceptional' and it's not what we are supposed to be as a country. We can tell ourselves how great we are, but the reality is quite different.
We are "Third world with benefits".
That is the problem in a nutshell.
The NRA was not elected by the people. The NRA does not speak for the people. The NRA is an interest group, why do they have a seat at any table when policy is being discussed.
If the NRA encouraged it's membership to write their Congressmen it would be one thing. The NRA meeting with (and handing an envelope to) a Congressman is another.
I know it's naive, but that's not democracy. That's not 'exceptional' and it's not what we are supposed to be as a country. We can tell ourselves how great we are, but the reality is quite different.
We are "Third world with benefits".
2
Trump and the NRA, ignorance loves company. I fear for what is left of the future as outright ignorance permeates and eliminates reality. The second amendment and ignorance are the greatest threat to Americans. We are now the laughing stock of humanity and history.
2
Watch lists are a violation of the Constitution when they actually empower law enforcement, including DHS, to act without evidence of any crime. They are a violation of due process. Sure, airlines are private enterprises, so they can deny access to aircraft for a variety of safety reasons. Trump and the Obama Administration's DHS seem to agree, however, that violation of legal due process is no impediment to a police stat.... excuse me, safe society.
Semi-automatic firearms with detachable magazines have been available for sale to the US public in large numbers since the end of World War 1. Almost a hundred years ago.
There are tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of semi automatic firearms with detachable magazines in private hands within the US.
If one includes semi auto-weapons that are reloaded with stripper clips, semi- autos have been available to the public since the late 19th Century. For example, the John Sturges western,"Joe Kidd" (1972) starring Clint Eastwood correctly features an 1896 Mauser semi-automatic pistol.
We can't even keep heroin out of the US, and it is sometimes made on the other side of the world.
Gun prohibitionists often fail because they generally know very little about firearms that is actually true.
Nevertheless, an ignorant, and slowly collapsing free society may threaten tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions with criminalization for simply exercising Constitutional rights, because of the criminal actions of a few.
Semi-automatic firearms with detachable magazines have been available for sale to the US public in large numbers since the end of World War 1. Almost a hundred years ago.
There are tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of semi automatic firearms with detachable magazines in private hands within the US.
If one includes semi auto-weapons that are reloaded with stripper clips, semi- autos have been available to the public since the late 19th Century. For example, the John Sturges western,"Joe Kidd" (1972) starring Clint Eastwood correctly features an 1896 Mauser semi-automatic pistol.
We can't even keep heroin out of the US, and it is sometimes made on the other side of the world.
Gun prohibitionists often fail because they generally know very little about firearms that is actually true.
Nevertheless, an ignorant, and slowly collapsing free society may threaten tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions with criminalization for simply exercising Constitutional rights, because of the criminal actions of a few.
1
Trump will have a golden opportunity to change America and over haul everything that is wrong with America and the world if he does become the next president of USA. He can take advice and ideas from Americans to develop the best solutions that will work for all Americans. There are many failures that have taken place in the past 7+ years and it best to not make the same mistakes again if he wants to make America great again. At breakfast today in Riga Latvia, I saw 100s of US air force and army personnel. We need to bolster our homeland security instead if having our defense forces spread all over the world. The infrastructure in Europe is first class and we need to develop our infrastructure. We have a massive fire power and killing machines but we cannot track whether we have guns in the hands of the wrong hands. We have more African Americans and Hispanics in US prisons than any time in the past 50 years. It is silly to call Trump dangerous and unqualified and focus on the real problems and find lasting solutions,
2
Oh to be a fly on the wall at that meeting! On the one side there's Trump (used to be for some gun controls but then decided he needed more votes so now depicts himself as a 'defender of 2nd Amendment rights) and on the other side the N.R.A. (Founded as a gun safety organization but now devoted to 'an assault rifle in every pot.') Nothing will come of the meeting except political mush-mouthing- no action, no furtherance of public safety. But the N.R.A. will come out with an endorsement of Trump and that's all he cares about anyway.
P.S. AR-15 sales are booming!
P.S. AR-15 sales are booming!
1
Oh yes, if only everyone at Pulse had been armed and able to defend themselves. Amidst all the alcohol, loud music, the large crowd, flashing lights and darkness of a nightclub at 2 a.m., I am absolutely certain all of the armed individuals at Pulse would have clearly and easily identified the shooter and immediately taken him out with no "collateral damage" to anyone else.
6
Let's elect a Congress that will pass this legislation so Hillary can sign it.
Look to see whether your representative voted for the best final proposal and spread the word.
Let's stop making massacres easy.
Look to see whether your representative voted for the best final proposal and spread the word.
Let's stop making massacres easy.
4
I wonder what National refers to in NRA. Certainly not American Nationals. Given the International trade deals and hiding money in Other Nations and protective laws for citizens diminishing in favor of multinational corporations, and then Russia and North Korea and Israel playing roles in our "National" elections, I do wonder about the money made in all these war games. Seems like a biological insecurity brewing...fight or flight, but nowhere to go. And we go down with the clueless boys with toys.
1
Trump has done us the favor of showing us clearly who is running the show in the US today and it is the NRA. Big tough guy Trump has to ask the NRA what his gun policy should be. Well, we'll find out what they tell him. We can expect the Donald to say, "Oh, well, OK then."
3
For those who don't know how background checks work on guns, when the shop calls in the check they get back a letter and a number. The letter A (approval), N (non approval), or CN (conditional non approval). A CN means the shop has to hold the gun for 3 days while the background check takes extra time to investigate. After 3 days if there is no resolution or it turns to an A, the gun is released. If it becomes an N the gun is not released.
The NRA wants the no fly list to trigger a CN and the Democrats want it to trigger an N. That is basically the difference.
The NRA wants the no fly list to trigger a CN and the Democrats want it to trigger an N. That is basically the difference.
58
That sounds like a minor difference. However, when someone is flagged as “CN” it shifts the burden to the government to do something within 3 days. That gives the government only 3 days to investigate the person’s background, gather evidence, conduct a legal analysis and perhaps even run it through the legal system. That would be for each person who is flagged. So, practically speaking, being flagged CN versus N for being on the terrorist watch list would make a big difference.
Not really, since the NRA opposes further checks or a longer wait period.
CN shouldn't be 3 days - it should be until the check comes back definitive.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
10
It's 2016.
Barack Obama is still stumbling around the oak tree.
Barack Obama is still stumbling around the oak tree.
1
Yeah DCB you hate him. Let us know whenever you come up with actual facts or a citation to support your venomous hatred.
How many liberal policy positions will Trump have to take before liberals get off his back? Answer: not gonna happen, they would rather have the beholden to the 1% and Wall Street crowd, change her position as the wind blows, war hawk, status quo Hillary.
12
Liberal positions, are you joking? Read facts, not headlines. What is the purpose of Trump going to the NRA as if they make the choices on law. Just pandering to the NRA's power. Why wouldn't he instead speak to members of his party who are in the actual position to vote on laws. It's one thing to be running for President of the United States without any actual political experience but to have NO CONCEPT of how our government works is beyond comprehending.
1
Interesting comment, Jordon. The bottom line for Trump, and the foundation that all of his statements must be heard from, is that he is a liar. He says what benefits him. You may hate the idea of a woman being President just as you hated the idea of a ni##er being President, but there is no way that Trump will win, so get used to the concept of HRC being CiC. Hehheh
That's because it's not entirely about Trump taking "liberal" positions. I could NEVER support him because he is a bigoted fool whose public persona and racist ramblings are dangerous for our country. Not gonna happen. Hillary is not a perfect candidate, but government isn't supposed to be taylor made for exactly what I believe. It is about doing what's best for the majority through compromise. Her positions (both the more progressive ones brought on by Sanders, and the more centrist ones from before) are closER to mine, so I intend to vote for her.
1
Fundamentals and inter-connection totally absent in Orlando horror incident.
Having been interviewed prior times by the FBI... the buy of weapons by purp should have immediately signaled a track and new interview.. Pyscho-sexual factors infused with religion fed the eruption as well... we arrest for action
we arrest for suspicion .. is arrest for potential next ( and/or needed)? A clearing expansion of Trump Islamic focal immigration thinking is in order -- all immigration should be considered frozen until further notice
Having been interviewed prior times by the FBI... the buy of weapons by purp should have immediately signaled a track and new interview.. Pyscho-sexual factors infused with religion fed the eruption as well... we arrest for action
we arrest for suspicion .. is arrest for potential next ( and/or needed)? A clearing expansion of Trump Islamic focal immigration thinking is in order -- all immigration should be considered frozen until further notice
3
So, what about people born in the U.S., not immigrants? Retroactive denial? What countries, what religions? What about guns? They don't count?
agreed , assault rifle purchase with tons of ammo and he should have had a knock on the door the next day
Donald Trump's proposal to ban people on the terror watch list from purchasing firearms is a lot more reasonable and ethical than his recent proposal to kill the 3-year-old son of the Orlando club shooter.
6
Yes, but please stop calling it "Donald Trump's proposal."
For God's sake, the man is trying to get something done.
How many times has Barack Obama respectfully sat down with NRA leaders to talk about compromise on gun control?
Hint: Never.
I'm a Black attorney in Washington DC, and I've been here since 2008. The NRA has a huge office on K Street, just a 2 min walk from the Obama WH.
I have never seen Obama, Biden or any human being that works in the Obama WH on that side of the street in 7.5 years. Let me repeat that.
I moved here after law school, before Obama won the 2008 election. My condo is 1.6 miles from the White House. I have never seen any human being that I've seen entering and exiting the White House with an employee badge in or around the building where the NRA has national offices. Ever. At all.
How are you going to reach common ground with someone if you refuse to talk to them? Seriously liberals, what's wrong with you?
How many times has Barack Obama respectfully sat down with NRA leaders to talk about compromise on gun control?
Hint: Never.
I'm a Black attorney in Washington DC, and I've been here since 2008. The NRA has a huge office on K Street, just a 2 min walk from the Obama WH.
I have never seen Obama, Biden or any human being that works in the Obama WH on that side of the street in 7.5 years. Let me repeat that.
I moved here after law school, before Obama won the 2008 election. My condo is 1.6 miles from the White House. I have never seen any human being that I've seen entering and exiting the White House with an employee badge in or around the building where the NRA has national offices. Ever. At all.
How are you going to reach common ground with someone if you refuse to talk to them? Seriously liberals, what's wrong with you?
17
Why should our President sit down with the NRA? They should be trying to reach out to the Democratic legislature, not to him. Furthermore, unless you are continually surveilling the White House and NRA offices (really creepy thought), how is what you've seen or not seen relevant to this conversation? Do you claim to really be able to identify every person that works in or for the WH? Also, why do you feel the need to keep telling us you are a "Black attorney?" Does that make your illogic more logical, or your assertions more credible? This Black attorney doesn't think so.
2
DCBarrister, do you really believe that the NRA would meet with President Obama and have a meaningful discussion about gun control? You must be living in another universe.
2
Dear Black attorney in DC. Obama may be unaware that the proper place for legislation to start in our system is not Congress, but in the offices of a rabid industry funded private lobbying organization led by unhinged crackpots, that has never once told the truth about Obama or the issues.
6
Typical--- Trump tweets a slogan instead of articulating a policy proposal and admits that he must take even that pathetic scrap of leadership to the NRA for approval. Sad proof that the GOP is owned by the NRA.
9
Since the founding fathers way back in 1791 when the 2nd amendment was passed had most likely never heard the term "high capacity magazine", it seems it would be a simple thing for Congress to restrict the size of these magazines to say 3-5 shots essentially crippling the AR-15 type assault weapons of any capacity to inflict high casualties in a terrorist attack. Seems it would pass the 2nd amendment gun rights muster since you could still buy the AR-15 type weapons, albeit with a crippled shooting capacity.
1
While it makes sense to institute this ban, it will start another sensitive debate...would we classify a caucasian american as a terrorist as easily as a non-caucasian? Dylann Roof wasn't classified as a terrorist even after his shooting in a black church. An uncomfortable debate to be sure. This is probably the real reason why the NRA is against it...it doesn't want its "enemy" the federal government arbitrarily classifying one of their own as a terrorist.
3
I think this is a preview of the kind of pragmatic and flexible president Trump would be.
6
Then I'm afraid you've fallen for the lie. Wait and see if he actually does anything about this, rather than just tweet.
Flexible? Trump is certainly flexible. He changes his viewpoint often within a speech, contradicting what he said a few minutes ago. He has a memory problem among other mental disorders.
1
Why has the GOP been against denying guns to people on the terrorist watch list? People are saying they are in cahoots with the terrorists! Its incredible that the mainstream media refuses to report this. Something is happening and we need to figure out what it is. Until we do, we need to ban Republicans.
11
What Obama liberals are refusing to admit:
Donald Trump is meeting with the NRA to try and restore sanity in this country when it comes to guns, which means Trump thinks more of the LGBT community than Obama, who has never sat down honestly and openly to talk to NRA leaders about anything.
Donald Trump is meeting with the NRA to try and restore sanity in this country when it comes to guns, which means Trump thinks more of the LGBT community than Obama, who has never sat down honestly and openly to talk to NRA leaders about anything.
7
Donald Trump and the words "restore sanity" in the same sentence? Surely you jest!
1
Trump should seat down and talk to his fellow Republicans NOT the NRA.....the NRA have gotten too much power via lobbying & throwing money on the Hill.
Let's not be naive.
Let's not be naive.
2
Suggest you look at a graphic of how our laws work. The NRA is not actually on it.
2
Who have the most strength to decide what how best to keep this country safe --- the NRA, and a bunch 2 year olds who purport to be adults, "strapping guns to their waist" as if their manhood is threatened?
2
Yes, Mr. Trump and the NRA will likely agree to a "limit" which will be as effective and appropriate as applying a fingertip bandaid to a gaping wound.
Then, Mr. Trump wil proclaim he has taken action on gun "control".
Then, Mr. Trump wil proclaim he has taken action on gun "control".
5
This is Trump pandering to a few conservatives (what else would you have to be to overlook his flaws) who might be reconsidering their formerly absolutist stance on gun control.
1
I imagine the NRA is toying with the Donald, just like Putin and all of his imaginary fans.
A poll came out yesterday showing that something like 90% of all voters, including Republicans, want changes like universal background checks and keeping guns from the no-fly list. We need to stress to Congress that the NRA isn't part of our government and should be ignored.
A poll came out yesterday showing that something like 90% of all voters, including Republicans, want changes like universal background checks and keeping guns from the no-fly list. We need to stress to Congress that the NRA isn't part of our government and should be ignored.
11
I don't see why the nra does anything. they have nothing to lose by current positions. if they budge once then they will be seen as open for more
1
Call your senators.
I just called mine and the guy in Cory Gardner's office said Gardner was still worried about hurting people's feelings if they are on a terrorism list since there "is no due process". They would not be able to buy a military weapon in a few minutes.
Has this do-nothing Congress addressed that- since it seems that those people are their main focus, not the rest of America getting shot up by military weapons??? Does our Congress actually care about America or Americans?
I just called mine and the guy in Cory Gardner's office said Gardner was still worried about hurting people's feelings if they are on a terrorism list since there "is no due process". They would not be able to buy a military weapon in a few minutes.
Has this do-nothing Congress addressed that- since it seems that those people are their main focus, not the rest of America getting shot up by military weapons??? Does our Congress actually care about America or Americans?
11
@Kay
Thanks for the suggestion!
I'm going to call both my Senators and tell them that I don't want the Government taking away my rights to due process.
Heck I don't want them taking away your rights either!
I'll let them know that too.
Thanks for the suggestion!
I'm going to call both my Senators and tell them that I don't want the Government taking away my rights to due process.
Heck I don't want them taking away your rights either!
I'll let them know that too.
2
Trump is an opportunist. He stiffed his investors and people who did work for him. Why would anyone believe he would stand behind any promise he makes once he is elected---God forbid!
11
He couldn't even keep his oaths of marriage.
In other words the NRA will dictate what Trump says.
3
Since the NRA become the dictator of the USA and now controls our nation, we have had a spate of murders by people who are either mentally unstable or who are terrorists.
I suppose we should be happy that our leader, the NRA, has not moved one centimeter in their support for ALL Americans, regardless of their individual circumstances, to own a gun of any type. Since the ONLY use of a gun is to kill something or someone, this makes perfect sense to me.
Keep electing the NRA as ruler of America and we can look forward to more and more murders like the one in Orlando this weekend and many others that occurred over the weekend around our "great" nation.
GO NRA!!!
I suppose we should be happy that our leader, the NRA, has not moved one centimeter in their support for ALL Americans, regardless of their individual circumstances, to own a gun of any type. Since the ONLY use of a gun is to kill something or someone, this makes perfect sense to me.
Keep electing the NRA as ruler of America and we can look forward to more and more murders like the one in Orlando this weekend and many others that occurred over the weekend around our "great" nation.
GO NRA!!!
I'm glad to see you support the NRA also. Go NRA! Go Trump! Go Merica!!!!!!!
one more note --- the intense media coverage of terror attacks needs to be seriously diminished -- it provides a twisted glorification and goading to subsequent individuals so inclined...
Hopefully two national nightmares will diminsh: He will lose & the NRA will have a moment of clarity.
4
Am I the only one who feels that the NRA itself might just have terrorist connections? They certainly lobby hard for the right to kill anybody at any time anywhere.
7
Can't they at least begin by banning automatic rifles? After all,they are meant to kill many at a time-who legitimally needs that for protection?
9
Automatic rifles are banned and have been for a long, long time.
1
Well I know nothing about guns or rifles but what then what do they call these rifles that fire many rounds and kill many people?
Certainly terrorists have them.
Certainly terrorists have them.
Huh?! Donald is promoting the "slippery slope" to confiscation of all guns and knives? The watch list restriction that Hilary has been requesting? We need Tweets. This is confusing. How will Donald spin this?
6
A small step in the right direction
6
Obviously Trump with "broker" a deal with the NRA and come out looking like he is the only one who can move things or negotiate. This is getting truly repulsive.
9
Why is it repulsive?
You DON'T want a President that gets things done as opposed to taking selfies and slow jamming the news with Jimmy Fallon as ISIS plans attacks in our country?
You DON'T want a President that gets things done as opposed to taking selfies and slow jamming the news with Jimmy Fallon as ISIS plans attacks in our country?
1
DCBarrister, you are obviously a Trump campaign employee.
1
Whats repulsive about trying to get things done regarding gun safety? What has monkey Hussein done to help? How about crooked Billary? Don't be butthurt your candidate (whoever that is) is not able to get things done. Don't be jelly. Yo mad bro?
I will wait until I see the legislation. It was only about two weeks or so ago when Republicans and Democrats alike touted their support of a bill to allow terror victims to sue the Saudis. We were going to give Americans the right to sue but, in fact, the Congress did NO SUCH THING. Church Schumer introduced a poison pill that would make it unlikely that anyone could sue the Saudis because it would allow the government to simply say NO to any law suit. That's how powerful the Saudis are. As a result, I expect the NRA will work hard to make any measure that appears to ban gun sales to terrors watch list or no fly list individuals to insert enormous loop holes that will make the ban worthless.
I will wait to see the legislation!
I will wait to see the legislation!
1
Does this have the appearance, or is it just a plain fact, that the NRA decides our national legislation? Where are our legislators?
6
I'd like to see President Obama escort Wayne LaPierre and Donald Trump through Club Pulse before the blood is cleaned up.
6
A good thought but do you think it would make any impression whatsoever on them?
1
Wow. I woke up to find that I agree with Trump on something. It's going to be a strange day.
27
You agree with where Trump is today...and where all Democrats have been for years. And Trump gets the credit. Go figure.
2
The Second Amendment states "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The NRA believes that a "well regulated miltia" is everyone living in the United States, whether on the terror watch list or not. That Trump is meeting with the NRA to discuss our nation's gun laws is downright frightening.
3
How is it that a private citizen meeting with a major gun lobbying firm should have any bearing whatsoever on how our government deals with our gun crisis?
Our congress, who ended their 'filibuster' too soon, need to get their fannies back up to the podium and not leave until THEY make change happen.
For far too long, these loons at the NRA have been in control of our gun laws. We need to take America back.
Our congress, who ended their 'filibuster' too soon, need to get their fannies back up to the podium and not leave until THEY make change happen.
For far too long, these loons at the NRA have been in control of our gun laws. We need to take America back.
9
The fact that the Democrats don't want Trump's support, or anything to do with Trump even if it's helpful, means the democrats are putting politics first, and we will be stuck in gridlock. We want the government - that's all parties - to do something, and if it means only incremental change, so be it. If we can't respond effectively to this latest atrocity, then in terms of our goverment's ability to effect positive change, we're officially a third-world has-been.
6
After so many massacres and misuse by terrorists NRA is still holding Americans in ransom
5
Gay Community spans a wide socioeconomic status.
They were successful with civil rights passed these years.
Perhaps they are the ones that will be able to confront gun control and make changes.
They were successful with civil rights passed these years.
Perhaps they are the ones that will be able to confront gun control and make changes.
17
I will at least consider buying into all of this if and when guns and assault weapons are allowed into the Republican Convention, the US Capital, and State legislatures.
8
When did things get so convoluted since the Bill of Rights 4th amendment was ratified in 1791?
One can see why the NRA runs such a thick-with-smoke backroom operation 2 strike down any legislation 2 increase gun control laws... any NRA challenge 2 such laws in the Supreme Court would be denied.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU AMERICA & YOUR LEGISTLATORS ????
The right of the people 2 keep & bear arms is in reference 2 M-I-L-T-I-A-S.
Noticed the word, ... “Militia.”
Intent obviously was never 2 provide access 2 the weekend warrior who likes 2 take their weapon on weekends & play army at the gun range.
It was & should have always been about militias.
The sniveling arguments against gun control laws coming out of the NRA are beginning 2 appear motivated 2 helping NRA staff members keep their jobs with the organization than supporting constitutional rights.
Our bullet riddled society is far beyond the discussion of civil liberty & the right 2 bear arms.
We the people continue 2 demand the militia stay armed but draw a line when access 2 weapons infringes upon citizens’ rights.
Maybe Donald Trump sees that that government is instituted, & ought 2 be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life & liberty, with the right of acquiring & using property, & generally of pursuing & obtaining happiness & safety.
Hey Congress!
That was "happiness & safety."
Safety trumps playtime at the gun range with a high powered military assault rifle any day.
One can see why the NRA runs such a thick-with-smoke backroom operation 2 strike down any legislation 2 increase gun control laws... any NRA challenge 2 such laws in the Supreme Court would be denied.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU AMERICA & YOUR LEGISTLATORS ????
The right of the people 2 keep & bear arms is in reference 2 M-I-L-T-I-A-S.
Noticed the word, ... “Militia.”
Intent obviously was never 2 provide access 2 the weekend warrior who likes 2 take their weapon on weekends & play army at the gun range.
It was & should have always been about militias.
The sniveling arguments against gun control laws coming out of the NRA are beginning 2 appear motivated 2 helping NRA staff members keep their jobs with the organization than supporting constitutional rights.
Our bullet riddled society is far beyond the discussion of civil liberty & the right 2 bear arms.
We the people continue 2 demand the militia stay armed but draw a line when access 2 weapons infringes upon citizens’ rights.
Maybe Donald Trump sees that that government is instituted, & ought 2 be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life & liberty, with the right of acquiring & using property, & generally of pursuing & obtaining happiness & safety.
Hey Congress!
That was "happiness & safety."
Safety trumps playtime at the gun range with a high powered military assault rifle any day.
Assuming he'll actually get the GOP nomination...it appears that Mr. Trump is preparing to debate himself this fall via his often diametrically opposed 'positions du jour'.
What I really don't get is his 'Hillary is going to abolish the 2nd Amendment' rant. Does Mr. Trump understand that the Executive branch of our government cannot arbitrarily amend and/or repeal amendments to the Constitution?
Seriously your 'hugeness' this is 8th grade civics....you remember...the 3 best years of your life...
What I really don't get is his 'Hillary is going to abolish the 2nd Amendment' rant. Does Mr. Trump understand that the Executive branch of our government cannot arbitrarily amend and/or repeal amendments to the Constitution?
Seriously your 'hugeness' this is 8th grade civics....you remember...the 3 best years of your life...
2
N.R.A. should be abolished.
6
Why are gun rights so sacred to people? Voting rights are subject to non-judicial restrictions like getting a special id card from a government office but gun rights are so sacred that people too dangerous to fly get to buy them?? Your right to practise religion does not allow you to abuse children or your spouse assuming your religion encourages it, but your right to a semi auto gun is sacred??
3
LIMITATION OF GUN SALES? Oh, the gun lobby will cringe and undermine the good intentions.
1
I've a question....HUH??? And some additional questions....
How is it that anyone on the terrorist watch list would BE ABLE TO BUY A GUN in this country? After all that's gone on before and since 911 how is that STILL A POSSIBILITY? WHERE and WHY would there be any opposition?
Who is representing the PEOPLE of this country and how have they gotten in to that position if they are not clearly bought and sold lackeys of the NRA?
What does the Second Amendment and this "notion" that "they want to take away our guns" argument have to do with plain ol COMMON SENSE?
When has the rights and agenda of a few TRUMP what's RIGHT AND IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE MANY?
How long will these corporate self serving groups continue to HOLD SWAY on the broad public?
What will it take for the mindset to truly shift away from PROFITS OVER PEOPLE?
This country has a DISEASE. These MASS SLAUGHTER EPISODES are SYMPTOMS of that over all disease.
How about a WAR AGAINST ALL individual, groups and corporate entities that VIOLATES WHAT'S RIGHT AND GOOD?
How is it that anyone on the terrorist watch list would BE ABLE TO BUY A GUN in this country? After all that's gone on before and since 911 how is that STILL A POSSIBILITY? WHERE and WHY would there be any opposition?
Who is representing the PEOPLE of this country and how have they gotten in to that position if they are not clearly bought and sold lackeys of the NRA?
What does the Second Amendment and this "notion" that "they want to take away our guns" argument have to do with plain ol COMMON SENSE?
When has the rights and agenda of a few TRUMP what's RIGHT AND IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE MANY?
How long will these corporate self serving groups continue to HOLD SWAY on the broad public?
What will it take for the mindset to truly shift away from PROFITS OVER PEOPLE?
This country has a DISEASE. These MASS SLAUGHTER EPISODES are SYMPTOMS of that over all disease.
How about a WAR AGAINST ALL individual, groups and corporate entities that VIOLATES WHAT'S RIGHT AND GOOD?
1
"What will it take for the mindset to truly shift away from PROFITS OVER PEOPLE?"
Bingo. That's the disease. But I'm not holding my breath .
Restricting gun sales to wackos and terrorists would have a tiny negative impact on Value To The Shareholder, so we simply must not let that happen, at all costs. It's staggering and depressing that these decisions are made in the corporate boardrooms and not in the legislature. We should give up the expensive pretense and get rid of all the politicians, and just let the Board of Directors make the laws. The shareholders will be delighted.
Craziness, man.
Bingo. That's the disease. But I'm not holding my breath .
Restricting gun sales to wackos and terrorists would have a tiny negative impact on Value To The Shareholder, so we simply must not let that happen, at all costs. It's staggering and depressing that these decisions are made in the corporate boardrooms and not in the legislature. We should give up the expensive pretense and get rid of all the politicians, and just let the Board of Directors make the laws. The shareholders will be delighted.
Craziness, man.
Why does anyone care about what politicians SAY?
It's more relevant to look back on their lives to see what they HAVE DONE.
It's more relevant to look back on their lives to see what they HAVE DONE.
1
Seriously? Bad Guy Criminals and Terror Boys and Girls alike can always just buy their need accoutrements on the Black Market. Face the facts, with millions of guns and assault rifles out there, nothing can be done to stop the slaughter unless we remove the one's who have that hate in them.
So a realistic solution would be to work on preventing the mentally ill from getting access to guns or any weapon that could harm others and being real about the threats the stem from the "Radical Islamic Terrorist" people.... like ISIS..... Declare war and go get them.... not play like its local police problems.
So a realistic solution would be to work on preventing the mentally ill from getting access to guns or any weapon that could harm others and being real about the threats the stem from the "Radical Islamic Terrorist" people.... like ISIS..... Declare war and go get them.... not play like its local police problems.
2
Go get them how? They are entrenched in heavily populated areas of Iraq and Syria. Most of the residents are Sunni and have no faith that they will be treated fairly by the Shia-dominated government in each country and Shia militias, which have a record of terrorizing those populations since the great Bush invasion. We could easily wipe out ISIS with bombing but we would kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians. This would create a base for the next ISIS. Sorry Straight Shooter, "go and get them" is a pipe dream. The Syrian and Iraqis will have to defeat ISIS and al Qaida but that will take a lot of hard work and the end of sectarianism. In the meantime, why not make it harder for nut-cases like the Orlando killer to get guns and especially assault weapons?
Trump is great American who loves his country.He must learn how to express himself in a rational manner.He does not have dangerous mind set.Obama is deludes himself.
2
He loves himself. And he has conned many people and business associates over the years into believing he loves them. Have you not read any of the multitude of articles that have exposed his beyond unethical business dealings?
1
Trump is not a great American, gives no indication of loving America, and seems unable to express himself in a rational manner. He has a very dangerous mindset, in line with fascism, immune from negotiation or advice, infatuated with himself. Don't fall for the hype.
1
Keep talking Mr. Trump. Please, please keep talking!
1
If the goal is to ban people on the terrorist watch list, and the executive branch creates the watch list, what is to prevent President Trump from putting Obama, who he has insinuated is aiding and abetting terrorists, on a no-fly list? In fact what is to keep him from creating a blanket suspected terrorist list including anyone whose national origin or religion or color spark President Trump's xenophobia? I just don't think we are making good public policy. Extensive, non-time-limited background checks to include domestic violence, mental health issues and criminal activity; ban assault rifles for civilians; report attempts to purchase military grade body armor. That is the solution.
4
If Donald Trump is the candidate who does not owe anybody anything and he will not cave to special interests - why is he he asking the NRA, who endorses him - in his own words - to consider banning those on the no fly list from purchasing a gun. Why is anyone asking the NRA what we should do?
17
The NRA is feeling the heat now concerning the AR-15 type assault weapons and will probably throw the Congress a bone in saying they will support a restriction on gun sales to individuals on the no fly list. Then the members of Congress will all stand together on the Capitol steps arm in arm and gush about how they are strong on gun control and fighting terrorism. Meanwhile the sale of AR-15 type assault rifles and high capacity magazines (IMO the real problem) will continue unabated much to the delight of the gun manufacturers.
12
Whilst this is all well and good, it's not going to stop a Sandy Hook, or an Aurora, or a Virginia Tech. This is bait and switch - the problem is not terrorists, it's the bleeping guns!!! How many mass shootings this year (out of over 170!), have been attributed to religious extremists? Two, and the disaster in Orlando seems far more complicated than that.
10
Actually, an assault rifle ban would have taken away the insane Sandy Hook shooter's weapon, and linking state records to the Federal firearms check system would have picked up his extensive psychiatric and legal history and denied him both of his guns.
1
Sfday - I agree. I'm of the opinion it was an anti-LGBTQ mission - period. Anyone can shout 'ISIS' while committing such horrors. Why not shout the names of anti-gay Baptist preachers who wished for more carnage than the 50 dead in Orlando:
Sacramento Baptist preacher - laments more LGBT weren’t killed; killer ‘didn’t finish them off”- http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-pastor-praises-orlando-killi... (quoting Leviticus something-or-other about killing ‘gays’ (or whatever the word was then - real xtian, huh?)
Tempe Baptist preacher - again, lauds the deaths of “50 … pedophiles …” http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/tempe-pastor-hails-orlando-massacre-...
More links (in addition to the above 2) here from my search: https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Sacramento+%3dand+TEmpe+preachers+aga...
Sacramento Baptist preacher - laments more LGBT weren’t killed; killer ‘didn’t finish them off”- http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-pastor-praises-orlando-killi... (quoting Leviticus something-or-other about killing ‘gays’ (or whatever the word was then - real xtian, huh?)
Tempe Baptist preacher - again, lauds the deaths of “50 … pedophiles …” http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/tempe-pastor-hails-orlando-massacre-...
More links (in addition to the above 2) here from my search: https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Sacramento+%3dand+TEmpe+preachers+aga...
YOur post does not acknowledge that domestically we have terrorists. These are not islamic terrorists, these are American terrorists, breast fed a diet of violence, anger, fear, paranoia coupled with a lack of opportunity and a mind numbing gap between the haves and the have nots. And then there's are inability to face and effectively and compassionately deal with the mental health aspect of the American Terrorists. This country has lost its mind and this has been state of this country since the mid 90's 104th congress rebellion. Guns are the problem, our culture is the problem, access to health care to treat mental health disorders is the problem.
Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Limiting firearm sales will not end firearm shootings, nor firearm deaths. Timothy McVeigh murdered 168 people, including babies and old people, in Oklahoma City without being near a firearm.......
3
Actually, McVeigh a) was carrying a loaded 9mm Glock when arrested, b) quit the NRA because he believed their ideas on guns were too liberal, c) carried out the bombing because he believed that a repressive government would soon abolish all liberties (including the right to bear arms) and impose a dictatorship.
It's an interesting idea you have there, but data suggests that you're dead wrong.
People invented guns because they are easy to kill things with. MUCH easier than home-made bombs, or knives, or cross bows. That's why people use them today too. They're a really good tool for killing stuff.
Now, even just from an economic perspective, let's think about what happens when you make them illegal.
It moves them from the open market to the black market. That, in turn, makes them more expensive. Why? Because running illegal businesses is risky; your product can be seized, you can't use normal banks, etc.
But you can still buy them illegally, right?
Kinda.
In the U.S., an AR-15 costs about $1,000. In Australia, where it's illegal, it costs over $30,000. So the cost here is 3% of the cost in Australia. Ohh, also, if someone sees you with it in Australia, they call the cops and you go to jail. Here, if the cops may tell them that 'open carry is legal.'
So, sure there's a black market, but for most criminals (who are criminals because of money) it's just too expensive to buy a death machine. Beyond that, you have almost nobody with a large personal arsenals and you certainly don't have 20-something year-old boys with mental health issues packing an assault rifle.
Saying that because it won't stop all violence all gun laws are pointless is a marketing ploy by gun manufacturers, and it seems to be one you've fallen for.
People invented guns because they are easy to kill things with. MUCH easier than home-made bombs, or knives, or cross bows. That's why people use them today too. They're a really good tool for killing stuff.
Now, even just from an economic perspective, let's think about what happens when you make them illegal.
It moves them from the open market to the black market. That, in turn, makes them more expensive. Why? Because running illegal businesses is risky; your product can be seized, you can't use normal banks, etc.
But you can still buy them illegally, right?
Kinda.
In the U.S., an AR-15 costs about $1,000. In Australia, where it's illegal, it costs over $30,000. So the cost here is 3% of the cost in Australia. Ohh, also, if someone sees you with it in Australia, they call the cops and you go to jail. Here, if the cops may tell them that 'open carry is legal.'
So, sure there's a black market, but for most criminals (who are criminals because of money) it's just too expensive to buy a death machine. Beyond that, you have almost nobody with a large personal arsenals and you certainly don't have 20-something year-old boys with mental health issues packing an assault rifle.
Saying that because it won't stop all violence all gun laws are pointless is a marketing ploy by gun manufacturers, and it seems to be one you've fallen for.
2
True that. But are you suggesting that if we can't fix all we shouldn't fix any?
The Times is against watch list limbo, unless it can be used as another tool to limit gun purchases. The Republican alternate proposal, which would alert Justice if someone on the list tries to buy a gun, triggering a special court proceeding and 72-hour investigation, is more reasonable and respectful. Perhaps Trump is proposing similar and looking for NRA backing to ease passage. Unless Dems go for all or nothing and block it.
4
"The legislation she is now proposing goes even further, covering not just people on the watch list at the time of purchase, but anyone who had been on the list in the preceding five years."
Perhaps that would not be "disrespectful" toward purchasers of assault weapons, their sensibility taken into account ?
Perhaps that would not be "disrespectful" toward purchasers of assault weapons, their sensibility taken into account ?
72-hour? When politicians talk about their great ideas, they must know how much it will cost the government to fulfill the wishes of gun owners (or to be). Do we even have the manpower and infrastructure to do 72-hour investigation? Should we move funding from education or Medicare to pay for gun purchase approval proceedings?
1
The problem with the 72-hour special court proceeding is the likely high cost in personnel, etc. I can just see the NRA, Ted Nugent and their ilk encouraging 1000s of people trying to purchase guns at the same time (i.e. a coordinated effort) thus clogging the system, possibly (if not probably) injecting erroneous information that would require much more than 3 days to straighten out. Just look what happened when Dylan Roof got his gun because of a mix-up in which the wrong department (police?) was involved in the attempt to determine if Roof was on some list or another and 72 hours elapsed. This all resulted in 9 fatalities of African American church goers in Charleston. And, oh yeah - Roof wasn't a Muslim - I'm confident his killing spree was motivated by racial hatred.
In my view, there is no earthly reason for assault-type weapons to be in the hands of civilians. If they want to shoot them , then have such weapons limited to highly secure ranges - check in, get a rifle, check out - leave the rifle. Even that will have some holes in it but it's a start.
In my view, there is no earthly reason for assault-type weapons to be in the hands of civilians. If they want to shoot them , then have such weapons limited to highly secure ranges - check in, get a rifle, check out - leave the rifle. Even that will have some holes in it but it's a start.
The ban on sales of any weaponry of any kind to someone legitimately on the no-fly list, is an issue separate and apart from the sale of military type armaments in general. No civilian has the need for (nor in my view the right to) an automatic assault weapon - period.
11
This is just more grandstanding and free publicity from the Trumper. He has no intention of doing anything regarding the restriction of gun purchases. Just wait a few days and he'll deny he ever even said it or that his words were misconstrued. So tired of this buffoon with his little hands and his pointing and bragging and putting his thumb and index finger together like he's holding a tiny, dainty, little teacup. Donald the Draft Dodger. Donald the Flim-Flam-Man. Please go away and return to your gilded palace.
7
God forbid one person who may mistakenly be on a terror watch list should be delayed in buying a gun and their 2nd Amendment rights denied...better to have 49 innocent people dead to avoid any loss of those 2nd Amendment rights...
If that represents anyone's rational thinking, we are certainly doomed to see many more of these mass murders!
Mateen was a perpetrator of domestic violence. Even if he wasn't on a list because the FBI could never link him to terrorist plots, he should never have been able to buy a gun anywhere in this world.
Domestic violence is terrorism for any of its victims!
If that represents anyone's rational thinking, we are certainly doomed to see many more of these mass murders!
Mateen was a perpetrator of domestic violence. Even if he wasn't on a list because the FBI could never link him to terrorist plots, he should never have been able to buy a gun anywhere in this world.
Domestic violence is terrorism for any of its victims!
6
Typical "flexible" Donald Trump. He says he would not enforce any mandate on laws on gun control and now after a mass shooting he describes particular uses of gun control. He's been doing this all throughout his campaign, using an incident to his political advantage.
1
We need gun control like they have in England where patrol cops don't carry guns.
1
Compare the murder rate. England has next to zero via guns.
1
I fear that this will be the pretext of the first of Trump's promised "deals." The "deal" could be: The NRA agrees to limit the sale--or encourage the same--of assault rifles to anyone on the terrorist watch list, which could very easily expand to a terrorist pre-watch list, which would be code for anyone with a Muslim name. This could be coupled with even more invasive surveillance allowances against this one targeted group. There are even some moderates who would grudgingly assent to expanded surveillance of Muslims "just this once and for a limited time. And so what if they have to wear a star and crescent on their lapel for just a little while...?" I hope it's just a publicity stunt, but his promises of deals sounds more like threats to me.
It's hopeful and refreshing that at least this candidate isn't locked into their handler's playbook--like Hillary and Bernie and the Dems.
5
So Trump is willing to consider restricting gun purchases by suspected terrorists. (Assuming the NRA gives its blessing first.) Just like Hillary and the Dems playbook has been proposing for years.
Hopeful and "refreshing?"
Hardly.
Hopeful and "refreshing?"
Hardly.
1
And they have accomplished zero!
1
My initial thought is that if someone who is or has been on the watch list should attempt to purchase a gun, the FBI would be notified so the person could be interviewed. Being on the list would serve as a trigger for further investigation and not a barrier. Perhaps this might get around the ridiculous "constitutional" objections of the absolutists in the NRA and their lackeys in the Republican Party.
3
If it weren't so tragic, it would be laughable: the NRA and The Donald posing as staunch defenders of the rights of would be terrorists to arm themselves with arsenals. Yet Trump (and implicitly, his GOP backers) would round up people based on their religious beliefs; would punish women for seeking control over their own bodies. And what about the rights of the police, whom Trump claims to love and support? They are endangered daily by assault weapon-toting crazies. I say, let's get rid of ANY gun control: I would begin by insisting that members of Congress be made to pack heat. Should someone begin a shoot up in Congress, let the good guy members of Congress fend for themselves. This is the logic of the NRA and its big mouth supporter Donald: we don't need a police force. We just require good guys with guns. They will take care of us all. I'm confident that will work out just fine. For sure that will Make America Great. Good luck.
2
Due process is a monumental concept. Its what separates us from the rest of the "tyranny" world.
Providing "that" protection for one group, at the expense of others is not how we do business. Not what the Founding Fathers had in mind. The NRA protects due process as much as the ACLU. When the selection is subjective is when the problem starts. For you and me.
The Administration is "misdirecting" blame". Looking to confuse the issue, to point at the wrong item. They failed, miserably, to stop these Islamic Terrorists.
And their answer? More idiotic gun control rhetoric. Completely wrong.
Providing "that" protection for one group, at the expense of others is not how we do business. Not what the Founding Fathers had in mind. The NRA protects due process as much as the ACLU. When the selection is subjective is when the problem starts. For you and me.
The Administration is "misdirecting" blame". Looking to confuse the issue, to point at the wrong item. They failed, miserably, to stop these Islamic Terrorists.
And their answer? More idiotic gun control rhetoric. Completely wrong.
2
This is a beginning. A huge problem is that due to government rules, people fall off the terror watchlist after just a couple of years. If this weren't the case, this last lunatic would have continued under surveillance. Let us not forget, however, Mateen bought his guns legally, have licenses (two types) to carry and the Pulse was a "gun free" zone. We have a lot of work ahead of us and it begins with better and longer surveillance.
Another thing we could sensibly do instead of Trump wanting to ban all Muslims is to ban those from specific countries who wish us harm. That is what Jimmy Carter did with Iran for six month during the the hostage crisis, and what any sensible person would do now.
Another thing we could sensibly do instead of Trump wanting to ban all Muslims is to ban those from specific countries who wish us harm. That is what Jimmy Carter did with Iran for six month during the the hostage crisis, and what any sensible person would do now.
2
"Democrats say that burden is too high." That burden is called due process. You can make it 5 days or 2 weeks, but the need for due process is critical.
Ask the victims of Lois Lerner.
Ask the victims of Lois Lerner.
5
After we ban people who are on the watch list from buying guns
How before we ban those same people from the right to a jury trial or the right to confront witnesses who testify against them?
You trust Pres. Obama and the Gov't with that type of power?
I don't and I voted for the man Twice!
This country goes completely Bat Shimsky crazy and elects Trump
You want him to have that type of power?
No American should give up there rights under the Constitution!
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
-B. Franklin
How before we ban those same people from the right to a jury trial or the right to confront witnesses who testify against them?
You trust Pres. Obama and the Gov't with that type of power?
I don't and I voted for the man Twice!
This country goes completely Bat Shimsky crazy and elects Trump
You want him to have that type of power?
No American should give up there rights under the Constitution!
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
-B. Franklin
8
Lordy, but that's an awful big leap from excluding firearm purchases to null and voiding the whole Constitution...sure that isn't a tad, well, over the top?
btw, If you were to read the ATF's background check form, (https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download), you'd discover that several kinds of people are banned from purchasing firearms.
Why no stinky brouhaha over those suspensions of Second Amendments rights?
btw, If you were to read the ATF's background check form, (https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download), you'd discover that several kinds of people are banned from purchasing firearms.
Why no stinky brouhaha over those suspensions of Second Amendments rights?
@EuroAm
"..sure that isn't a tad, well, over the top?"
If you understand one simple concept my post maybe too conservative.
That concept is what?
No right taken by a Government is ever returned and Governments never stop trying to take away your rights which is why men like Madison, Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Hamilton(the rapper - who knew?) and others made sure those rights which were critical to the survival of a democracy were enumerated and protected from the Government.
"Why no stinky brouhaha over those suspensions of Second Amendments rights?"
Excluding those with past criminal records or mental health issues would most likely survive any court challenge under the concept of "Strict Scrutiny"
The Gov't probably can show that it has:
1) A Compelling Interest
2)The law is narrowly tailored to exclude only those who should be. i.e. mentally insane etc
3) Its the least restrictive way to accomplish the protection of the Governments compelling interest.
Cheers
Java
"..sure that isn't a tad, well, over the top?"
If you understand one simple concept my post maybe too conservative.
That concept is what?
No right taken by a Government is ever returned and Governments never stop trying to take away your rights which is why men like Madison, Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Hamilton(the rapper - who knew?) and others made sure those rights which were critical to the survival of a democracy were enumerated and protected from the Government.
"Why no stinky brouhaha over those suspensions of Second Amendments rights?"
Excluding those with past criminal records or mental health issues would most likely survive any court challenge under the concept of "Strict Scrutiny"
The Gov't probably can show that it has:
1) A Compelling Interest
2)The law is narrowly tailored to exclude only those who should be. i.e. mentally insane etc
3) Its the least restrictive way to accomplish the protection of the Governments compelling interest.
Cheers
Java
1
Yes! And how long will it take after they tighten drunk driving laws for them to take our cars away?? And how long will it take after we criminalize bank robbery before they prevent us from even walking into a bank??? And how long after they outlaw child porn before they confiscate all computers???? We MUST stand up to ALL forms of imaginary governmental overreach!
"All we have to fear is Trump itself." I refer to him as an 'it' intentionally. He seems incapable of relating to people or himself in any other way. Oh, and by the way, he's going to slip into a phone booth and emerge ready to "save your Second Amendment." I've yet to hear anyone from either side say they wanted to eliminate the Second Amendment. Why do everyday citizens need semi-automatic weapons? Banning these weapons is common sense.... And we need thorough, appropriate background checks. My own father once bought a rifle immediately after being discharged from a psychiatric unit. He threatened to kill his own daughter. I called the sheriff where he lives. The sheriff said, "I'm going to get that gun." He did. And he warned the store that sold the gun (a major retailer) they would lose their license if they continued to sell weapons without appropriate screening. Was my father's Second Amendment right violated? Whether it was violated or not I know my sister is alive and healthy and my father was spared the anguish of going to his grave knowing he killed his daughter in the midst of his psychosis...We need strong leaders to wrestle with these difficult issues. Where are you Paul Ryan? I don't agree with many of your policies, but I always thought you were a man of character. You are the Republican party's leader. It's time to admit your party chopped down the cherry tree. There is still time to turn this around. But the clock is ticking.
16
A single citizen was able to shoot one hundred people in mere moments. High capacity, automatic weapons allow a lone individual to hold the unrestrained power of life and death over one hundred fellow citizens. Unlicensed, untrained and largely unscreened gun hobbyists are buying thousands of these weapons each and every week. In Florida you can walk into a store with cash and walk out with a gun, bucket of ammo and half dozen high-capacity clips. If it's a gun show or private sale, there isn't even a cursory background check. The vast majority of Americans refuse to be forced into a national arms race with their gun zealot neighbors, in order to secure the illusion of safety for their families. Gun zealots are a small and loud sub-set of gun owners. Their plaintive wail is led by NRA lobbyists and the industry they loyally support. From the level of panicked rhetoric this fanatical faction generates, you would think they were the most persecuted, abused and put-upon minority on the planet. Losing the God given right to go to the range and instantly burn up a bucket of ammo on tin cans seems more important to them than life itself. If their kids don't come back alive from school, church or a nightclub someday, so be it. It must be God's will. They'll just head out to the range with another bucket of ammo and blast their way through any emotions. So long as they can still have that thrill'n adrenaline power rush , it'll all be OK. Loosing it would be too emasculating to bear.
15
Andy W. - well said. Speaking of ranges, I could 'live with' the concept of having these 'machine guns' kept at a range and highly secured for those who just have to fire 300 rounds a minute. When done, they'd check the rifles back in before leaving the secured range area. I haven't fired such a weapon since my days in the Army ('65 - '67) and we had all manner of practice from grenade throwing to firing M-60 automatic weapons. BUT - that's the military which, in my view, is the only reason such weapons should be used. Picture the Framers of Amendment II saying "Should we make it clear that we're talking about the right to bear arms that take 10 minutes to load & fire one bullet?" Credit to Editorial cartoonist Jeff Stahler, 14 June 16.
I do not understand why a smart country like the U.S. does not make and enforce very strict gun laws for a limited period and make any guns very hard to obtain. If during that period, the statistics of mass killings come down significantly, then extend the ban for another period. If not, look for other measures. I know you have that outdated second amendment, but Trump is willing to suspend the constitution to ban Muslim immigration and other rights for a period until he finds out “what the hell is going on”, isn’t he? Why not apply the same logic to gun violence?
14
We may be smart as a country, but we have a lot of citizens with baloney for brains who have been completely brainwashed by right wing hate radio and FOX "news."
America is the land of the free, home of the paranoid, most of whom buy the lie that a gun will make them safer - even when toddlers get a hold of them and shoot each other or their parents, guns go off in peoples' pockets, etc.
Heroic fantasy sells everywhere, and when you combine that with completely unfettered access to military weapons, Orlando, San Bernardino and all the other killing scenes of the USA become pretty much inevitable results.
America is the land of the free, home of the paranoid, most of whom buy the lie that a gun will make them safer - even when toddlers get a hold of them and shoot each other or their parents, guns go off in peoples' pockets, etc.
Heroic fantasy sells everywhere, and when you combine that with completely unfettered access to military weapons, Orlando, San Bernardino and all the other killing scenes of the USA become pretty much inevitable results.
1
If you have access to Facebook you need only look for comment strings from our anti-gun control folks. They are generally quite paranoid, possessed of an irrational fear of authority, their fears regularly stoked by the National Rifle Association, whose primary objective is to support and increase sales of firearms to people who don't actually need them.
1
Our political system is severely dysfunctional. If any political cause forms a lobby around any position, no matter how unreasonable, they can raise enough money to fund a challenge to an incumbent politician who doesn't support the lobby group's policy preferences. It is very typical for industry groups to capture the political process to effect their business interests. What this means is that in the end, it is almost irrelevant who the electorate votes into office when every politician (most of whom would like to get reelected) will not dare cross paths with the most powerful lobbies.
Add to this, gerrymandering (look it up), unlimited campaign contributions (money supposedly equals free speech here), and a whole lot of other idiosyncrasies, and we have what you see.
We have some other world records as well: highest percentage of people who doubt climate science, highest rates of gun violence, highest rates of incarceration, higher healthcare costs than most. This is what capitalism is: the political process in the service of profit.
Add to this, gerrymandering (look it up), unlimited campaign contributions (money supposedly equals free speech here), and a whole lot of other idiosyncrasies, and we have what you see.
We have some other world records as well: highest percentage of people who doubt climate science, highest rates of gun violence, highest rates of incarceration, higher healthcare costs than most. This is what capitalism is: the political process in the service of profit.
1
I m having trouble getting my head around the magnitude of damage one well trained sociopath can inflict. Mateen may have been a "sleeper' lone wolf. Background checks on all; state and national data banks that are integrated; limit ammunition; no Fly no Buy ; if the FBI investigates then no guns, even if you are eventually "cleared'. Go to court if you want a hearing, not the other way around. Attending psychiatrists should be able to anonymously tip off the state -like a drivers license.
This is a 30 + billion dollar per year business in the US, we supply half the arms in the world and there are over 300 million guns in the US. Less than 5 % of sales are for assault rifles. It seems to me that there is a lot of leverage for a Congress that wants to make a deal.
This is a 30 + billion dollar per year business in the US, we supply half the arms in the world and there are over 300 million guns in the US. Less than 5 % of sales are for assault rifles. It seems to me that there is a lot of leverage for a Congress that wants to make a deal.
12
If you thought that sociopath could do a lot of damage, wait until you see the vast destruction Trump would pull off.
So, President Trump will hold Muslim-Americans accountable if they fail to turn in their neighbors. How about the gun dealers who sell the guns to the perpetrators? Same standard of accountability LP ity
7
Apparently Donald wants all bar patrons to carry a gun. Everyone would then be safe. What could go wrong?
Trump thinks he can change the collective mind of the NRA leadership. Shouldn't be a problem for a man who makes the best deals. After all, he has a good brain and knows the best words. I'm sure he can get them to do his bidding.
The NRA is doing its usual rope-a-dope. Their intent is to hide while Democratic Senators throw punches 'til exhausted. Then a reminder to all their supporters that crossing the NRA is hazardous to their re-election. It's always worked before.
Maybe this time it's different? Background checks, a no buy list, things 80% of the country thinks are reasonable and necessary. Maybe this latest horrific shooting is the tipping point? I'm hoping so.
Trump thinks he can change the collective mind of the NRA leadership. Shouldn't be a problem for a man who makes the best deals. After all, he has a good brain and knows the best words. I'm sure he can get them to do his bidding.
The NRA is doing its usual rope-a-dope. Their intent is to hide while Democratic Senators throw punches 'til exhausted. Then a reminder to all their supporters that crossing the NRA is hazardous to their re-election. It's always worked before.
Maybe this time it's different? Background checks, a no buy list, things 80% of the country thinks are reasonable and necessary. Maybe this latest horrific shooting is the tipping point? I'm hoping so.
12
To some of the commenters about Trump being cynical: they are all politicians. Hillary was for the TPP before she was against it. There are countless examples of this.
2
The NRA is a lobby for the gun manufacturers, pure and simple - it does NOT represent it's members. Its only objective is to sell more guns, and the more terror incidents we have, the more guns will be sold. Orlando was a WIN for them. As such, they will never support any kind of gun control.
3
The total stupidity of this situation goes back to when the ban on assault weapons was lifted in the first place. What's next for the NRA, hand grenades?
After all they fall under "arms".
After all they fall under "arms".
4
British member of parliament shot today in Yorkshire......
They need to severely regulate those evil guns in England, too. That will prevent shootings. Oh wait, guns already are severely regulated in England just as they are in France where muslim extremists had multiple automatic rifles (real assault weapons not regular guns like in the US that are just made to look like assault rifles).
But no matter. Logic doesn't matter when you are talking about regulating guns and attacking the Bill of Rights.
They need to severely regulate those evil guns in England, too. That will prevent shootings. Oh wait, guns already are severely regulated in England just as they are in France where muslim extremists had multiple automatic rifles (real assault weapons not regular guns like in the US that are just made to look like assault rifles).
But no matter. Logic doesn't matter when you are talking about regulating guns and attacking the Bill of Rights.
2
Two thumbs up for Trump. He is a good negotiator and will get this done. It makes zero sense that people on the no fly list can buy guns. Shame on Paul Ryan and the GOP for voting down this bill after San Bernardino. If the ban had gone through, these 49 people would still be alive. The GOP's kowtowing to every demand of the NRA is the main reason I don't vote for them. Not that the Dems are any better either. They did nothing about guns even when they had the house, the senate and the White House. Now they are just crying crocodile tears. Hillary Clinton will give us an Obama third term, which means she will not be able to get a single gun bill through the GOP controlled congress, because they are all afraid of the NRA, and Hillary holds no sway with the NRA unlike Trump.
Go Trump!
Go Trump!
8
"if the ban had gone through, these 49 people would still be alive"
Your statement, while an idea I think we'd all like to believe, is false, because the shooter wasn't on any kind of watch list and therefore would have still been able to buy a gun since his FBI investigation was closed.
NYTimes... do you even screen these comments?
Your statement, while an idea I think we'd all like to believe, is false, because the shooter wasn't on any kind of watch list and therefore would have still been able to buy a gun since his FBI investigation was closed.
NYTimes... do you even screen these comments?
1
Trump's a lousy negotiator, immune to advice, incapable of diplomacy. He also holds no power over the NRA. Try not to fall for his constant stream of lies.
No.
One wonders if Trump has had a little private chat with the NRA and agreed on this 'symbolic gesture' that will cause no change.
It's a mistake to believe _anything_ Trump says. Even he doesn't know what he really thinks.
It's a mistake to believe _anything_ Trump says. Even he doesn't know what he really thinks.
6
Seems to me that more effective gun control measures, while important, are only a piece of the solution. This country has a deep-seated and long-standing gun culture, based on traditions and mythogies of self-reliance. We glorify the person who is willing to take matters into their own hands and deal with perceived threats. Until we as a society develop a new ethos that doesn't view everyone else as a threatening "other" that one must be vigilant against, I fear that our reliance on guns for "self-defense" will not go away, and neither will gun violence and tragedies such as Columbine, Sandy Hook and Orlando. It takes more than a change in law to change attitudes and behaviors stretching back hundreds of years. I don't mean to suggest that changes in law shouldn't be pursued; however, let's not be under the illusion that those changes will eliminate, or even reduce, the incidents of gun violence anytime soon.
1
Trump Veers From Party Line. Who cares? Trump is a conman and a fraud.
What we need is a Congress with backbone.
- Ban the sale of assault weapons to individuals.
- Close all gun show or private sale loopholes.
- Prohibit the sale of any weapons to anyone on whatever federal government lists are compiled to identify risks.
- Initiate a long-term program for gun buybacks.
Is this neat and clean? Of course not. Does it run afoul of ACLU positions? Absolutely. But what line do we have to cross to take action? Twenty-plus schoolchildren wasn't enough. Nine people in church wasn't enough. Are 49 party-goers enough? Is 70 dead the right number? 100?
What we need is a Congress with backbone.
- Ban the sale of assault weapons to individuals.
- Close all gun show or private sale loopholes.
- Prohibit the sale of any weapons to anyone on whatever federal government lists are compiled to identify risks.
- Initiate a long-term program for gun buybacks.
Is this neat and clean? Of course not. Does it run afoul of ACLU positions? Absolutely. But what line do we have to cross to take action? Twenty-plus schoolchildren wasn't enough. Nine people in church wasn't enough. Are 49 party-goers enough? Is 70 dead the right number? 100?
8
Things I have learned in the last week from the NY Times-- Elizabeth Warren doesn't like to talk to the press, Donald Trump black balls the press, and Diane Weinstein doesn't think the presumptive Republican candidate should be involved in the gun control--"As for Mr. Trump’s role, she was dismissive. “Oh, Trump just makes everything worse,” Ms. Feinstein said."
So it seems that everyone at the top only want to consult themselves and not be held accountable for their actions.
So it seems that everyone at the top only want to consult themselves and not be held accountable for their actions.
8
He's meeting with the NRA regarding legislation and we're seeing him as veering away from the party line? I thought congress controlled legislation. Oh, of course, silly me - the NRA controls the Republican congress.
10
USA, USA, USA... #1 in the world = 88.8 guns per 100 inhabitants, babies and grandmothers included; 10.2 gun related murders per 100,000 (2012 statistics, higher now, but not available). Happy hunting, and don't forget to take your bible along with the amo.
9
Why is this article front page news? Please explain, NYTimes. Obviously a shameless candidate is meeting with a shameless group to discuss a tragedy they both helped create. All for easy publicity, and you are helping him.
How about putting the filibuster article at the top? That's real action, taken by a real man.
How about putting the filibuster article at the top? That's real action, taken by a real man.
20
He's the presumptive Republican nominee for President. How on earth can you assert that it's not newsworthy?
2
He means this sincerely, of course, until he changes his mind (and the NRA won't back it anyhow). I view this as cynically opportunistic on Trump's part, which is the normal modus operandi for a demagogue. And it works: look at all the media attention it has drawn.
9
So Trump says the PC thing today in the wake of the Orlando shootings. If he is elected he will do the opposite. That is what he is famous for, contradicting himself.
1
I wonder which one Republicans would prefer:
Netanyahu or Trump. To be honest, though both are nasty, Netanyahu is slightly less ugly and slightly less insane.
But trust Trump to grab center stage. The dumpster fire of vanity is not to be put it. It glows with a radioactive orange glow, and thinks it's end product doesn't stink.
Netanyahu or Trump. To be honest, though both are nasty, Netanyahu is slightly less ugly and slightly less insane.
But trust Trump to grab center stage. The dumpster fire of vanity is not to be put it. It glows with a radioactive orange glow, and thinks it's end product doesn't stink.
3
Dumpster fire not to be put out, that was. Words are only approximations of the nauseating disgust having to look at this greedy mugster everywhere invokes in the sane and kindhearted people who want to keep the peace and help each other.
5
Being on a terrorist watch list doesn't make you a terrorist. Being on a terrorist watch list five years ago shouldn't overrule a constitutional right to own a weapon. I don't like where this is going.
2
We have heard too many times that President Obama would do something about these mass murderers getting their hands of these types of weapons. He has blamed Congress...use your Executive Order power NOW instead of the staged hand wringing and admonishments. This tragedy could have possibly been avoided. He had been watched by the FBI, now we find out that after the FBI dropped the watch this sick person was posting his intentions of Facebook. This is a case of way too little way too late.
Trump uses the same line and lie the NRA uses, 'if everyone only had a gun!' Well, if they don't in rootin', tootin' Florida, then where would they. As far as I know you're able to carry concealed weapons there.
Personally I never spend money in a state where any and everyone is allowed to carry, I even refuse to drive to Seattle any longer, not that I think I am a target of anyone, but because I do not think anyone should own weapons, just my personal belief.
I had 2 parents both from the United Kingdom, in neither of their countries did the police carry weapons, and they managed to stay alive as arrest people.
Less than 30% of people in this country own weapons, usually 6 a piece apparently, yet they push us, the silent MAJORITY around daily.
It's time to stop being silent
The GOP is willing to dismiss the 14th amendment, deporting anchor babies and their families, and I am more than willing to dismiss the 2nd.
Personally I never spend money in a state where any and everyone is allowed to carry, I even refuse to drive to Seattle any longer, not that I think I am a target of anyone, but because I do not think anyone should own weapons, just my personal belief.
I had 2 parents both from the United Kingdom, in neither of their countries did the police carry weapons, and they managed to stay alive as arrest people.
Less than 30% of people in this country own weapons, usually 6 a piece apparently, yet they push us, the silent MAJORITY around daily.
It's time to stop being silent
The GOP is willing to dismiss the 14th amendment, deporting anchor babies and their families, and I am more than willing to dismiss the 2nd.
3
When common sense legislation is blocked because of some special interest group, there's seriously something wrong with the "democracy."
1
Most Americans are not experts in the methods for making Americans safe with so many easily obtainable guns. We should make the gun industry and gun owners responsible for keeping us safe. The only way to accomplish this is to give them an economic incentive. The NRA, gun manufacturers and gun owners should all pay for the expenses and consequences of gun related law enforcement, injuries and deaths in America. This should be done through fees, taxes and court determined liability damages to cover ALL costs of gun related activity and losses. No taxes unrelated to gun purchases should be used to fund law enforcement, injuries, deaths, business losses or property damages.
The gun industry should pay its own way for ALL consequences of its products.
This should be our free market capitalist solution.
The gun industry should pay its own way for ALL consequences of its products.
This should be our free market capitalist solution.
1
Ditto for car and alcohol manufacturers!
Whatever the motives that are driving these mass murderers the one thing they all have in common is that they have weapons that can fire great amounts of bullets in a very short time. Limiting the size of clips and the ability to fire the weapons in automatic mode can give the few seconds to disarm these individuals. We have speed limits on our highways to prevent uncontrolled speeding. Limiting the ability of weapons to rapidly fire is only common sense and there are no legitimate reasons to stand in the way of these controls.
3
Preventing wanna be terrorists from buying assault weapons? Duh. That's akin to hitting an elephant with a fly swatter. The NRA stock defense of the undefensible is that If more "good guys" had guns, America would be a safer place. Yeah, right. (How do we define "good guys"?) Let's ask the people of Chicago, where it's not unusual for 60+ people to be shot on a weekend.
1
Chicago also has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.
2
The obvious implication being that if the almighty NRA decides to say yes, then Congress will dutifully make it so, as if we needed any more evidence that our 535 elected officials effectively work for those that help fund their campaigns, not, as we'd been led to believe, for those of us that vote for them and pay their salaries.
Which, for many of us, should make Election Reform and the removal of every penny of private money from the manifestly corrupt political process one of Hillary's most urgent priorities when she's sworn-in next January.
Which, for many of us, should make Election Reform and the removal of every penny of private money from the manifestly corrupt political process one of Hillary's most urgent priorities when she's sworn-in next January.
2
When a mere Presidential candidate gets going on the issue when Mr. Obama is fairly silent as is MS. Clinton, where is our leadership in this country?
Congress is dysfunctional. We know that. Just write them off. Mr. Obama is not outraged but appears hapless, again. Where is the impassioned speech from the Presidential bully pulpit? Why did he not, as President, tell the NRA to go to the devil, once and for all? What would he lose?
Ms. war-hawk Clinton is not going near this either.
Wacky-Doodle or not, at least Mr. Trump is not silent (is he ever?) and appears to be doing something, if only verbalizing what we know we need to do.
Congress is dysfunctional. We know that. Just write them off. Mr. Obama is not outraged but appears hapless, again. Where is the impassioned speech from the Presidential bully pulpit? Why did he not, as President, tell the NRA to go to the devil, once and for all? What would he lose?
Ms. war-hawk Clinton is not going near this either.
Wacky-Doodle or not, at least Mr. Trump is not silent (is he ever?) and appears to be doing something, if only verbalizing what we know we need to do.
3
Trump is simply playing opportunist as most politicians do. Congress is actually close to agreement on a bill that would exclude 'watch list' persons in gun background checks. Trump will have a meeting with the NRA, claim he reached a deal with them, as if the NRA is more important than the rest of us and gloat about what a great negotiator he is.
The real issue in the shadows is how anyone gets on these FBI lists in the first place? What triggers an investigation and by what criteria does an investigation result in being unable to board a plane? Before critics say 'we don't want to alert the terrorists' remember that there have already been stories of 'mistakes' along with airlines refusing to allow passengers who were Muslim simply because other passengers were 'uncomfortable.'
We do want our police resources employed for legitimate suspicion but as of now no one seems to know what that means or how that works. Our national security state has grown to enormous size. Phone calls are recorded, emails seized and yet we don't seem any safer than before all this intrusion.
Weren't we also promised that the purpose of the massive Homeland Security Department was to coordinate information sharing between all the various federal agencies? Yet one still doesn't seem to know what the other is doing until after an attack occurs. Where is congressional oversight on that?
The real issue in the shadows is how anyone gets on these FBI lists in the first place? What triggers an investigation and by what criteria does an investigation result in being unable to board a plane? Before critics say 'we don't want to alert the terrorists' remember that there have already been stories of 'mistakes' along with airlines refusing to allow passengers who were Muslim simply because other passengers were 'uncomfortable.'
We do want our police resources employed for legitimate suspicion but as of now no one seems to know what that means or how that works. Our national security state has grown to enormous size. Phone calls are recorded, emails seized and yet we don't seem any safer than before all this intrusion.
Weren't we also promised that the purpose of the massive Homeland Security Department was to coordinate information sharing between all the various federal agencies? Yet one still doesn't seem to know what the other is doing until after an attack occurs. Where is congressional oversight on that?
3
Who do the Repiblican's in Congress represent the people or the NRA? What should e our goal to increase the number of gun owners or lower the number
of gun owners? To be safer gun owners should know their weapon, store it safely. The NRA idea that a gun owner can stop a bad guy is preposterous. Hitting a target with a pistol at any distance is difficult and even harder. As a nation we must listen to each other and seek a vompromise.
of gun owners? To be safer gun owners should know their weapon, store it safely. The NRA idea that a gun owner can stop a bad guy is preposterous. Hitting a target with a pistol at any distance is difficult and even harder. As a nation we must listen to each other and seek a vompromise.
1
As I understand it, this is not as simple as "keeping guns out of the hands of terrorists." Who's a terrorist? If someone's name appears on the no-fly list, does that make him or her a terrorist? Not necessarily. And most people on the no-fly list don't know that they're on the list until they try to fly. There is also currently no way to have one's name removed from the list if it's there because of an error. Whether or not you agree with the right of the individual to keep and bear arms, the right does currently exist under our current Constitution. How do we keep guns out of the hands of terrorists and would-be terrorists without taking away a constitutionally guaranteed right? Now, if you don't like the individual right to keep and bear arms, that's a separate matter that requires a Constitutional Convention. But just saying that the matter of keeping guns away from terrorists is simple and a no-brainer is to ignore the reality of the situation.
2
I wish the Second Amendment could be REPEALED in it's entirety. I loathe this gun culture. To me, it's horrifying.
Personally, I think the American people should be allowed to vote, via a national proposition, on how they want gun ownership to be regulated and restricted. And then Congress should respect the will of the American people by immediately amending the constitution to reflect these new changes.
Yes, people should be allowed to own guns but, aside from guns used for hunting, the types of guns available should be limited and people should be screened for criminal backgrounds, prior arrests, domestic violence and psychological screenings. People should be put on a national gun registry, fingerprinted and have a pay a fee yearly for a license. And they should have to purchase liability insurance for that firearm and have to provide proof that their insurance is prepaid for one year before their registration is renewed annually.
Furthermore, no guns should be able to be sold privately. There should be regulated, licensed gun stores and any resale of guns should have to be done through the store, where the store would take a commission and assure that the proper background screening and transfer of registration of that firearm be properly implemented.
I personally fear for my safety with all these gun-happy people walking around with firearms. They can legally conceal these weapons on their person! Wake up, fellow Americans. We have constitutional rights, too.
Personally, I think the American people should be allowed to vote, via a national proposition, on how they want gun ownership to be regulated and restricted. And then Congress should respect the will of the American people by immediately amending the constitution to reflect these new changes.
Yes, people should be allowed to own guns but, aside from guns used for hunting, the types of guns available should be limited and people should be screened for criminal backgrounds, prior arrests, domestic violence and psychological screenings. People should be put on a national gun registry, fingerprinted and have a pay a fee yearly for a license. And they should have to purchase liability insurance for that firearm and have to provide proof that their insurance is prepaid for one year before their registration is renewed annually.
Furthermore, no guns should be able to be sold privately. There should be regulated, licensed gun stores and any resale of guns should have to be done through the store, where the store would take a commission and assure that the proper background screening and transfer of registration of that firearm be properly implemented.
I personally fear for my safety with all these gun-happy people walking around with firearms. They can legally conceal these weapons on their person! Wake up, fellow Americans. We have constitutional rights, too.
14
There's nothing wrong with the Second Amendment per se. What is needed is enforcement of the 'well-regulated militia' part. Switzerland is a model there. Every household has an Army-issued gun, after receiving Army training in how to use (and not use) it. Its conditions of storage are also well-regulated. This would not contravene the Second Amendment, but go a long way to solve the issue in the US.
Alas, amending the Constitution is far more complicated than you suggest
"Furthermore, no guns should be able to be sold privately."
I can sell anyting I own so tgere is no way to monitor this. Also remember, no amount of legislation, background checking, stripping law abiding citizens of their rights, or repealing the 2nd Amendment will keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
I can sell anyting I own so tgere is no way to monitor this. Also remember, no amount of legislation, background checking, stripping law abiding citizens of their rights, or repealing the 2nd Amendment will keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
1
This is piecemeal. The Australian way is the only way. Every gun in circulation to be turned in, melted down, perhaps repurposed for memorials of gun violence victims.
7
Gun control is a catalyst for all sorts of political discussion, and the discussion often blurs important distinctions. We clearly do not want guns in the hands of criminals, terrorists, convicted felons, and mentally unstable people. The latter category can be very broad.
There is very little we can do about guns in the hands of criminals. By definition, these people have no regard for the law. They will find a way to get a gun. The same is largely true about terrorists. As recent experiences in Europe have shown, even much stricter gun control laws than ours did not work. Convicted felons who have renounced criminal behavior and the mentally unstable are sometimes more manageable but they are irrelevant to this discussion.
The Orlando mass murder that brought gun control to the top of our discussion list was purely terroristic in nature. Unfortunately, as we saw in San Bernardino, terrorists will be able to get guns just as they were able to get guns in France and Belgium. When you are dealing with terrorism, we should want to know if anyone who is or ever was suspected of terroristic inclinations wants to buy a gun. This will not prevent a terrorist from getting a gun unlawfully, but it should expose a terrorist and the terrorist's acquaintances to heightened surveillance in case something is in the works. Possession of a gun is not important. The plans to use the gun are important. That is what we need to know as soon as possible and follow up with very closely.
There is very little we can do about guns in the hands of criminals. By definition, these people have no regard for the law. They will find a way to get a gun. The same is largely true about terrorists. As recent experiences in Europe have shown, even much stricter gun control laws than ours did not work. Convicted felons who have renounced criminal behavior and the mentally unstable are sometimes more manageable but they are irrelevant to this discussion.
The Orlando mass murder that brought gun control to the top of our discussion list was purely terroristic in nature. Unfortunately, as we saw in San Bernardino, terrorists will be able to get guns just as they were able to get guns in France and Belgium. When you are dealing with terrorism, we should want to know if anyone who is or ever was suspected of terroristic inclinations wants to buy a gun. This will not prevent a terrorist from getting a gun unlawfully, but it should expose a terrorist and the terrorist's acquaintances to heightened surveillance in case something is in the works. Possession of a gun is not important. The plans to use the gun are important. That is what we need to know as soon as possible and follow up with very closely.
2
This is just dipping a toe in the water. Ban sale of assault weapons, totally, now.
21
Trump undid any good he could have done here by asserting that things would've gone down differently in Orlando if the patrons had been packing pistols. And knives. At a dance club, on a Saturday night. How did an Ivy League education produce such flawed thinking? The University of Pennsylvania must be ducking under their chairs. Sure is getting crowded under there.
19
I've encountered many Ivy League grads in my time. A handful are impressive, but most aren't. It's time for us to stop being impressed by such credentials.
1
This is why the other candidates in the Republican Party were so easily defeated. Trump made the right move.
8
How is it that everything Trump says is newsworthy?
18
I believe it has something to do with Trump being the GOP candidate for president in 2016.
2
So Trump says that if more people had guns in the club the carnage would have been less. It doesn't take an expert to realize how silly that claim is. You have a dark club with dozens of people, many of whom have been drinking. When the shooting starts and everyone pulls their guns, how would you know where to shoot? And when the police show up, how do they know who the culprit is? It seems obvious that more guns equal more chaos. There are, no doubt, some remote cases where a citizen with a gun stopped a bad guy, but this proves nothing. Most often when people pull guns their options are limited and the situation escalates. Untrained, unlicensed people carrying guns around is a terrible idea.
25
How right you are. It would be nice if just one time, journalist interviewing someone making the claim that good guys with guns will put an end to incidents like Orlando said exactly what you said instead of letting te nonsensical remarks go unchallenged.
1
And no one with a handgun has much of a chance against a guy/gal/90-lb adolescent with an assault rifle. The firepower and accuracy are overwhelming.
Funny how NRA members who promote "carrying" to protect others are never around when a mass shooting breaks out.
So the real stories here are
1) the Democratic filibuster forcing a vote on universal background checks and
2) Donald Trump now wants to do away with the 2nd Amendment.
1) the Democratic filibuster forcing a vote on universal background checks and
2) Donald Trump now wants to do away with the 2nd Amendment.
4
Again Trump 'veers' from party doctrine and dogma. . .until he 'veers' back again. Is Trump a contemplative thoughtful person or a small sailboat tacking wildly whilst going nowhere?
16
The word "nuance" has crept into our national dialog such as in this article ("...reflecting the unusual nuances of the issue, which touches on public safety and civil rights beyond the Second Amendment.) and I have grown weary of it.
It favors a supposedly intelligent mindset to avoid facing issues head on. The Second Amendment was passed in an era when state and local citizen militias were often the only means to keep order or repel an invasion, and our founders guaranteed those citizens could maintain arms. We got from there to guaranting anyone the means to rapidly mow down children. That is not "nuance." It is insanity.
It will probably take a very long, long time for us to deal with this highly politicized flaw in our culture. So far we can't even muster the will to put the most minimal measure in place. History will not be kind to us.
It favors a supposedly intelligent mindset to avoid facing issues head on. The Second Amendment was passed in an era when state and local citizen militias were often the only means to keep order or repel an invasion, and our founders guaranteed those citizens could maintain arms. We got from there to guaranting anyone the means to rapidly mow down children. That is not "nuance." It is insanity.
It will probably take a very long, long time for us to deal with this highly politicized flaw in our culture. So far we can't even muster the will to put the most minimal measure in place. History will not be kind to us.
24
Fred, Thank you for your clear and relevant comments. If only, those swept up in this controversy could see and understand what you have referenced and then commit to real remedies for these moments of insane brutality that are indefensible and preventable. Sid
No matter what Trump attempts to do or say this paper and the readers will take it wrong. He says many things that come across ridiculous but this is the paper of Pelosi who must pass a major bill to see what it says and a vice president that says numerous dumb things. A man who invented the internet and a president who can't give a speech without looking at the words. You actually think Bush and Trump are dumb???
13
Al Gore 'invented' the internet, not Joe Biden.
no, not "dumb", but wrong and evil.
2
Everything you just pointed to shows your bias and that your "news" sources aren't giving you straight news. Pelosi of course read the bill. The bill was available for every citizen to read as well. Her comment simply meant that once the bill was passed people would see it wasn't the end of the world (and she was right). Gore never claimed to 'invent' the internet. Everyone knew he meant that he helped back initiatives that would help create the internet. Bush was indeed Dumb. Trump isn't dumb - he's just a self-serving and greedy narcissist.
1
What a joke! According to the accompanying graphic, even if any legislation were passed concerning selling guns to suspected terrorists, they could still obtain them legally through private vendors. We need a total and complete revolution here. We need people organizing and marching on a grand scale in order to turn things around in our country and the sad part of it is that the very people for whom guns are such a sacred right, are the ones who mistrust the status quo politicians the most. I am so disgusted.
16
Trump might prove to be the Trojan Horse for the NRA. They are closely aligned and when (not if) he is resoundingly defeated in November, intelligent firearm legislation might prove possible.
15
The nation's safety is in the hands of Donald and the NRA? We are in bigger trouble than I ever imagined!
Congressional Dems are finally standing up with Obama. They should stand with Hillary and don't back down.
Congressional Dems are finally standing up with Obama. They should stand with Hillary and don't back down.
22
So maybe after all it is no longer the Republican Party but the Trump Party. At least on one issue they pretend to be able to try to compromise. They are a gaggle of hypocrites who have subjected the people of the USA to years of economic and social chaos.
17
And, on top of all the complaints against the NRA below, why is lobbyism even legal in the United States? There is nothing democratic about a wealthy special interest group having so much more influence over lawmakers than the average citizen.
Lobbyism is only a half-step removed from corruption. Ban it!
Lobbyism is only a half-step removed from corruption. Ban it!
19
it's in the constitution..it allows the public to petition the government..
It's also protected by 1st amendment (free speech)
However special interest lobbying enhances the power of elite groups and is a problem shifting the nation's political structure toward an oligarchy where average citizens have little or no independent influence.. sad sad sad..
It's also protected by 1st amendment (free speech)
However special interest lobbying enhances the power of elite groups and is a problem shifting the nation's political structure toward an oligarchy where average citizens have little or no independent influence.. sad sad sad..
1
This is just another media Trumparticle. Nobody "entirely understand(s)" any Trump proposals. He has made outrageous statements about the Orlando slaughter and is now reaping the free benefits not the least of which is more media time. Oh yeah, and Congress just happens to be considering gun legislation that should have been passed years ago. What malarkey.
12
This whole thing is a non-starter. You simply can't have people in the government restricting a constitutional right without due process just because they don't like a person's views. The ACLU is against it. And the FBI is against it because they say it would complicate their efforts to track these people without tipping them off.
But there are no legal complications for the NICS background check system to pass along a non-binding recommendation that a given person should not be sold a firearm, with an explanation why. I think that very few gun dealers would proceed with a sale if there were informed that the person standing in front of them is a suspected by the FBI of being a terrorist. Beside the obvious reason, they would also be disinclined to give someone a gun they were explicitly warned could be dangerous because this would expose them to legal culpability if something bad happened. This "soft ban" would achieve 99% of the effectiveness of a "hard ban" without the due-process problems. And it would only require adding a software feature.
The "soft ban" idea would also be more palatable to the pro-gun side by reducing the perceived potential for abuse by some future anti-gun tyrant. If they came to believe that too many restrictions on too may people were being maliciously enacted through this mechanism then gun dealers could legally decide to ignore the non-binding recommendations and simply operate on their own judgment (and acceptable level of legal risk).
But there are no legal complications for the NICS background check system to pass along a non-binding recommendation that a given person should not be sold a firearm, with an explanation why. I think that very few gun dealers would proceed with a sale if there were informed that the person standing in front of them is a suspected by the FBI of being a terrorist. Beside the obvious reason, they would also be disinclined to give someone a gun they were explicitly warned could be dangerous because this would expose them to legal culpability if something bad happened. This "soft ban" would achieve 99% of the effectiveness of a "hard ban" without the due-process problems. And it would only require adding a software feature.
The "soft ban" idea would also be more palatable to the pro-gun side by reducing the perceived potential for abuse by some future anti-gun tyrant. If they came to believe that too many restrictions on too may people were being maliciously enacted through this mechanism then gun dealers could legally decide to ignore the non-binding recommendations and simply operate on their own judgment (and acceptable level of legal risk).
2
" And the FBI is against it because they say it would complicate their efforts to track these people without tipping them off. "
This makes no sense. If they are on a no fly list, then they would be tipped off by buying a plane ticket.
This makes no sense. If they are on a no fly list, then they would be tipped off by buying a plane ticket.
These bans do not go far enough. Assault weapons should be illegal to buy, and yes, to own, regardless of when they were purchased. We also need to change the second amendment since it continues to be misinterpreted by the NRA and their supporters. What is our idea of freedom? The real freedom from fear of being gunned down at a mall, a movie theatre, a school or a night club outweighs the "freedom" to own a weapon made for the sole purpose of killing as many people as quickly as possible. Are Europeans, Australians, or the Japanese any less "free" than Americans. I don't think so.
17
Banning manufacture and sales of assault type weapons would also drive the price up on the black market making them to expensive for some of these nut balls to buy. It would take awhile but the incidents of mass murder drop off.
Trump and the NRA say those on the no fly and restricted lists should not be sold assault weapons. I agree. But, in most states, does that stop their brothers or mothers from buying them? From leaving them available to them (just thinking of Newtown?)?
The ability to buy assault weapons would not have helped one of those 49 people because no decent person would have been allowed to walk in there without the alarm being raised. If real people started doing that, I they would have been stopped. An AR 15 at each table would probably have stopped waiters serving. I expect there may have been some or many carrying handguns that night. But except in the movies, they could not have battled successfully against a maniac shooting at automatic.
So much for 2nd Amendment rights: just arm the loonies.
The ability to buy assault weapons would not have helped one of those 49 people because no decent person would have been allowed to walk in there without the alarm being raised. If real people started doing that, I they would have been stopped. An AR 15 at each table would probably have stopped waiters serving. I expect there may have been some or many carrying handguns that night. But except in the movies, they could not have battled successfully against a maniac shooting at automatic.
So much for 2nd Amendment rights: just arm the loonies.
1
Coming soon to a public venue near you, the TSA and security lines at all entrances to such venues. The pace of life will be slowed to a crawl.
Serious question, can someone please explain the legal justification for denying someone his constitutionally protected rights without any due process? Currently, you can't appeal your no-fly status, and in fact, you won't be told that you are on it.
I agree that terrorists shouldn't have guns, but this seems like it could have some real pitfalls.
I agree that terrorists shouldn't have guns, but this seems like it could have some real pitfalls.
18
We can either make every effort to keep guns out of the wrong hands or we can repeal the second amendment. Which do you prefer?
The Constitution does not protect a citizens right to semi automatic rifle, or a military grade rifle. That's a canard passed off by the NRA and gun lovers to end debate.
1
What part of the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right to buy assault rifles?
1
The bill to stop those on the terror list from buying guns was voted down by Congress not too long ago. Was that incredibly stupid?
5
Wow, it's tragically comical that this is even a discussion, should we let those on terror watch lists, no-fly lists, etc buy guns. But, if they think this will solve our mass murder problem in this country, they ought to think again, it takes far more guts and brains to enact strict gun control laws to keep these guns out of anybody's hands.
9
After seeing crime scene photographs of what a shotgun could do to a human being the former governor of Colorado considered banning all shotguns. He couldn't believe how devastate shot gun injuries could be. The guys heart was in the right place but his expertise was lacking.
There's no shame in a know it all politicians consulting the expert's in their fields. For instance if you wanted to break up the banks it might be helpful to talk to bankers.
There's no shame in a know it all politicians consulting the expert's in their fields. For instance if you wanted to break up the banks it might be helpful to talk to bankers.
3
Perhaps congress should be shown photos of the scene from this recent atrocity and perhaps the babies murdered in their school. Would that jolt them into action? At this point I doubt even that would help.
If Mr. Trump was at all serious he would be meeting with Mitch McConnell. But wait, on second thought, perhaps Mr. Trump has it right. The NRA pulls the strings of its puppets in the Congress. So, he has gone to the real power instead of meeting with their lackey.
12
50 people are murdered by a terrorist in cold blood and some people are explaining it away with convenient facts and figures. I'm speechless. This country has stopped making sense.
12
Trump is confused. The NRA tells him what to do is how it works. What he should be asking for is that everyone dangerous enough to be on a no-fly list should be arrested. That would solve their gun purchase problems, and put him on the same page with the ACLU.
I despise the creep, but he is not "confused." He is simply shape shifting, as he always does to confuse his voters and would-be voters.
It goes like this. The NRA wants him in the White House.
Hello gravy train. So they make a deal about something that is imminent anyway, make him look like a hero, and he brags his way into the White House.
Quid. Pro. Quo.
It goes like this. The NRA wants him in the White House.
Hello gravy train. So they make a deal about something that is imminent anyway, make him look like a hero, and he brags his way into the White House.
Quid. Pro. Quo.
Except that the terrorism watch list is notoriously flawed and rife with thousands of errors! That's not the solution. Instead:
Ban all assault-type, semi-automatic, and multiple magazine guns.
Require all guns and guns owners to be registered, just as we do with cars.
Require waiting periods and background checks on ALL gun sales and ALL gun transfers.
Limit the number of gun purchases annually to a very small number.
Require all gun buyers to pass gun safety tests, especially about household use and accessibility, with multi-year renewals.
Yes, it's a burden, but it's common sense and the carnage of 30,000 people dying each year in gun-related incidents has to take priority over free and easy access to guns and weapons, especially those that can fire and kill many in a short period of time.
Ban all assault-type, semi-automatic, and multiple magazine guns.
Require all guns and guns owners to be registered, just as we do with cars.
Require waiting periods and background checks on ALL gun sales and ALL gun transfers.
Limit the number of gun purchases annually to a very small number.
Require all gun buyers to pass gun safety tests, especially about household use and accessibility, with multi-year renewals.
Yes, it's a burden, but it's common sense and the carnage of 30,000 people dying each year in gun-related incidents has to take priority over free and easy access to guns and weapons, especially those that can fire and kill many in a short period of time.
5
Paula, legislating legal gun owners will NOT stop criminals. And, as long I follow the law; background check, waiting period, register the gun(s), etc., I'm not the problem. I shouldn't have to explain why I want guns if it's my right to have them.
1
I would venture that most of the gun carnage in this country, which takes place one or two victims at a time in places like Philadelphia and Chicago is at the hands of unlawful gun owners for whom additional felonies on top of those related to murder really won't matter much.
1
Lots of posts about the NRA not being an arm of our government.
In fact, the NRA IS IS IS a DE FACTO Arm of our government.
Sad but that's the fact.
In fact, the NRA IS IS IS a DE FACTO Arm of our government.
Sad but that's the fact.
4
It would set a terrible precedent to allow the government to take away one of our constitutional rights for simply being accused of a crime, rather than being charged with or convicted of one. I'll pick a different amendment, and different accusation, and ask if anyone would find it acceptable for one to lose his or her fourth amendment protections against warrantless searches simply because someone has accused him or her of possessing drugs. We'd find that unacceptable, so we should find this unacceptable, too.
2
We do not have a right to own tanks or stinger anti aircraft missiles. The same should apply to assault weapons. It does not infringe on your second amendment right to own guns, just these types.
We are getting close to the tipping point on gun control. It happened with cigarettes. Remember when non-smokers tolerated others smoking in their homes and cars? Public sentiment changed, and what seemed unsolvable was addressed. Now cigarette smokers are only 15% of the population.
If European countries don't have the carnage we have from guns, it shows the problem can be solved. Trump is dead wrong that we just need more people armed. We just need the public will and Congress behind sensible gun control. Vote the others out in November.
If European countries don't have the carnage we have from guns, it shows the problem can be solved. Trump is dead wrong that we just need more people armed. We just need the public will and Congress behind sensible gun control. Vote the others out in November.
6
I am pretty tired of the national dialogue about Trump. It has been completely taken over been the most vociferous left-wing voices who have interests neither in ideas or policies. They are just dead set on defending an anal retentive method of communication where everything needs to be taken literally and the burden of proof lies solely on the speaker. It doesn't matter how lazy or reactionary the listener is, as long as they fee personally offended they are justified.
That is not how Donald Trump talks, nor is it how many people speak. Acting as if that is his style when it is not is as self-serving and masochistic as reading into everything a garbage collector says as if he were a 13 year spoiled rich girl. Speaking different languages isn't just about using different words and grammar, it happens inside communities and inside homes because people think differently.
Even if you can't relate to the way Trump talks, it should be pretty obvious that he is a moderate open to working with his opposition. The famed muslim ban is literally the current policy of the government in that if there is a hot spot or ethnic group that is poorly known, they are rigorously denied entry. Though nobody covers it, Trumps deportation of illegals comes with a potential fast track to let them back in legally, which in fact mirrors current government policy for certain visa renewals.
That is not how Donald Trump talks, nor is it how many people speak. Acting as if that is his style when it is not is as self-serving and masochistic as reading into everything a garbage collector says as if he were a 13 year spoiled rich girl. Speaking different languages isn't just about using different words and grammar, it happens inside communities and inside homes because people think differently.
Even if you can't relate to the way Trump talks, it should be pretty obvious that he is a moderate open to working with his opposition. The famed muslim ban is literally the current policy of the government in that if there is a hot spot or ethnic group that is poorly known, they are rigorously denied entry. Though nobody covers it, Trumps deportation of illegals comes with a potential fast track to let them back in legally, which in fact mirrors current government policy for certain visa renewals.
2
So we should trust (and accept!) that our President "just talks this way," very much on the record, but actually means a bunch of reasonable stuff we're all going to be down with when we find out what it is. None of the other contenders on either side get/got cut that kind of slack, from what I remember.
I don't care if something good comes from even Trump. We need to close these loopholes.
4
I of course fully agree with the basic idea of denying guns for people on a watch list of suspected terrorists, but it is another slippery slope excursion into the abyss of no freedom. First; what is proposed is denying the rights of those that did not commit a crime while assuming they are guilty of that uncommitted crime before the fact. That is assuming one is guilty who is innocent. Second; If there were 800,000 names on the 2014 terror watch list, you can bet that there was extreme abuse of power by those who added some of those names to the list. Cops are the best liars because everyone believes them and feds are the worst cops. I do like cops, but they are unfortunately corrupt at times. Third; I have noticed a pattern of Congress taking advantage of appalling events to gain new powers over the people for the government forces, including the military, a classic point being the national information dragnet by the military NSA. Fourth; Besides the empowering of the government and military over the people, Congress is also militarizing the nations police with light and heavy equipment. Fifth; The big clue is what Senator Feinstein is doing. She is a truly fascist Senator who has consistently worked in Congress to militarize the nations forces and slowly eviscerate our nations freedoms.
There must be a better way.
There must be a better way.
2
Who cares what his position is? He has never been so much as a student council member. He has no power, no office, very few supporters in congress, and he never will.
Stop legitimizing this buffoon. He is a con man, a liar, a demagogue and a fool.
At the same time he tries to sound "reasonable" by supporting something that the vast majority of Americans want, but that he opposed until this morning, he is also claiming the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES was "training terrorists" based on a tabloid story, and renewing his unconstitutional call to put all Mosques under surveillance.
Stop legitimizing this buffoon. He is a con man, a liar, a demagogue and a fool.
At the same time he tries to sound "reasonable" by supporting something that the vast majority of Americans want, but that he opposed until this morning, he is also claiming the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES was "training terrorists" based on a tabloid story, and renewing his unconstitutional call to put all Mosques under surveillance.
10
Why would anyone be surprised that the Trump blowhard would go to the NRA? The NRA gives grades to the mostly male Congress who behaves like adolescent schoolboys. You can be sure everyone in Congress knows their ratings from the NRA. And you know how children, particularly the Republicans, want to keep an A grade.
1
Any miscreants caught trying to buy guns while not qualified to do so will be detained and forced to listen to alternating hours of Trump and Hillary delivering campaign stump speeches!
No repeat violators are anticipated.
No repeat violators are anticipated.
5
If only the NRA's concern about rights and freedoms extended to ANYTHING else, I might give a grain of credence to its stand. Absent that, we are left with the very sad truth that it is a lobby for the death-by-firearm industry, which explains its otherwise inexplicable compulsion to remove any limits at all to the sale of firearms.
2
How did the Xenophobic Cheeto get coverage on here but not our actual law makers and the filibuster? Shame on the times.
7
"Gun sales ban to people on terror watch list", like that would do anything. Anyone who has read the Orlando shooting news knows that the gunman's background come clean before the shooting. So what good is this ban to terror like this? This is such a lousy attempt to pretend to fix a problem.
1
How ironic and self serving can you get? The NRA would not give President Obama the time of day, but is willing to sit down with Trump, and he is not even President!
The other painful aspect is that this is not sitting down with Congress, with the leadership of the country, but rather what is ultimately a private lobbying group - not for gun owners - but for gun makers. Just another sign that Congress is Powerless and Feckless in the face of the desires of their true Masters on gun related issues. There is no longer even a pretense here as to who Congress works for anymore! It's NOT the American People!
The other painful aspect is that this is not sitting down with Congress, with the leadership of the country, but rather what is ultimately a private lobbying group - not for gun owners - but for gun makers. Just another sign that Congress is Powerless and Feckless in the face of the desires of their true Masters on gun related issues. There is no longer even a pretense here as to who Congress works for anymore! It's NOT the American People!
8
Brilliantly worded and expressed. I applaud you Maestro. Carry on....
As far as I am concerned the NRA is the real "terrorist" organization. They put the rest of us in continual danger by obstructing sensible gun legislation and buying off legislators. Tens of thousands of people are the victims of gun violence a mere fraction of which are done by foreign inspired killers.
8
Bernie Sanders’ campaign seems to have lost some relevance since the Pulse killings. But it need not be so. I would like to see Sen. Sanders continue his movement — and have some real impact — by using his oratorical skills to speak forcefully for a ban on the sale of assault weapons, and for other sensible gun controls. I would hope the young people who jammed arenas during the primary would turn out to hear that speech, and contribute $27 for that cause, and march on Washington in the hundreds of thousands to take on the NRA and the political cowardice of both Republicans and Democrats. Tale the revolution out of the theoretical and on to the streets. Let it begin now.
If my crazy neighbor can buy an assault weapon 20 minutes from now without a background check then I'm not safe with my puny handgun. We have to stop the arms race in our own neighborhoods . We may need to become single issue voters until this issue is resolved.
5
Yes, stop the sale of guns to people on the terrorist watch list. And for heavens sake change this 3 day background deadline. I don't get why, if a background check can't be conducted in 3 days, a "bad guy" can then go ahead and make the purchase. Establish a reasonable timeframe for an appropriately thorough background check. I'm an NRA member and I support these things. And I also don't get the large magazines. But I will oppose anyone who wants to eliminate all semi automatic hunting rifles or shotguns. Who wants to register all guns. Who's real agenda is to unravel the second amendment. And I won't vote for Trump, but the fact that he isn't stuck in the old Republican stance and is able and willing to engage them while supporting the second amendment is great.
16
No one "wants to unravel the second amendment." This kind of simple-minded, unexamined thinking makes YOU just as responsible for the thousands of firearm deaths as all the politicians in the NRA's pocket.
2
Charlie, I know more than a few NRA members and they are responsible gun owners who lock up their weapons in a gun safe when not in use. They own no automatic weapons, go to a range to practice and may or may not hunt legally. To a person, they see what the leadership of their organization has done to this country and they see that the GOP is largely "bought and paid for" by Wayne LaPierre and others in leadership of the NRA.
Most of us are reasonable and want measures to stop the spread of these killings and remember that part of the Second Amendment that reads "well regulated" for militias. I don't remember any "well regulated" militia ever being the culprit in a mass shooting or, indeed, crimes committed with guns. I would urge the responsible NRA members to make their views known to their leadership. Let's tone down the name calling and get some rational thought, finally, in the process.
Most of us are reasonable and want measures to stop the spread of these killings and remember that part of the Second Amendment that reads "well regulated" for militias. I don't remember any "well regulated" militia ever being the culprit in a mass shooting or, indeed, crimes committed with guns. I would urge the responsible NRA members to make their views known to their leadership. Let's tone down the name calling and get some rational thought, finally, in the process.
1
Bookmanjb, you are very much mistaken. There is a very large contingent in this country who constantly remind us about all the other "great" nations out there who have either eliminated personal possession or reduced it severely. And they advocate the same here. Simple minded indeed!
1
It's enough to have this man with his bombast as a presidential candidate. Who needs him and the NRA to decide anything on behalf of anyone. Not me anyway . . . I wouldn't have him represent me for anything and, unfortunately, I'd not have the other candidate represent me either. How I hate what's become of things here (and there).
2
The NRA will explain to Trump the importance of towing the line. Mass shootings are profitable, fear is profitable, limiting gun sales not so much. They are a profit driven organization. Given Trumps business record, and the NRA's business record , my money is on Trump coming around to their way of thinking, and real quick.
4
The NRA isn't government and should have no bearing on laws I live under.
149
No, the NRA styles itself the newest version of a private militia, albeit for its wholly-owned (and bought on the cheap!) subsidiary, the GOP.
1
You're wrong Monsieur. Thanks to Citizens United the NRA buys their republican politicians, therefor they they ARE the government, and they make stupid decisions like allowing those on the terror watch list to legally buy guns.
@Monsieur
"The NRA isn't government and should have no bearing on laws I live under.'
Fine. Then don't bother with NRA, and then nothing will change.
By the way, the ACLU isn't government either, but it's actions have some "bearing on laws [you] live under." And how about Credo, Moveon.org and People for the American Way and other liberal lobbying groups? They all try to have "some bearing" on the laws that affect all of us...
"The NRA isn't government and should have no bearing on laws I live under.'
Fine. Then don't bother with NRA, and then nothing will change.
By the way, the ACLU isn't government either, but it's actions have some "bearing on laws [you] live under." And how about Credo, Moveon.org and People for the American Way and other liberal lobbying groups? They all try to have "some bearing" on the laws that affect all of us...
But, but, but Trump is a strongman who admires other strongmen such as Vladimir Putin and this admiration is reciprocated by Putin for Trump. Putin would never go to the gun manufacturers front man Mr. Wayne LaPierre to ask if it's OK to do some gun control. Putin would tell Mr. Wayne LaPierre how it's gonna go down. That's the way strongmen do it. How can this be? There's something going on here. I can tell you that. Believe me.
1
Waaaay too little, waaay too late. The NRA has become a force unto itself, a separate state of being that feeds on ignorance, fear.. and the greed of manufacturers who care more about the bottom line than human lives. This puny gesture by Trump is little more than pandering and will lead to, at best, a tiny, little-finger child's bandaid being placed on the gaping, organ-ripping wound on the nation caused by countless AR-15s and the sad souls who wield them. I grew up in a hunting family in eastern Oregon, and this travesty is about as far from the America I grew up in, know, and love as, well... Donald Trump and the NRA.
3
I missed the civics lesson that said that presumptive candidates and lobbyist create our laws!
6
Perhaps the Justice Department should go after the NRA for monopoly and racketeering.
3
Wait. Why is this a discussion? What is there to discuss? A six year old knows not to give guns to bad guys! Why don't these white guy Republicans know this? I will never understand men and their propensity towards violence. I just hope that I'm not an innocent bystander when the next zealot explodes.
4
Explodes like when using an unregistered pressure cooker? There are other ways terrorists use to kill people.
1
The Times won't like my comment, nor my compatriots, the Democrats, but I have to write it because a united America above politics is important to me.
I of course fully agree with the basic idea of denying guns for people on a watch list of suspected terrorists, but it is another slippery slope excursion into the abyss of no freedom. First; what is proposed is denying the rights of those that did not commit a crime while assuming they are guilty of that uncommitted crime before the fact. That is assuming one is guilty who is innocent. Second; If there were 800,000 names on the 2014 terror watch list, you can bet that there was extreme abuse of power by those who added some of those names to the list. Cops are the best liars because everyone believes them and feds are the worst cops. I do like cops, but they are unfortunately corrupt at times. Third; I have noticed a pattern of Congress taking advantage of appalling events to gain new powers over the people for the government forces, including the military, a classic point being the national information dragnet by the military NSA. Fourth; Besides the empowering of the government and military over the people, Congress is also militarizing the nations police with light and heavy equipment. Fifth; The big clue is what Senator Feinstein is doing. She is a truly fascist Senator who has consistently worked in Congress to militarize the nations forces and slowly eviscerate our nations freedoms.
There must be a better way.
I of course fully agree with the basic idea of denying guns for people on a watch list of suspected terrorists, but it is another slippery slope excursion into the abyss of no freedom. First; what is proposed is denying the rights of those that did not commit a crime while assuming they are guilty of that uncommitted crime before the fact. That is assuming one is guilty who is innocent. Second; If there were 800,000 names on the 2014 terror watch list, you can bet that there was extreme abuse of power by those who added some of those names to the list. Cops are the best liars because everyone believes them and feds are the worst cops. I do like cops, but they are unfortunately corrupt at times. Third; I have noticed a pattern of Congress taking advantage of appalling events to gain new powers over the people for the government forces, including the military, a classic point being the national information dragnet by the military NSA. Fourth; Besides the empowering of the government and military over the people, Congress is also militarizing the nations police with light and heavy equipment. Fifth; The big clue is what Senator Feinstein is doing. She is a truly fascist Senator who has consistently worked in Congress to militarize the nations forces and slowly eviscerate our nations freedoms.
There must be a better way.
2
We live in a country where a sizable number of politicians are in the thrall of the NRA's political clout. Is it a coincidence it is also a country where guns outnumber people, where any individual can buy a gun regardless of age or criminal history at a gun show or on a Craigslist-type sales website, and where sloppy gun owners egged on by concealed-carry laws to arm themselves have allowed thousands of poorly-stored guns to be stolen from vehicles parked outside malls and sporting events? Far more people were killed by guns in the US last year alone than were killed by Hurricane Katrina. I wonder if it's far too late to fix the unnatural disaster these weapons have brought upon us.
2
We’ve always had gun control. The Founding Fathers instituted gun laws so intrusive that, were they running for office today, the NRA would not endorse them. While they did not care to completely disarm the citizenry, the founding generation denied gun ownership to many people: not only slaves and free blacks, but law-abiding white men who refused to swear loyalty to the Revolution.
For those men who were allowed to own guns, the Founders had their own version of the “individual mandate”. A 1792 federal law mandated every eligible man to purchase a military-style gun and ammunition for his service in the citizen militia. Such men had to report for frequent musters—where their guns would be inspected and, yes, registered on public rolls.
10 U.S. Code § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1) The organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Want a military grade weapon...Join Up...Uncle Sam is looking for you.
For those men who were allowed to own guns, the Founders had their own version of the “individual mandate”. A 1792 federal law mandated every eligible man to purchase a military-style gun and ammunition for his service in the citizen militia. Such men had to report for frequent musters—where their guns would be inspected and, yes, registered on public rolls.
10 U.S. Code § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1) The organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Want a military grade weapon...Join Up...Uncle Sam is looking for you.
3
Absolutely absurd that the NRA is holding the entire country hostage at gunpoint. There are more guns than citizens in the United States. Enough is enough. This concession, if ever passed, does not go nearly far enough. The only thing that could possibly help is a mandatory registration of all guns. Similar to vehicles, gun owners would have to register all guns and pay a fee, with mandatory registration/fees every two years. We could use the revenue to protect our national parks and hunting areas. Failure to register any weapon would result in mandatory seizure. Additionally, the violator would be denied the right to purchase a gun in the future. This would protect second amendment rights, which by the way, had nothing to do with personal ownership of a gun, while allowing those who want a weapon to own one. This would cut down gun violence. All other measures are just hit and miss, no pun intended.
5
You mentioned the requirement to register cars and pay annual or other license fees. Sheesh!! In most places, one needs a license to catch FISH!! Go figure!
1
Donald Trump takes strong positions on both sides of all arguments, he is not to be trusted. Not with the NRA, not with the nuclear code.
6
Our leaders have for years, stated we are not at war with Islam, but, you fail to realize the radicals are at war with us. Any militant of any intelligence would have a long term strategy and obviously, the radicals objective with all these massacres is to get America to disarm itself leaving it vulnerable in the future.
2
We have already tried an AWB, Clinton Era 1994-2004, and the murder rate now is lower than during that period. I think the answer is to classify high cap. semi auro weapons as we do fully auto guns. Charge a high transfer fee, guns must be registered and a longer vetting period. Anyone attempting to buy one of these weapons would be match against any watch lists. No one's 2nd amendment rights are abused and there are more controls. I support the 2nd amendment but oppose all weapons that do not serve a sporting purpose.
1
Our friend Trump may be able to leverage them with a pointed finger that he can "fire", I mean, say "you're fired".
Trump will say anything to get votes. The NRA will give him lip service, but won't change their absurd stance on gun control. Trump and the NRA are in bed together. They are eroding the democracy that we call the USA. Give Trump some time and his rallies will hark back to the day of Bund rallies. He is out of control.
2
The members of the NRA are disgusting. Using the fake 2nd Amendment to give crazy people the right to kill. Embarrassing for America and for Americans. What kind of a country have we become with liars like that having the power?
2
The NRA might actually agree to some concession and make it look like some smart thing Trump negotiated because -
Trump would do nothing to bother the NRA if elected and the NRA knows it. The NRA would be smart to agree to this to help Trump get elected because the NRA would totally own him as president.
It would also garner some very rare 'good press' for the NRA. Both the NRA and Trump would cynically 'win' if they 'negotiated' a concession the NRA would be wiling to make.
Trump's a dog's breakfast but he's proven himself a wily politician. The NRA would do anything to continue to control the government. Win/win for both.
Trump would do nothing to bother the NRA if elected and the NRA knows it. The NRA would be smart to agree to this to help Trump get elected because the NRA would totally own him as president.
It would also garner some very rare 'good press' for the NRA. Both the NRA and Trump would cynically 'win' if they 'negotiated' a concession the NRA would be wiling to make.
Trump's a dog's breakfast but he's proven himself a wily politician. The NRA would do anything to continue to control the government. Win/win for both.
1
So freaky, reading this the NRA is sounding strangely enough like the ACLU wanting to protect rights of citizens to buy guns at all costs!! Our country is surreally upside down in every way.
And the Democrats never consult with powerful lobbying groups like teacher's unions before proposing legislation that affects their membershi. Just checking..
2
Trump will try to broker an apparent deal with NRA that he will hawk as just sweet enough to get him some democratic votes. Don't be fooled.
2
Interesting and appalling that he meets with the NRA to discuss this as opposed to those in power in the Senate. Who has the power here? But also, not surprising. I met with NJ Rep. Leonard Lance about gun legislation, and he said he wouldn't support any bill not approved by the NRA. He said that out loud. This is what we're dealing with -- blind allegiance to the NRA.
2
It's clear to everyone who's the puppet and who pulls the strings. As far as the GOP/conservatives are concerned, the sun doesn't rise until given the nod by the NRA.
I do believe the NRA is a democratically run organization. A sustained grassroots membership drive could fill the NRA with responsible citizenry. Then we could elect a responsible head of the NRA and be done with this inane lobbyists-make-laws quagmire we are in. At least with the NRA.
We need a well-regulated militia. The NRA is the gun lobby establishment full of gred, grifters and gun hoarders.
4
So if Trump announces he has a deal with the NRA will he be fired if they back out after the election?
1
He looks to the mirror for foreign policy but to the NRA for domestic policy.
1
Excuse me, but why is it up to the NRA? Are the principals of this nefarious organization our true legislators, not Congress? Yes. Because Congress is stacked with NRA puppets. NRA appears to be ruling our country and is basically indifferent to human life. We must vote the NRA puppets out.
69
This plan for Trump and the NRA to meet smells of a demons' pact in which the NRA makes some minor concession, Trump gets credit for being a brilliant statesman and deal-maker who gets things done, and the gun lobby is spared a President Clinton.
160
Oh no, we still get a President Clinton. She is an excellent choice, and there is no one else running who is remotely qualified for the job.
I too smell the sulpher.
1
And whatever the pact is, won't be implemented until/unless Trump becomes president.
1
Those of us outside the USA just look on incredulously at what happens in the US in relation to gun crime and gun usage in general - aside from the Constitutional thing, clearly there are cultural issues at play too. What are you all scared of?? Why on earth does anyone need an assault weapon unless they are fighting in a war - oh, wait.....
24
Americans still dream about the independence from Britain centuries ago and think that the civilians must have equivalent guns that the govt has. Govt also has lots of other ammunition like fighter jets, nuclear weapons, I hope the civilians need them also just in case there is an uprising against the govt.
1
Sue,
Of course no sane civilian needs an assault weapon. Many of us inside the U.S. also look on incredulously as you do. Our country has been hijacked by radical extremists and business interests. Voting districts have been gerrymandered to protect the rabid right-wing, no tax, pro gun part of the population (Look at the voting lines in Austin, Texas to see what I mean). The Americans I know are appalled by Trump, the lack of any sort of gun control, and religious extremists who feel the need to force others to adhere to their version of morality. However, we aren't wealthy enough to buy our very own politicians, so we're stuck.
Of course no sane civilian needs an assault weapon. Many of us inside the U.S. also look on incredulously as you do. Our country has been hijacked by radical extremists and business interests. Voting districts have been gerrymandered to protect the rabid right-wing, no tax, pro gun part of the population (Look at the voting lines in Austin, Texas to see what I mean). The Americans I know are appalled by Trump, the lack of any sort of gun control, and religious extremists who feel the need to force others to adhere to their version of morality. However, we aren't wealthy enough to buy our very own politicians, so we're stuck.
2
You would think it's a no brainer to prevent terrorist from buying guns.
But, our politicians need permission from the NRA.
But, our politicians need permission from the NRA.
39
I wonder who bought the guns for San Bernadino shooter. A friend who was not on terrorist watch list. Wake up Trump!!
6
Donald Trump is holding discussions with the NRA?
Why not with the US Congress?
Why not with the US Congress?
23
He is not a member of Congress or the President - anyway, they have accomplished nothing in years. Trump is correct on many things and this is just one more example. Working with the NRA is intelligent in my opinion. The NRA is the main obstacle to reform.
1
If you want to discuss gun control legislation, you have to go to the NRA? I suppose Donald Trump has a point. The best approach is to talk directly to the legislators, and when it comes to gun control (or the lack thereof), all legislation is written by the NRA.
25
You lost your argument when in today's Editorial, you accused the N.R.A. with complicity with terrorists. That is as absurd as people accusing you of being a government paper.
6
I think it's a reasonable argument. The NRA opposes all measures aimed at blocking those on the terrorist watch list from obtaining guns. It's fair to say that the NRA is complicit with terrorists.
2
The NRA is an industry group with the goal of maximizing gun sales. While they could choose to accept that there might be other priorities that would legitimately reduce sales - such as avoiding criminal or insane or terrorist customers - they do not.
Does that make them complicit? That certainly can be argued.
...Andrew
Does that make them complicit? That certainly can be argued.
...Andrew
2
How about the HYPOCRISY that NRA Headquarters in Washington DC is a GUN-FRE zone. You cannot bring a weapon into their offices except if you work there.
They advocate that anyone be permitted to pack anywhere, all the time, except when it is a possible danger or threat to them.
Just sayin'.
They advocate that anyone be permitted to pack anywhere, all the time, except when it is a possible danger or threat to them.
Just sayin'.
46
I agree -- and the hypocrisy was at its greatest a year ago when the NRA made one of their major member events an ammo free zone!
2
Excellent point!
2
The NRA would love to have President Trump. He can say he made A "DEAL" and the dodos will eat it up.
I guess now is the time for the Republicans to stand-up an defend the 2# amendment against the renegade Trump.
What's next? Abortian for rape-victims? In the Republican party we are pro-life and pro-gun........ after birth !!!!
What's next? Abortian for rape-victims? In the Republican party we are pro-life and pro-gun........ after birth !!!!
3
The ACLU will never allow the terror watch list to be used. There is no Due Process.
3
Why should military weapons be used by civilians...?
Military weapons are for one sole purpose....to kill the enemy
Civilians are defenseless against military weapons....so why should assault
weapons be allowed to be sold or owned by civilians...just tell me why this
is allowed...and I do not think this fits into the reasoning of owning any and
all guns...The NRA is running the country...and in my view is the actual
militia described in the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court should
rule on the sale and ownership of military weapons by our civilian citizens.
Military weapons are for one sole purpose....to kill the enemy
Civilians are defenseless against military weapons....so why should assault
weapons be allowed to be sold or owned by civilians...just tell me why this
is allowed...and I do not think this fits into the reasoning of owning any and
all guns...The NRA is running the country...and in my view is the actual
militia described in the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court should
rule on the sale and ownership of military weapons by our civilian citizens.
16
Americans still dream about the independence from Britain centuries ago and think that the civilians must have equivalent guns that the govt has just incase they have to fight the govt in future.
1
Controlling guns will not control murderers. PEOPLE kill, not guns, nor knives nor clubs nor poisons - PEOPLE. If there were a way to control the people, we might be able to control murders. Recall Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma City - 168 murders, no guns.
3
Pogo was right, but statistics show you are not.
You are right. People kill, that's why those who are killers or potential killers should not be able to get anything legally that allows them to continue killing. Is that so hard to omprehend?
2
McVeigh, an outlier. People with guns kill; a person has to have the gun and pull the trigger. Guns do not have legs and feet; guns do not walk public streets nor walk into public gatherings. People who have military style assault weapons kill more people than people with a pistol, or even a Glock. There was a ban on assault weapons and it was allowed to sunset. That ban needs to be reinstated. Unless you plan to enter into combat with your neighbors, or your own government, there does not appear to be a need to own a combat weapon modified for civilians who want to pretend they are combat vets. A military style assault weapon killed 26 innocent children; it killed innocent people in San Bernardino; it killed innocent people in a movie theater; it has now killed 49 innocent men who were out on a Friday night. evening. You are not in a militia defending against the British. You are an ordinary American, as were those 49 dead Americans in Orlando. We have police, sheriffs, national guards, and a standing military. We taxpayers who just want a peaceful, safe commons, do not need you to defend us. We are adequately defended.
1
It's pathetic that we are still even having this conversation after so many people have been slaughtered by idiots who got military assault rifles legally before they on their killing sprees. There is NO REASON that anyone, other than police or the military, needs this kind of rifle in their possession. NO REASON. This has nothing to do with gun rights. There are plenty of other guns available. This is about humanity and common sense. BAN ASSAULT RIFLES NOW!
20
Is it too much to ask for the story about the ELECTED senators who filibustered for 15 hours to be above this one on the home page? Must Trump always lead? The MSM -- including this paper-- bears a yuuuuge amount of responsibility for allowing Trump to indulge in his narcissistic fantasies. If you can't stop hanging on his every word, at least try putting 50% of the stories about him below the fold.
26
Meanwhile, real leaders who can and have worked with the government and LEGITIMATE legislative branches, can and WILL help elect Sec. Hillary Clinton to become our 45th president by connecting all Republicans in the DO-NOTHING congress as the reason terrorist CAN and HAVE gotten assault weapons which kill innocent Americans.
13
wow! this is ridiculous- what is the role of NRA in making this law? how many senators and reps does the NRA have in its pockets? People of America- wake up! the façade of 2nd Amendment being used as an excuse to sell weapons to civilians is clearly exposed. do you still not see it?
19
Con Man Don and the NRA find themselves on the wrong side of history! 85% of all Americans want laws preventing a terrorist to buy automatic weapons. Is the NRA and Con Man Don on the side of ISIS in the War on Terrorism?
11
Why does Trump need to "meet with the N.R.A. ... about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list .. to not buy guns?" Is Trump not aware that neither he nor the N.R.A. are allowed to vote for laws?
15
Though I doubt conservatives' newfound concern for due process rights, I don't think the NRA concern is irrelevant. The no-fly list, and so certainly the no-fly list + 5 years, is going to include a lot of false positives. And as we know with the case of people trying to board airlines while having Muslim-sounding names, it's hard to appeal and the process isn't transparent. It's true that if you shouldn't be able to board a plane, then you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. But it's also true that the no-fly list is often discriminatory, and so a doubtful standard in its own right for fairly determining who can fly.
Also, if Democrats think that a probable cause standard is too high of a burden, then they should have to defend what standard we use to legally restrict people's ability to do something. Is any suspicion by the government enough? If someone challenges their place on a no-fly (or no-buy) list, should the government then have to give evidence that satisfies probable cause? Or reasonable suspicion? Should the decision be made by a secret court or an administrative agency, or should someone be able to appeal the decision?
I worry that this is poorly thought-out crisis policymaking.
Also, if Democrats think that a probable cause standard is too high of a burden, then they should have to defend what standard we use to legally restrict people's ability to do something. Is any suspicion by the government enough? If someone challenges their place on a no-fly (or no-buy) list, should the government then have to give evidence that satisfies probable cause? Or reasonable suspicion? Should the decision be made by a secret court or an administrative agency, or should someone be able to appeal the decision?
I worry that this is poorly thought-out crisis policymaking.
3
You raise some thoughtful, valid points. That said, if the laws were changed to ban private citizens across the board from possessing assault weapons, which I believe is the right approach, then issues about who can and can't buy other types of guns wouldn't be so critical.
1
Any movement on gun control should be welcomed. Just because it comes from Trump does not dilute its importance.
Trump and Bill O'Reilly deserve kudos -- this is significant.
Trump and Bill O'Reilly deserve kudos -- this is significant.
29
trump is coming for your guns!
3
Equivalent to Nixon going to China? Stay tuned for history in the making, ot not.
1
I'm sorry, I don't trust either one of them. I believe like others here that it is for show. What could be the reasoning? Within two days the NRA has had a change of heart?
Call me a doubting Thomas
Call me a doubting Thomas
2
Where is your story about the filibuster going on in the Senate? Chris Murphy's message is worth hearing and reading about.
Every time I see Trump's name or his face I want to regurgitate. He has proposed NO coherent ideas and consistently sounds like an immature, petulant, ten year old narcissist.
Every time I see Trump's name or his face I want to regurgitate. He has proposed NO coherent ideas and consistently sounds like an immature, petulant, ten year old narcissist.
2
The right wing, particularly the NRA, now has a delema.
Support restrictions on the sale of these weapons, especially at loose-rules gun shows, and extensively monitored lists of "no buy" persons…
or,
face the prospect that the terrorists will hijack and completely define the gun control debate in the U.S. with every incident like Orlando.
In other words, it's mostly on the NRA now to assist the effort to keep these weapons away from certain dangerous people (through means they don't support) or else the public backlash will bite them big.
The terrorists and their access to guns are now the biggest challenge for the NRA. It's on them now to justify their positions and avoid a public demanded crackdown.
Support restrictions on the sale of these weapons, especially at loose-rules gun shows, and extensively monitored lists of "no buy" persons…
or,
face the prospect that the terrorists will hijack and completely define the gun control debate in the U.S. with every incident like Orlando.
In other words, it's mostly on the NRA now to assist the effort to keep these weapons away from certain dangerous people (through means they don't support) or else the public backlash will bite them big.
The terrorists and their access to guns are now the biggest challenge for the NRA. It's on them now to justify their positions and avoid a public demanded crackdown.
4
In order to be fair and allow everyone due-process, whether or not actively or formerly on a terrorist watch or no fly list, the sale of assault-type, semi-automatic, large magazine-capacity weapons should be banned to one and all.
Why do you suppose their called "assault rifles?"
Why do you suppose their called "assault rifles?"
2
Why not a total ban on the sale of assault weapons by Congress "until we figure out what is going on."
4
Trump's pitch is simple: 'Tell them what the want to hear and we'll just rescind it later."
2
How do you get on the terrorists watch list? What parameters are used? What/who reviews the determination to put one on the list? What safe guards are built in so that it doesn't become another IRS fiasco and used for political reasons? Are you advised that you are on the list? Can others look at the list under the freedom of information act? Potential employers? What is the process to get off? Is it a judicial proceeding? Costs in trying to get off?
2
All it takes is a gun violence at a gun show or a NRA meeting -- probability of which is non-zero -- to quash any argument against gun control. I am not wishing for another gun massacre, just stating the obvious.
7
“Oh, Trump just makes everything worse,” Ms. Feinstein said.
Few words, sums it up.
(Proud to be from CT: Murphy, Blumenthal, Himes--great national leaders.)
Few words, sums it up.
(Proud to be from CT: Murphy, Blumenthal, Himes--great national leaders.)
7
Last I checked, neither the N.R.A. nor Donald Trump were elected officials and therefore anything they decide is a mere proposal of minor significance.
129
Except the NRA appears to have most of congress in its pocket, so their decisions carry a lot of weight. According to the Donald, he also has most of congress in his pockets....
I've heard this one "First they disarmed the Brown people, and I did not complain because I was not a Brown person"
2
Over Memorial Day Weekend in Chicago, 67 people were shot, and six died. Why no discussion about that?
1
It falls into the 33,000 guns deaths per year in the U.S. Gang murders, suicides, domestic violence murders etc. 33,000 gun death per year. We have just added 49 new gun deaths with the possibility of more who are on life support. Innocent, tax paying American citizens out on a Friday night murdered by a violent possibly mentally ill man. He was not documented, because his ex-wife never reported the physical abuse. The current wife who went with him to buy weapons and ammo chose to stay silent, even when he talked about killing homosexuals. An employee who worked with him in a security service quit his job, because Mateen frightened him with his crazy rants. Mateen's father is a homophobic bigot whose son was a closet gay, going to gay clubs, full of self-hatred. What a perfect storm of ignorance and the availability of military style weaponry.
This is a sham. Nothing more and nothing less. Trump and the NRA will both "agree" to take action once Trump is elected.
If however, anyone is gullible to believe that action would actually occur, then I have a bridge I'd like to sell them...
If however, anyone is gullible to believe that action would actually occur, then I have a bridge I'd like to sell them...
2
This may be the first test of the Democrat's ability to handle Trump. He's going to meet with them, cut a deal that "prevents terrorists from buying guns", the NRA will support it (it doesn't really affect the rights of the overwhelming bulk of their members) and Trump will look like the deal maker he always portrayed himself to be. HRC better be on top form to handle the spin coming out of that one.
He's going to try to cut a deal and the NRA is going to blow him off. This will be Trumps new pre-presidential experience of bargaining when you don't already have the upper hand.
Why is this meeting even news? Trump is not a legislator, and the NRA isn't supposed to be either. Why is it featured on NYTimes.com so prominently, when the filibuster in progress -- being conducted by actual legislators -- is not?
5
Are you guys going to put the hours long filibuster on the front page? Its a bit more important. And genuine.
3
So what happens if your name in on a terror watchlist in error. Since a name could be put on a watchlist for any reason, with neither a reason nor a way to get it taken off, this is a further errosion to the 2nd ammendment and people's rights.
Apparently it can get taken off, since the Orlando shooter was taken off the list.
1
Obama (or Biden) should have Trump arrested on a charge of sedition. Donald has made serious false charges against a sitting President and I would love to just hear him howl and call out his lawyers.
3
So the Democrat side of Trump is for a law that 90 percent of the American people and the Democrats have been trying to get for years. And yesterday we found out he loves the gays also. Tsk tsk, what's a bipolar candidate to do? Now, was that before or after he banned the Washington Post from his crazy rallies. These Republicans will go down in history as the worst ever. The Donald doesn't look like he's having fun anymore.
1
So, the NRA runs the whole show on gun policy in the USA. Oh well,
just confirms what we already knew. And what a concept, deny
guns to suspected terrorists and those on the "no fly list".
Seriously, should that even be up for debate? Really?
just confirms what we already knew. And what a concept, deny
guns to suspected terrorists and those on the "no fly list".
Seriously, should that even be up for debate? Really?
5
Lets compromise. No Syrian refugees admitted in the US for one year and no assault rifle sales to anyone in the US for one year.
The NRA will hand Trump a win on this one. Trump will preen as a deal maker. Republicans will get behind him. Nice political ploy on Trump's part.
59
Don't lose hope. Plenty of time left for Trump to be himself and remind everyone of how dangerous he would be as president.
I disagree. The NRA will stick to its position and Trump will be forced to choose to either A) disagree with the NRA and look like an ineffectual fool or B) retract his position, toeing the NRA line and end up an ineffectual tool.
I'll give odds that the meeting between Mr. Trump and NRA never happens. The same way the the debate with Senator Sanders didn't happen.
Trump is a joke, he's a self centered narcissist that believes that he really is smarter than anyone else. The fact is, he is nothing more than a bigot that pillaged Atlantic City, destroyed people's lives ruined business. Then had the gall to talk about his business acumen.
For all you young republicans if he were to get elected, rest assured that he would be willing to throw the US into a war that you would participate in while the loser hid his sons. Trump is a stain that needs to be removed, I have dropped my NRA membership not that I believe in their propaganda, with that said Trump talking to the NRA is nothing less than pandering to a lobby that panders to the Republican Party.
For all you young republicans if he were to get elected, rest assured that he would be willing to throw the US into a war that you would participate in while the loser hid his sons. Trump is a stain that needs to be removed, I have dropped my NRA membership not that I believe in their propaganda, with that said Trump talking to the NRA is nothing less than pandering to a lobby that panders to the Republican Party.
3
"I will ask the NRA if my [baseline reasonable] idea is ok with them". There, fixed that drivel-tweet. Pitifully obsequious, from a would-be leader.
3
Oh I see, when Trump says something NO Republican has ever said, and it also is the right thing to do, it's barely mentioned and has like no comments. I heard so much crazy on NYT and NPR today about Trump, but now that he is doing something no liberal has the power to do (influence the NRA) and liberal can give him support?
Trump is standing up to the gun lobby that ten thousand commenters whined about in their comments over the last few days. They of course will call him a bigot and a racist. However, here he is actually working to save lives.
Guess your anti-Trump views don't really stand up when the guy is actually working to prevent terrorist suspects from buying guns. But oh he is a racist because he wants to actually enforce immigration laws. He is a bigot even though he was the only Republican candidate that said a Transgender person could use any bathroom they want, in Trump Tower no less. Finally, he must hate women, except he sure does seem to employ a lot of them and pay them well...
Trump may say stupid stuff occasionally, but so does every American. We don't all have focus groups to comb our every word for the "best" message.
Trump is standing up to the gun lobby that ten thousand commenters whined about in their comments over the last few days. They of course will call him a bigot and a racist. However, here he is actually working to save lives.
Guess your anti-Trump views don't really stand up when the guy is actually working to prevent terrorist suspects from buying guns. But oh he is a racist because he wants to actually enforce immigration laws. He is a bigot even though he was the only Republican candidate that said a Transgender person could use any bathroom they want, in Trump Tower no less. Finally, he must hate women, except he sure does seem to employ a lot of them and pay them well...
Trump may say stupid stuff occasionally, but so does every American. We don't all have focus groups to comb our every word for the "best" message.
5
"Trump may say stupid stuff occasionally?" Every other sentences of every speech is more like it.
No, Jacqueline, Trump doesn't say stupid stuff occasionally. He says stupid things all the time and lies close to 100% of the time. He also flip flops regularly. So pardon us on the left if we continue to be suspicious of what Trump says and does. Because you can bet that his assertions that he's going to speak sternly to the NRA will morph into something else before the week is out.
I am thrilled about his meeting with the NRA and wish him well. But I still think his wall idea is foolish and that he has expressed racist and sexist ideas and fomented hate. He doesn't seem to me to be unifying the country but rather reestablishing white male supremacy, trying to turn back the clock to when people who looked and acted like him were in charge. But it was also a time when there weren't assault weapons easily purchased, making his meeting with the NRA understandable. He is consistent but I'll never vote for him.
Well now we know. The NRA sets policy. Congress does as it is told.
Nice to officially recognize the arrangement.
Nice to officially recognize the arrangement.
11
Show me where in the 2nd Amendment terrorists have the right to keep and bear arms. Thought so....It doesn't. In fact, the notion of our free state allowing a terrorist to own a firearm runs counter to this amendment. We as Americans have a right and obligation to do all we can to prevent such a situation. To do otherwise would be unpatriotic.
2
Good god! Trump is going tell the NRA what to do while all those mealy mouthed GOP congressmen stand by! All these guys had plenty of opportunity
to do this, but now apparently it takes a loud mouthed spoiled brat from Queens to set them right. What has the world come to?
to do this, but now apparently it takes a loud mouthed spoiled brat from Queens to set them right. What has the world come to?
4
"Mr. Trump contends that if people had guns to shoot back, the killers (sic) might not have tried the attack or would have injured fewer people." He went on to claim that "if you crouch behind a wooden table during an attack it will act as a bullet proof shield and if you duck and roll the evil people wont be able to hit you with a spray of bullets while you get one perfect shot off". Mr. Trump doesn't know who was attacked, why they were attacked or how best to deal with the weaponry that define the nature of these attacks. His grasp of detail is abysmal. His reading of this moment in history is delusional. I look forward to getting rid of him in a hail of votes.
10
The essential irony of the gun debate is lost on most. Republicans champion law and order, except when it comes to guns. They argue for law, order, and gun freedom. Democrats champion individual rights except when it comes to guns. They defend the rights of gun criminals but they are opposed to their possession of guns. Republicans are tough on crime but soft on guns. Democrats are the reverse. The goal of Republicans is strict enforcement of the law against gun-toting criminals. Democrats prefer to take guns out of criminals' hands and then embrace them. I think they're both wrong. We need to get rid of guns, like the Democrats want, but we still need to lock up the bad guys, like the Republicans want. Unlike either party, I have no affection for criminals or their gun rights. Take the guns out of their hands and punish ten for their wrongdoing.
2
Not an unreasonable view among many unreasonable views.
1
If barring people on the terror watch list is at the center of the gun control debate, we should bow down and give our allegiance to the nra right now. They won.
5
So what. Who cares who the imbecile Trump meets with? What difference does it make? This is giving the rotund orange lizard more free publicity.
11
Well, if Tump succeeds with the NRA but fails with the election, Clinton should offer him the position of ambasador to the NRA.
9
Pretty obvious who runs the show when it comes to guns in America - and it's not Trump...
NRA owns Congress. Pretty despicable. I don't remember voting for NRA. And guess what - we can't. But their voice is far more powerful than that of the voters.
NRA owns Congress. Pretty despicable. I don't remember voting for NRA. And guess what - we can't. But their voice is far more powerful than that of the voters.
19
Talk. Talk. Talk. There is a lot of talk after every mass shooting. And what actually happens? Nothing. Zilch. Nada. Just another day in the US where the only solution acceptable by the NRA and their supporters is to put more guns into the hands of Americans - whether they should have them or not.
2
Why is he talking to the NRA on this? Real presidents tell the NRA what will be. It's not the other way around.
7
I have no patience for people who are willing to have fellow citizens murdered on a daily basis because they cannot accept a tiny control to their supposed right. I happen to think that five people of the Supreme Court made a dreadful mistake by making absolute the right to carry guns, and that the Republicans in Congress are complicit to the mayhem by supporting the NRA over fellow Americans. I suppose that every person on the verge of dying from a gun shot is saying to himself: I am glad that I have only one life to protect the Second Amendment right of the guy who shot me.
60
"N.R.A. officials said on Twitter that they would be happy to meet with Mr. Trump, but that the group had not changed its position: withholding guns from people on the terrorist watch list, the vast majority of whom have not been charged with a crime, would give the government too much power to deny people of their Second Amendment right."
You know what we need here? A referendum to create a new amendment that would guarantee every innocent citizen bystander, of any gender, color, religious belief, or ethnicity the right to live their lives free from having a madman enter the scene and pretty much blow them away.
You know what we need here? A referendum to create a new amendment that would guarantee every innocent citizen bystander, of any gender, color, religious belief, or ethnicity the right to live their lives free from having a madman enter the scene and pretty much blow them away.
71
We already have that in the Declaration of Independence that focuses on the three inalienable rights of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happyness." It also spells out that it is the duty of government to protect these rights. The Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4th, 1776; many years before the the 2nd Amendment. And nowhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights does it state that the content of these later documents would invalidate anything written in the Declaration of Independence.
So much to say.
"A spokesman for Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said that the speechmaking by Democrats was merely delaying the consideration of the gun-related measures"
The hypocrisy of that statement is great even for a GOP spokesperson.
Trump is hoping to make some kind of "deal" with the NRA, which they might give in order to help him look like the great deal maker and the ONE who could fix what nobody else could fix, i.e., the savior of America and the world. The NRA wants him elected. Trump is no friend of gun control.
As to "good guys" having guns in the club. The insanity of that is amazing. Have these folks no imagination? Add lots of guns in a dark room where everyone is confused, not sure what is happening, frightened, and (this is the kicker) not sure how many "bad" gunmen there might be. First "good guy" shoots, then others think that maybe there are two "bad guys" then others start shooting - no one knows who is "good" and who is "bad." No one aims well when startled, frightened, confused. The original gunman might even be killed and all the "good guys" would still be shooting wildly at each other! Why can these idiots not see that?!!!
"A spokesman for Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said that the speechmaking by Democrats was merely delaying the consideration of the gun-related measures"
The hypocrisy of that statement is great even for a GOP spokesperson.
Trump is hoping to make some kind of "deal" with the NRA, which they might give in order to help him look like the great deal maker and the ONE who could fix what nobody else could fix, i.e., the savior of America and the world. The NRA wants him elected. Trump is no friend of gun control.
As to "good guys" having guns in the club. The insanity of that is amazing. Have these folks no imagination? Add lots of guns in a dark room where everyone is confused, not sure what is happening, frightened, and (this is the kicker) not sure how many "bad" gunmen there might be. First "good guy" shoots, then others think that maybe there are two "bad guys" then others start shooting - no one knows who is "good" and who is "bad." No one aims well when startled, frightened, confused. The original gunman might even be killed and all the "good guys" would still be shooting wildly at each other! Why can these idiots not see that?!!!
106
In addition when the police arrive how are they to determine who the bad guy is?
Trump's utterances don't have any basis in logic, experience or intelligence, why are people surprised when he says something stupid?
An off-duty police officer with a loaded weapon was the first one to respond to the scene. He was not able to stop Mateen.
Wha a joke! Trump and NRA are playing a charade here - and a revulsive one.. NRA is the moral equivalence of a terrorist organization and Trump its sympathizer.
86
Yes, the charade can be seen a mile away. Behind the scenes, the NRA candidate and the NRA can't wait to stage the presumable advances they've made in 1 week that all these politicians couldn't make in 10 years. I can see the tweets flying already.
EVERYONE spraying hundreds of bullets from a gun is a terrorist, not only those who happen to be Muslims. If we work together, spraying bullets should be the easiest terrorism to prevent: prevent purchase of weapons of mass destruction to all individual citizens, period.
In the meantime, the mastermind behind yet another mass killing is not ISIS, it is the gun manufacturers and NRA and bought off legislators who irresponsibly make it all too easy for any angry soul to spray bullets.
In the meantime, the mastermind behind yet another mass killing is not ISIS, it is the gun manufacturers and NRA and bought off legislators who irresponsibly make it all too easy for any angry soul to spray bullets.
The watch list - where a name can be put on without judge, jury, or the presumption of innocence - is not a shining example of a democratic society. The problem is not that people on the watch list can buy semi-automatic guns. The problem is that semi-automatic guns are for sale.
The sale of semi-automatic guns should be banned except for exceptional cases.
The sale of semi-automatic guns should be banned except for exceptional cases.
249
There are no exceptional cases!
Treat semi-automatic weapons in the same way as automatic weapons. You too can own a machine gun after undergoing an extensive background check and paying a very large tax, that is if your local law enforcement agency doesn't veto the purchase. This could be a stop-gap measure until we realize that the second amendment speaks of a "well-regulated militia" not millions of heavily armed individuals. There is no rational for a private person owning or possessing modern military grade firearms.
For sale to civilians:
Long guns bolt action only, 5 round clip
Shotgun, over/under or side by side
Pistol, revolver only 6 round max.
Long guns bolt action only, 5 round clip
Shotgun, over/under or side by side
Pistol, revolver only 6 round max.
Trump's last minute change of heart for the LGBT rights and now for the qualified gun control seems to have been dictated more by the electoral compulsions than by genuine conviction.
43
Trump isn't the only person to do such a thin. Hillary is a pretty good follower of polls herself.
1
Maybe he will use his unpredictable-ness in a good direction. Clinton is no better in terms of flailing around with her positions depending on the direction of the wind. As much as Trump's negatives are obvious and blatant, I think I'm not alone in being really sick of the drumbeat.
It's even worse. It's a charade to make trump appear to be a deal maker. He'll walk out of that meeting with some apparent deal. Sell it as a grand achievement. It is showmanship and exploitation of a tragedy for personal gain. The conman at his best.
It is as if the media has been taken over by 'the Donald'. Yesterday as he was speechifying yet again, as he does virtually every day, the speech was covered live by Faux News, MSNBC and CNN.
Trump seeks to dominate the news cycle, every news network, every day. Yet while doing this the networks, inadvertently or not, are showing preference to one candidate, while marginalizing the viewpoints of Hillary Clinton and to a large degree, President Obama.
At what point in this election cycle is Trump going to be exposed for the blowhard that he is, and as should happen with all braggarts, shown for exactly who he is and for what he craves - constant adulation and attention.
Trump seeks to dominate the news cycle, every news network, every day. Yet while doing this the networks, inadvertently or not, are showing preference to one candidate, while marginalizing the viewpoints of Hillary Clinton and to a large degree, President Obama.
At what point in this election cycle is Trump going to be exposed for the blowhard that he is, and as should happen with all braggarts, shown for exactly who he is and for what he craves - constant adulation and attention.
74
For the past year exactly, Trump has been the novelty who gets the crowds and the attention much like dog-bites-man always loses to man-bites-dog.
If history is any guide, however, once Hillary's coronation is complete, every shot of Hillary will have her bathed in a halo behind her head while dark and menacing backdrops wil accompany all Trump pictures and video.
Everything changes once Labor Day is past.
If history is any guide, however, once Hillary's coronation is complete, every shot of Hillary will have her bathed in a halo behind her head while dark and menacing backdrops wil accompany all Trump pictures and video.
Everything changes once Labor Day is past.
2
Gamesmanship aside, this would not be happening unless Trump and the NRA realized that the overwhelming majority of Americans want something done about weapons of mass murder. If the GOP in congress recognizes the same, we might finally see some progress. They would deserve no credit, having blocked action until now. Still, I see this development as a good sign (sadly coming after yet another tragedy).
5
Of course, coverage by Fox of this issue omits any mention that House Republicans stymied this exact legislation last December.
The Republicans are running scared now after seeing the results of their fealty to the NRA, and I only hope that Democrats keep hitting this issue with everything they've got.
The Republicans are running scared now after seeing the results of their fealty to the NRA, and I only hope that Democrats keep hitting this issue with everything they've got.
15
Here's a great opportunity for Trump to be consistent.
Trump's argument for banning Muslims from entering the U.S.: "We've got to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. until we figure out what's going on.
So Trump can argue to the NRA and its Congressional concubines: "We've got to ban people on the terrorist watch lists from buying guns until we figure out what's going on."
Let's see how far Trump gets with the NRA and its Congressional concubines with that argument.
Trump's argument for banning Muslims from entering the U.S.: "We've got to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. until we figure out what's going on.
So Trump can argue to the NRA and its Congressional concubines: "We've got to ban people on the terrorist watch lists from buying guns until we figure out what's going on."
Let's see how far Trump gets with the NRA and its Congressional concubines with that argument.
9
It is so incredibly frustrating to imagine that a ban on assault rifles (however limited), after the decades of protest and opposition by so many rationale and passionate Americans who have lost love ones to gun violence, could come about after a parlay between the Donald and the NRA. Is this really how this country is run?
9
It is when Donald and The NRA wake up and find public opinion has totally, and to their shock and horror changed literally overnight, thanks to the 50 dead and countless horribly injured thanks in no small measure to the NRA and their best bud, their joined-at-the-hip-hand-picked man: Donald Trump, who was just yesterday, after the 50 dead had been cold for 18 hours, here was Donald, ranting, defending the right to "defend ourselves" or go "sport hunting" with an assault weapon designed for war. Why this sudden change of heart? Trump is desperate to save his quickly sinking campaign of hate, and the NRA wants to protect the huge money making franchise of 800,000 fanatics who pay for the big lifestyles and power-loving execs like Mr. LaPierre, head of the NRA.
2
no
Why is Mr Trump asking permission from the NRA before he decides what he's going to do? Is that what he would do as president?
76
I would never consider voting for Trump but at least he's more sane than any republican when it comes to this issue. How insane is it that the NRA and the republican party are adamant that terrorists be allowed to purchase assault rifles?
12
S,
Why is Mr. Obama adamant that the terrorists not be looked at too closely and that their privacy rights always come first?
He actually ordered the ICE and immigration people NEVER to tell the state or local cops when immigrants are coming in with a criminal history OR Tuberculosis.
The San Bernardino shooters would have been stopped had the feds been ALLOWED to check these Muslims' Facebook accounts.
Yes, someone is adamant.
Why is Mr. Obama adamant that the terrorists not be looked at too closely and that their privacy rights always come first?
He actually ordered the ICE and immigration people NEVER to tell the state or local cops when immigrants are coming in with a criminal history OR Tuberculosis.
The San Bernardino shooters would have been stopped had the feds been ALLOWED to check these Muslims' Facebook accounts.
Yes, someone is adamant.
If you had told me in, say, 1974, when I graduated from high school, that in 2016 Congress would not agree to ban the sale of firearms to people identified by the government as "terrorists" ... I don't think I would have believed you.
Who are these chowderheads serving as our elected officials? It's as if we ordinary folk (i.e., those of us who are not lobbyists or influential millionaires), have no more say in the laws which govern us than feudal serfs had, in 15th century England; or than the French peasants had in the 18th century -- right before their Revolution.
Is that really what it's going to take to get the professional politicians in Washington to enact gun laws for the public good, rather than for the arms dealers represented by the NRA?
Who are these chowderheads serving as our elected officials? It's as if we ordinary folk (i.e., those of us who are not lobbyists or influential millionaires), have no more say in the laws which govern us than feudal serfs had, in 15th century England; or than the French peasants had in the 18th century -- right before their Revolution.
Is that really what it's going to take to get the professional politicians in Washington to enact gun laws for the public good, rather than for the arms dealers represented by the NRA?
23
You don't know how right you are...the majority of Americans want common sense gun control but we have absolutely no say in the matter!
1
Presumably they give a hell of a lot of political donations. In which case you need donation law reform too.
If they've been identified as terrorists, why are they not in custody?
Trump is accused of spreading hate, but when I look at the postings here, the amount of hatred is simply unbelievable. It is clear that NRA and Trump will probably collude to bring about some measure of gun control. Probably not enough, but more than we have had for some time.
But instead of being glad about this, the readers are boiling mad that something like this is happening!
But instead of being glad about this, the readers are boiling mad that something like this is happening!
9
The two entities you mentioned, Trump and the NRA, are not legislative bodies and cannot change anything. You understand that, right? Why would anyone be "happy" about an obvious and un-American ploy for attention?
3
It's true. If you don't like the suitor, you're not going to like the roses.
1
It is anger, not hatred Mr. Ludwig.
Can we please stop with the "good guy with a gun" argument? I can think of no other claim more specious. If others in that club had been armed it would have turned out differently: The carnage quite likely would have been worse, with multiple people indiscriminately shooting at one another, and the police, once they arrived, completely unable to tell who started the shooting.
The good guy with a gun claim is simply a lie, because without a uniform, a good guy with a gun looks exactly the same as a bad guy with a gun.
The good guy with a gun claim is simply a lie, because without a uniform, a good guy with a gun looks exactly the same as a bad guy with a gun.
63
I don't think a guy randomly shooting a semi-automatic weapon into a crowd would be easily mistaken for a good guy, do you?
Not including the bad guy with the fake uniform (Aurora, CO).
1
There were over a hundred people in that club and one man with two guns. A few days before two terrorist kill customers in a restaurant. No one fought back. How much worse would it been if they did .
I find this incredibly insulting to the whole concept of elected government. The leader
of a private organization is going to meet with someone who has not been elected to anything-and they're going to decide what the law will be. Something's not right there.
of a private organization is going to meet with someone who has not been elected to anything-and they're going to decide what the law will be. Something's not right there.
70
I agree. Unfortunately however our president has been secretly meeting with corporations deciding what the law will be for years. It's called the TTP.
Corporations and their lobbyists have been deciding what the law will be for a very long time. The NRA is a dangerous example but not the only one.
Corporations and their lobbyists have been deciding what the law will be for a very long time. The NRA is a dangerous example but not the only one.
At the moment, Senate Democrats are in the 13th hour of an actual standing and talking filibuster on the topic of gun legislation. And yet the Times chooses not to cover that at all, but instead to present this story, the headline of which makes it looks like Trump has actual power over this issue. I find that an extremely odd decision.
52
Given the number of mass shooters who have not been on a watch-list, it would be more efficient to deny access of automatic weapons to people who are not on a terror watch list.
Is it only the NRA who cares how people end up on this list, or that there is no current way to determine the criteria used to be placed on "the list" nor due-process measure to challenge being placed on a list? This is a very, very slippery slope. The next step wluld be to publicize the list, and have a Megan's Law styled registry, so the public/employers can know who is on "the list." This is why Trump likes the idea. Just ban the assault rifles, for everyone.
Is it only the NRA who cares how people end up on this list, or that there is no current way to determine the criteria used to be placed on "the list" nor due-process measure to challenge being placed on a list? This is a very, very slippery slope. The next step wluld be to publicize the list, and have a Megan's Law styled registry, so the public/employers can know who is on "the list." This is why Trump likes the idea. Just ban the assault rifles, for everyone.
9
This shows an ill wind is blowing for Donald and his pals at the NRA.
Multiple recent polls show a steep drop in national support for Trump, especially among in independents. These polls show that Mr. Trump is in deep trouble for the following reasons:
1. Voters are paying attention and they are alarmed. Trump's unhinged, out-of-control and irrational rants are unbecoming of a nominee of a major American party. In short they make all too clear that Donald lacks the temperament to be President.
2. His use of the racism card, the petty insult card (or rather insult Tweet), the assault weapon card, and the Muslim card have all backfired, and he has been put in his place and humiliated through a masterful, angry, but dignified response by President Obama. Trump has shown he lacks the intelligence and ability to respond to a righteous and much-deserved smack-down--one that will go down in history as a guide to putting a dangerous political bully in his place.
3. All of the above, and much more, shows how imperative it is that Trump never gets the capacity to make war nor, God help us, have access to the nuclear codes.
Multiple recent polls show a steep drop in national support for Trump, especially among in independents. These polls show that Mr. Trump is in deep trouble for the following reasons:
1. Voters are paying attention and they are alarmed. Trump's unhinged, out-of-control and irrational rants are unbecoming of a nominee of a major American party. In short they make all too clear that Donald lacks the temperament to be President.
2. His use of the racism card, the petty insult card (or rather insult Tweet), the assault weapon card, and the Muslim card have all backfired, and he has been put in his place and humiliated through a masterful, angry, but dignified response by President Obama. Trump has shown he lacks the intelligence and ability to respond to a righteous and much-deserved smack-down--one that will go down in history as a guide to putting a dangerous political bully in his place.
3. All of the above, and much more, shows how imperative it is that Trump never gets the capacity to make war nor, God help us, have access to the nuclear codes.
39
...or to nominating and seating Supreme Court Justices.
1
It is good to see your report that voters are starting to hear Trump's message for what it is - the babble of a poor weak man.
Since when does trump, who has never been elected to anything and never held any office anywhere, and the advertising firm representing weapons cartels get to decide national polcy? They can shove it. Democrats are already forcing the issue in congress, somthe only thing the orange troll and the blood soaked special interest are REALLY discussing is how to pretend they are in favor of doing something so they can try to hijack the process.
81
You have to be really naive or intentionally ignorant to believe that the NRA is motivated by a desire to protect your second amendment rights. For them, the 800,000 names on the no fly list represent a market for a million or so guns that they plan on selling. Is all about the money, and if some kids in a school or dance club get murdered by some madman the NRA has enabled, it's perfectly ok with them since it provides free advertising that further boosts their sales. If you are a Christian pro-life advocate that supports the NRA please spend a few moments to think about all the murders and preventable deaths that the NRA is responsible for.
88
800,000 is a large number. I don't suppose we're permitted to know how many on this list are religious extremists and the religion to which they belong?
Unfortunately there's not many other choices.
Pro-lifers believe life begins at conception and ends at birth. They don't care about human or animal life, or children. If they did, they would have adopted all the children in foster care.
The NRA is the modern equivalent of the Klan, with the same relevance to civilized society. What is tyranny? Not being able to go to school, church, the movies or a nightclub without being armed. What a miserable vision of freedom. The founders would be appalled to see their words twisted so and I can't imagine a single WWII vet ever thinking they were fighting for this.
135
Deaths caused by guns and cars per annum in the US are about on a par....in the 30,000s, each. Yet no one would in their right mind would use a car for suicide....or homicide, while firearms are almost exclusively used to accomplish certain death by intent. One could scratch his head raw while contemplating the uses of cars and guns in modern society and how they are so stupidly and inconsistently regulated.
Our DUI laws revoke driving privileges while a terrorist on a no fly list can buy an AR-15 at a gun show or virtually anywhere else. And while we need to drive to work daily, I doubt we need to pack heat in the process just in case we need to off a cut off driver in a fit of road rage because it's a Second Amendment right.
Our DUI laws revoke driving privileges while a terrorist on a no fly list can buy an AR-15 at a gun show or virtually anywhere else. And while we need to drive to work daily, I doubt we need to pack heat in the process just in case we need to off a cut off driver in a fit of road rage because it's a Second Amendment right.
53
The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution says: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to security of a free State, the right of the people to bear Arms, shall not be infringed." In 2007 the Supreme Court looked at the Amendment and decided that despite its irrelevance to modern armies and weapons it was as applicable to our country today as when it was written.
However, a moment's reflection is enough to make clear that the right of civilians to bear muzzle-loading arms in 1776 was vastly different in scope from any conceivable right for civilians today to bear the much more lethal array of weapons that are available. Things have changed. There are no longer state militias and muzzle-loading muskets. The closest present counterparts to the old state militias would be our states' national guard units. But National Guard units all now have the latest weapons of war themselves and clearly have no need for ordinary citizens to bear muzzle loading weapons on their behalf.
22
Sounds like you have chowderheads on the bench as well as in Congress.
When Trump and the NRA decide on a new law, does it automatically go into effect? I can't figure why we didn't do this a long time ago. It's so simple and efficient. And anyone can do it!
24
Watch the NRA water this down: anyone can still buy an AR-15 gun at a gun show with no background check!!! Shame on the NRA. Shame on the Republican Party for being in the pocket of the NRA.
20
Anyone can NOT buy an Rifle or a Pistol or a Shotgun
at a gun show with out a background check.
I would guess having been to a fair number of gun shows that 98%+ of the transactions are by Licensed dealers(FFL)
If you have an FFL you can not sell a gun to anyone unless you perform a background check. PERIOD!
What you can do is in certain States if you're a private seller who does NOT have a FFL, is bring a gun to a gun show and conduct a private transaction.
Any idea how many of those private transactions selling rifles have led to crimes?
Just one and the Gun Grabbers would make it a poster child for their agenda of banning and confiscation of guns.
What if I want to sell a gun to my neighbor or I sell it someplace other than a gun show... Perfectly legal (at least until recently in Oregon - it still is, you just have to have a truck to drive through the loopholes in the law)
Oregon recently passed a law which said you could not have private transactions at gun shows...
How many crimes had been committed via "the gun show loophole" in Oregon?
You guessed Nada, None, Zip, Zero.
One more law to solve a problem that didn't exist...
at a gun show with out a background check.
I would guess having been to a fair number of gun shows that 98%+ of the transactions are by Licensed dealers(FFL)
If you have an FFL you can not sell a gun to anyone unless you perform a background check. PERIOD!
What you can do is in certain States if you're a private seller who does NOT have a FFL, is bring a gun to a gun show and conduct a private transaction.
Any idea how many of those private transactions selling rifles have led to crimes?
Just one and the Gun Grabbers would make it a poster child for their agenda of banning and confiscation of guns.
What if I want to sell a gun to my neighbor or I sell it someplace other than a gun show... Perfectly legal (at least until recently in Oregon - it still is, you just have to have a truck to drive through the loopholes in the law)
Oregon recently passed a law which said you could not have private transactions at gun shows...
How many crimes had been committed via "the gun show loophole" in Oregon?
You guessed Nada, None, Zip, Zero.
One more law to solve a problem that didn't exist...
6
"How many crimes had been committed via "the gun show loophole" in Oregon? ... Nada"
A) How do you know?
B) Must we wait for another massacre to implement common sense?
A) How do you know?
B) Must we wait for another massacre to implement common sense?
1
How would you know how many crimes are committed by guns purchased through the gun show "loophole." Is someone tracking this?
The bombastic, narcissistic bully who ostensibly plays by NO ONE'S rules but his own has to grovel and BEG the NRA -- to allow him just to take A POSITION that terrorists should not be allowed to legally buy military-grade weapons!! Yeah I can see how you're such a "strong leader" there, buddy. I'm sure you'll be able to control Putin no prob.
27
He's not groveling and begging. The NRA and Trump, Inc. are both opportunistic, amoral entities who are working on a way to make themselves look good while accomplishing nothing of real substance. It's all a game.
I guess it's official now, the NRA is now the fourth branch of the federal government whose blessing is required to pass legislation. Ain't it great?
378
A very erudite and thoughtful comment.
1
Who needs to have an assault rifle? Nobody! That's who. It's all about the money!
The NRA and their Republican servants are ultimately responsible for mass shootings like Orlando. They only care about protecting the profits of gun manufacturers and sales agents. It's big business and the lives of Americans mean absolutely nothing to them. It's all about the money!
Trump is another stooge who cares not a bit for anything other than his own profit. He would happily sacrifice the lives of Americans to further the Republican agenda of protecting the NRA and gun manufacturers. Remember - It's all about the money!
The NRA and their Republican servants are ultimately responsible for mass shootings like Orlando. They only care about protecting the profits of gun manufacturers and sales agents. It's big business and the lives of Americans mean absolutely nothing to them. It's all about the money!
Trump is another stooge who cares not a bit for anything other than his own profit. He would happily sacrifice the lives of Americans to further the Republican agenda of protecting the NRA and gun manufacturers. Remember - It's all about the money!
32
But don't forget that the Republicans also want to protect the billionaires. I suspect they don't much care whether ordinary people have guns or not. They just want to give the Republican party a reason to exist -- protecting the rights of ordinary citizens to own AK-47's or grenades or tanks or whatever makes them happy enough to support the party that keeps the billionaires from having to pay their fair share of taxes.
15
For the NRA it is about money. For those purchasing the guns, unless it is solely for hunting, it's all about power. And that desire for power is hidden behind "I need to protect my family" and love of country. Their motto is "In Guns We Trust".
7
Instead of covering some NRA trick to avoid meaningful gun regulation, why is there no coverage of the eloquent and moving Democrat filibuster still going on on the floor of the US Senate
15
The lunacy of this is that there actually has to be a meeting to discuss NOT allowing individuals on the terror watch list from purchasing guns. What am I missing here? Other countries must be shaking their heads incredulously that we actually need to discuss this!
10
"Other countries must be shaking their heads incredulously"
Other countries like France and Belgium?
Other countries like France and Belgium?
1
A Terror Watchlist is just that, a list. The named had no due process. So, how does the government deny a citizen one of their Constitutional Rights just because some unknown person named them for some unknown reason? Trump and the NRA can discuss this until the cows come home, but I don't see this plan survives a court challenge.
4
Part of the problem is that the FBI can't seem to hang on to those that have been put on the list as this nut case was. The Republicans have been holding up the bill to not allow those on the lists to purchase guns for some time. The Republicans are in favor of everyone having guns and don't want to do anything that might indicate cooperation with the Democrats. Trump is certainly someone that should not have a gun since he is so unpredictable and will do anything to get elected. Sad times for our country to have him as a candidate.
5
I am not a Trump fan but at least he is doing something on the gun control issue. Can talking to the NRA be a bad thing? Trying to negotiate with them is something Obama refuses to do. No wonder we get nothing done in Washington with an arrogant president who is only concerned about his legacy. Obama needs to lead and stop playing politics on everything. It is he who should be meeting with the NRA to work something out. The country is going down the tubes primarily because Obama is only interested in photo ops and sound bites. Come on Barry! Lead and make some deals with the opposition!
8
Repellent, ignorant "logic." I guess his complete sentences are a bit beyond you.
The NRA and the "opposition" has denigrated, insulted, proclaimed the illegitimacy of POTUS (and by extension done the same to the majority of us who voted for him) since 2008. He's always taken the high road in return. But now he must beg for their assent and favor?
Stay on the high road, Me. President. Leave Drumpf and the NRA to their sty.
The NRA and the "opposition" has denigrated, insulted, proclaimed the illegitimacy of POTUS (and by extension done the same to the majority of us who voted for him) since 2008. He's always taken the high road in return. But now he must beg for their assent and favor?
Stay on the high road, Me. President. Leave Drumpf and the NRA to their sty.
11
Seriously, the President of the United States is supposed to negotiate national policy with the NRA?
2
What complete rubbish. How many times, how many times, has he "Barry" aka The President, called for ***reasonable*** laws to control assault weapons and large-capacity magazines? 20, 30? And in case you don't know it Presidents Ronald Reagan and HW Bush help get passed the Brady Bill that DID JUST THAT. And who brought it BACK? The same NRA we have here. The same Republicans we have here. Trump is ONLY doing this because he has been show to be unfit by temprament, issues of anger management, outright racism and bigotry, and because he and his Republican enablers totallly misjudged the failure of using this tragedy to play Donald's usual hate card, racism card, Muslim card, Mexican card, assault weapons card, and most of all he misjudged the ability of President Obama to stuff him back in the dark evil land which he represents.
1
Well this surprises me - this is only the second thing I've ever heard Trump say that is right (or correct), although I can't remember what the other one was.
It's very interesting because while polls show that the majority of NRA members do think that reasonable gun regulations are okay, there's a core that doesn't want any regulation and subjectively, that core seems to be strong Trump supporters.
So I have to wonder whether this stance is going to lose Trump some support. It's not like those people will vote for Hillary, but they might just stay home and not vote.
And for the record, there is absolutely no Second Amendment right to an assault weapon. I love the way gun defenders simply forget about "A well regulated militia..." You either take it literally or you don't. If you take it literally, then one has to be part of a well-regulated militia. If you want to leave those words out and therefore not take it literally, then you don't get modern assault weapons.
It's very interesting because while polls show that the majority of NRA members do think that reasonable gun regulations are okay, there's a core that doesn't want any regulation and subjectively, that core seems to be strong Trump supporters.
So I have to wonder whether this stance is going to lose Trump some support. It's not like those people will vote for Hillary, but they might just stay home and not vote.
And for the record, there is absolutely no Second Amendment right to an assault weapon. I love the way gun defenders simply forget about "A well regulated militia..." You either take it literally or you don't. If you take it literally, then one has to be part of a well-regulated militia. If you want to leave those words out and therefore not take it literally, then you don't get modern assault weapons.
7
Trump will lose no support. It's been shown time and again that Trump supporters don't really care about the specific things he says; they admit find some of them offensive. They're voting for him eitherbbecause he's going to "shake things up" or because they hate Hillary Clinton.
All the more important for a president to win this election. A liberal Supreme Court will see to it that the 2nd amendment will be interpreted in a modern manner.
16
It may, in fact, be time to REPEAL the 2nd Amendment. The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom gave us this right. It may well be time to exercise it.
Liberal Court?
How about a court of intelligent individuals who are not beholden to Grover Norquist or Wayne Lapierre?
How about a court of intelligent individuals who are not beholden to Grover Norquist or Wayne Lapierre?
His handlers suddenly realized that this is a real issues after Orlando, and they're doing this for optics. It's strategy and nothing more. He's still a monster.
19
This comment is exactly correct. And then Obama kicked him to the curb.
The problem is that none of the Aurora, Sandy Hook, San Bernardino or Orlando shooters were on a "terror watch list." None of these people had been adjudged insane. However, all of these shooters used AR 15 variants. Instead of taking military grade weapons off the market, Trump and the NRA will use the tragedy to offer up a pointless gesture of false grace towards a society tired of being literally torn to shreds by the NRA's political power. Alternatively, they will seek to create a impotent "terror watch list" decide to evade the inclusion of white anti-government extremists. I am sure that the NRA and their new sidekick Donald, will be willing to chuck a number of substantive and procedural civil rights down the tubes in order to preserve the seemingly primary human right of the gun and ammo makers to keep selling military weapons to fanboys who entertain fantasies based on the NRA's ever more sick and frankly seditious anti government stance. The NRA declared war on America years ago. When i was a kid the NRA supported the rights of hunters and sportsmen. Like a hound bitten by a rabid animal they have somehow morphed from a trusted hunting companion into a slavering nightmare. They are fully engaged in battle. One of the NRA's top selling top bumper stickers proclaims "NRA Stand and Fight." I agree that its time to stand and fight the NRA and win a victory for Americans.
32
Where does second amendment figure when hundreds of thousands of American citizens have died like insects over a period of time due to gun violence. Don't they have any right to live ? All these meaningless debates must stop. Simply ban all guns, that's it.
14
"Simply ban all guns, that's it."
You do not understand that what you just said is the problem. Republicans will never agree to any measure of gun control if "ban all guns" is the ultimate goal of the Democrats.
To get a deal you have to give as well as get. If you only want to get, you will get nothing.
You do not understand that what you just said is the problem. Republicans will never agree to any measure of gun control if "ban all guns" is the ultimate goal of the Democrats.
To get a deal you have to give as well as get. If you only want to get, you will get nothing.
1
Gun owners have all the rights. Gun victims have none.
Thanks Ludwig and Juna : I appreciate your views but I have some questions. Already thousands and thousands of Americans have given their lives. How about their family members, who have had permanent deadly cumulative impact on their lives who might be at least three times those already dead. Don't they have any right to live. What will they do with guns if at all they own ? Will they take revenge as shown in Hollywood movies ? Is it the solution ? They need education, healthcare, bread and butter, a place to live and job for day to day maintenance. Who will take care of them ?
This is not going to stop here since gun violence is not going to end if this sort of attitude continues on the part of Republican Party. If it's the hindrance, can't Americans throw it out once for all ?
This is not going to stop here since gun violence is not going to end if this sort of attitude continues on the part of Republican Party. If it's the hindrance, can't Americans throw it out once for all ?
1
Trump crawling on his pathetic and crooked knees to the NRA is like Lucifer seeking permission from Satan to speak out against evil. Won't happen because it'll destroy the brand. Trump will meet with the NRA only to show his political base that he and the NRA are sympatico in their mutual policies even though the NRA's policies are largely responsible for what the American Medical Association has labelled an epidemic of mass killings in the U.S.
It's a cheap and lousy gimmick by a know nothing charlatan whose final act of narcissism is his campaign for the highest office in the land.
It's a cheap and lousy gimmick by a know nothing charlatan whose final act of narcissism is his campaign for the highest office in the land.
21
Lets wait and see if he can convince LaPierre.........my bet; he will get the NRA to comply with his suggestions. He's a successful deal maker.......
1
To recap: the NRA's self-proclaimed best friend is going to beg permission from them to allow United States Congressmen and Senators of his party to vote for a law limiting gun sales to people identified as potential terrorists. Then, for good measure, those same Congressmen and Senators will be allowed to pass a bill that will prohibit the sale of assault rifles to people who have already committed mass murder with them.
12
If the NRA has one tiny ounce of brains, it will agree to use the no-fly list for a no-gun-sale list. And it will give Trump credit for persuading them. That action would take the wind right out of Clinton's sails -- or at least make the gun issue less important for the election.
I don't know whether the NRA has an ounce of brains or not. If it is really controlled by gun manufacturers, the brains are there. We'll see.
I don't know whether the NRA has an ounce of brains or not. If it is really controlled by gun manufacturers, the brains are there. We'll see.
5
So you think the makers of these killing machines have brains? That's rich!
If the manufacturers of these evil weapons were sentient beings they would be in another business!
If the manufacturers of these evil weapons were sentient beings they would be in another business!
The lobbying arm for the gun industry. The billionaire narcissist with no moral compass what so ever. A match made in heaven. The NRA is aligned with Right to Work, the Koch brothers, the anti-abortion groups and any other group which thinks of itself as more "right" than others. They have purchased and control legislators on both sides of the aisle. They limited the assault weapons ban and worked like hell to make sure it was not continued and that the gun manufacturers liability would be eliminated. They are, in a word, evil. Completely evil. And unlike Trump they are not buffoons.
19
In the same way that we've set our system of laws with the philosophy that it is better to set free 100 criminals than convict 1 innocent person, it is better to keep 100 people from buying guns because they were mistakenly put on a no-fly list than to allow the sale to the 1 who could murder 100.
Not being able to buy a gun is an inconvenience. Death is permanent.
Not being able to buy a gun is an inconvenience. Death is permanent.
26
"Give me liberty, or give me death."
We are not a nation of frightened rabbits. In manyh circumstances, we accept some deaths to preserve freedom.
We are not a nation of frightened rabbits. In manyh circumstances, we accept some deaths to preserve freedom.
Slowly, at a snail's pace, the wall between sensible gun control and NRA extremism is crumbling. It's ironic that Trump, builder of walls, is part of this deconstruction.
I do believe that Americans are beginning to see, again at a snail's pace, that the proliferation of guns in America enables homegrown terrorists and others who murder and mayhem. Guns may not kill people, as the saying goes, but weapons of war, the AR-15 in particular, facilitate the killing when numbers are uppermost in a disturbed person's mind.
Maybe this is a generational thing, too... Boomers still probably control the lion's share of money in this country and can afford guns. What does an AR-15 go for anyway, $750 discounted? I wonder how many Millennials rush to a gun store at times like these. They can barely afford a trip to McDonalds.
Something tells me the gun manufacturers better make all the money they can now. I'm betting a younger, less affluent generation of Americans is going to be choosing butter over guns in the future, or at least the newest digital device.
And I have to wonder: if things are so bad economically in this country that everyone has to shop at Walmart, where is the money coming from to purchase all of these guns... are people choosing guns at the expense of other items?
I do wonder...
I do believe that Americans are beginning to see, again at a snail's pace, that the proliferation of guns in America enables homegrown terrorists and others who murder and mayhem. Guns may not kill people, as the saying goes, but weapons of war, the AR-15 in particular, facilitate the killing when numbers are uppermost in a disturbed person's mind.
Maybe this is a generational thing, too... Boomers still probably control the lion's share of money in this country and can afford guns. What does an AR-15 go for anyway, $750 discounted? I wonder how many Millennials rush to a gun store at times like these. They can barely afford a trip to McDonalds.
Something tells me the gun manufacturers better make all the money they can now. I'm betting a younger, less affluent generation of Americans is going to be choosing butter over guns in the future, or at least the newest digital device.
And I have to wonder: if things are so bad economically in this country that everyone has to shop at Walmart, where is the money coming from to purchase all of these guns... are people choosing guns at the expense of other items?
I do wonder...
36
Trump sees which way the wind is blowing, and he wants to be downwind. This is no different than usual. The guy has no core, no integrity. He just wants to win at all costs, embracing whatever gets him the most cheers and votes. I give him no credit here. Who knows where he will be next week.
63
Yes they are. Self defense is more important these days as radicals proliferate throughout America and more Middle Eastern immigrants are being brought into America. So I pass on a new laptop in favor of a S&W pistol and ammo.
When somebody comes crashing through my front door, I can't throw the laptop at them, but a hailstorm of lead will stop them.
When somebody comes crashing through my front door, I can't throw the laptop at them, but a hailstorm of lead will stop them.
1
Trump is not running for president, he's just running for as much publicity as he can get and use for his next reality TV show in 2017.
Not a surprise, but I hope everyone realizes what this is: Absolute concrete proof that republicans (which includes the NRA) would rather oppose and hold hostage laws that make perfect common sense for decades, in the sole interest of making sure their voters continue to hate progressive legislators.
It's also proof of how absolutely terrified GOP congressmen are of supporting even the most reasonable and widely supported (by the public) legislation of it comes from a Dem's mouth.
Not that the NRA would support much reform, if any. But this is so blatant it really shines a light on the brainwashed right. Dem's insist on gun control for years, and now Drumphf will try to make it look like he's the hero. The saddest part, as always, is that his supporters will believe it.
It's also proof of how absolutely terrified GOP congressmen are of supporting even the most reasonable and widely supported (by the public) legislation of it comes from a Dem's mouth.
Not that the NRA would support much reform, if any. But this is so blatant it really shines a light on the brainwashed right. Dem's insist on gun control for years, and now Drumphf will try to make it look like he's the hero. The saddest part, as always, is that his supporters will believe it.
32
The point about due process, to me, a Massachusetts liberal, is a valid one. Suspending someone's constitutional right because they are on a gov't list is a slippery slope indeed--who decides who is on the list? Having said that, I do think that closing down private sales of guns and the gun show loophole is important; that is a regulatory issue, not a constitutional issue. Even taxing bullets and requiring gun owners to have insurance could work--as others have pointed out, something similar to what car owners do--gas is taxed, and we all know to insure and register our cars.
There has to be a middle path that does not erode a constitutional right, yet also puts in place more protections.
As far as the NRA and Donald Trump go, Donald Trump cannot keep a consistent position on anything, so any deal he did make would not be worth the carbon dioxide he exhaled to make it.
There has to be a middle path that does not erode a constitutional right, yet also puts in place more protections.
As far as the NRA and Donald Trump go, Donald Trump cannot keep a consistent position on anything, so any deal he did make would not be worth the carbon dioxide he exhaled to make it.
4
The due process argument is a canard. What matters is how the courts interpret the meaning of this amendment. As far as I'm concerned, only active duty members of the national guard have the right to posses firearms. That's my interpretation of the 2nd amendment. Is that the prevailing opinion among the members of the federal judiciary and supreme court? Almost certainly not - and it's probably barely even a fringe interpretation at this point. But some day...
4
I know the NRA is powerful, actually a homegrown terrorist organization, but do candidates really have to ask their permission advance gun control measures? This just proves how much the NRA owns our politicians. Trump included, apparently.
13
This most recent travesty seems poised to act as a watershed moment. Partisan lines are coalescing around what they view to be the continued source of these senseless deaths: Liberals decry an oversaturated supply of weaponry, conservatives blame the specter of terrorism.
One remedy attacks the source of the issue; the other a symptom. The fact is that there will always, unfortunately, be angry and unbalanced individuals who want to do harm to others. Whether ISIS-inspired or "radicalized Christians" (like Dylann Roof or Robert Lewis Dear, Jr.), enemies to our nation's ideals and its people will continue to exist. The inevitable defeat of ISIS will give way to the next threat. Meanwhile, banning a group of people for their religious beliefs is in opposition to the very Constitution the NRA claims to uphold. At least so long as it continues to profit their arms dealers. Perhaps even more terrifying is Trump's threat of punishing Muslims for supposedly failing to report their neighbors. It is Orwellian in its intention.
That Donald Trump and the NRA are lauding themselves for considering such a common sense measure such as this--after the NRA successfully sought its defeat in December--is astounding in its arrogance and dissonance. Neither Trump nor the NRA has been elected by the people to a position with the power of enacting legislation. I hope we as citizens unite in November to denounce these pretenders to the Republic and vote to rectify the root of these tragedies.
One remedy attacks the source of the issue; the other a symptom. The fact is that there will always, unfortunately, be angry and unbalanced individuals who want to do harm to others. Whether ISIS-inspired or "radicalized Christians" (like Dylann Roof or Robert Lewis Dear, Jr.), enemies to our nation's ideals and its people will continue to exist. The inevitable defeat of ISIS will give way to the next threat. Meanwhile, banning a group of people for their religious beliefs is in opposition to the very Constitution the NRA claims to uphold. At least so long as it continues to profit their arms dealers. Perhaps even more terrifying is Trump's threat of punishing Muslims for supposedly failing to report their neighbors. It is Orwellian in its intention.
That Donald Trump and the NRA are lauding themselves for considering such a common sense measure such as this--after the NRA successfully sought its defeat in December--is astounding in its arrogance and dissonance. Neither Trump nor the NRA has been elected by the people to a position with the power of enacting legislation. I hope we as citizens unite in November to denounce these pretenders to the Republic and vote to rectify the root of these tragedies.
5
I actually see this as a (very) small step in the right direction.
Nevertheless, when I consider how screwed up the situation with guns in this country is, it makes me lose nearly all faith in our leaders. If the government can't reasonably handle an issue like guns -- something regular citizens hear about/see on the news all the time or in some cases even witness first-hand -- how can the government possibly handle an issue like climate change: a problem so insidious that there may not be outrage until it is too late.
Nevertheless, when I consider how screwed up the situation with guns in this country is, it makes me lose nearly all faith in our leaders. If the government can't reasonably handle an issue like guns -- something regular citizens hear about/see on the news all the time or in some cases even witness first-hand -- how can the government possibly handle an issue like climate change: a problem so insidious that there may not be outrage until it is too late.
4
Law enforcement cannot be saddled with one more useless and unenforceable law. This "No Sell to suspected terrorists" law is a violation of due process and would be rightly shot down immediately by SCOTUS. In short, it is the perfect NRA smoke screen.
There are too many guns available and too many ways to obtain them (Just look up Webster NY Christmas 2012) with no indication or evidence of threat until the deed is done.
The only direction that this country can progress with reducing gun violence is to federally register all semiautomatic weapons (any auto-load weapon that can fire more than 4 shots without a manual effort other than pulling a trigger to release the firing pin). Charge a fee for registration (based on caliber and muzzle energy) and an annual reporting fee - just enough to keep honest people honest. Then when someone has a semi-auto without registration - throw them in jail, even if they are law enforcement (they should NOT be exempt!!). Military weapons need controls too when soldiers carry them off-base. In the end - responsible reporting results in responsible ownership. Responsible ownership results in a safer society, to paraphrase the NRA!
They want a weapon that can kill half a hundred in 10 minutes - we won't deny them. But those owners will have to DEMONSTRATE responsible behavior through registration, training, and liability insurance. The alternative has been too high a cost to bear any longer.
There are too many guns available and too many ways to obtain them (Just look up Webster NY Christmas 2012) with no indication or evidence of threat until the deed is done.
The only direction that this country can progress with reducing gun violence is to federally register all semiautomatic weapons (any auto-load weapon that can fire more than 4 shots without a manual effort other than pulling a trigger to release the firing pin). Charge a fee for registration (based on caliber and muzzle energy) and an annual reporting fee - just enough to keep honest people honest. Then when someone has a semi-auto without registration - throw them in jail, even if they are law enforcement (they should NOT be exempt!!). Military weapons need controls too when soldiers carry them off-base. In the end - responsible reporting results in responsible ownership. Responsible ownership results in a safer society, to paraphrase the NRA!
They want a weapon that can kill half a hundred in 10 minutes - we won't deny them. But those owners will have to DEMONSTRATE responsible behavior through registration, training, and liability insurance. The alternative has been too high a cost to bear any longer.
4
Ban assault weapons. Nothing else will work.
Tony, we can enact laws of the type you are recommending -- the Firearms Act of 1934 (which controls fully automatic weapons) has worked well and has been supported by SCOTUS. But there are other controls that would comport with the 2nd Amendment but do much to reduce gun violence: 1) Mandatory liability insurance for all guns; let the market determine the cost of insuring any gun based on the probabilities that it will be used wrongfully; 2) Mandatory firearms training and registration for all gun sales; the classes would be at least as tough as driver's ed, with a practical test for each firearm purchased; students would be trained in gun laws and their responsibilities; all guns sales would be registered -- no gun show or family gift loopholes; 3) track all ammo sales; you can only buy ammo for guns you have registered (no buying for "friends"; you can buy all you want, but the FBI will know about every round, and you are legally responsible for every round you own (lost or stolen ammo has to be reported as much a lost/stolen guns; 4) gun makers must add federal tracking technology to all new guns and ammo.
Here's a good gun control idea:
A Missouri lawmaker introduced a bill that would subject gun buyers in the state to the same kind of restrictions that women face if they choose to have an abortion.
State Rep. Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) has pre-filed a bill for the state legislature’s 2016 session that would require buyers to wait 72 hours to make a gun purchase, which they would only be able to do at a store at least 120 miles from their home. Women in the state must wait 72 hours before they can get an abortion and the 120-mile restriction is intended to draw attention to the long distances that women must travel to have one.
She said that since Missouri has one of the strictest abortion regulation states in the country, it makes sense to use similar restrictions to lower the high gun violence rates.
The bill would require gun buyers to undergo an evaluation and receive counseling from a physician about the risks associated with owning a gun. Women in Missouri must sign a consent form 72 hours before an abortion, be given a chance to look at an ultrasound of the baby and be informed about potential health hazards of the procedure under Newman’s bill, the gun purchaser would be required to tour an emergency trauma center between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. on a weekend when firearms victims are present and meet with at least two families affected by gun.
A Missouri lawmaker introduced a bill that would subject gun buyers in the state to the same kind of restrictions that women face if they choose to have an abortion.
State Rep. Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) has pre-filed a bill for the state legislature’s 2016 session that would require buyers to wait 72 hours to make a gun purchase, which they would only be able to do at a store at least 120 miles from their home. Women in the state must wait 72 hours before they can get an abortion and the 120-mile restriction is intended to draw attention to the long distances that women must travel to have one.
She said that since Missouri has one of the strictest abortion regulation states in the country, it makes sense to use similar restrictions to lower the high gun violence rates.
The bill would require gun buyers to undergo an evaluation and receive counseling from a physician about the risks associated with owning a gun. Women in Missouri must sign a consent form 72 hours before an abortion, be given a chance to look at an ultrasound of the baby and be informed about potential health hazards of the procedure under Newman’s bill, the gun purchaser would be required to tour an emergency trauma center between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. on a weekend when firearms victims are present and meet with at least two families affected by gun.
22
I wish I could recommend this 100 times. Make gun purchases as hard to achieve as getting a legal abortion in many Republican-controlled states.
9
As a conservative and Second Amendment proponent, I don't have any issue with banning those on the terrorist watch list from buying guns. I would extend such a ban to anyone who visits a psychiatrist and anyone who has ever been arrested - juvenile offenses would count too.
You would probably have to have some form of appeals process since such a wide dragnet would snare more than a few people who are not really threats, but let's err on the side of keeping guns away from dangerous people.
You would probably have to have some form of appeals process since such a wide dragnet would snare more than a few people who are not really threats, but let's err on the side of keeping guns away from dangerous people.
4
Jim Waddell: By any liberal definition, anyone with a gun is a dangerous person. That's some error.
I believe the author Joseph Heller referred to the quandary as, Catch -22.
To paraphrase, if you want to own a gun you will, by future law, need to see a psychiatrist. And if you see a psychiatrist you are thereafter ineligible to possess a gun.
That's some catch, that Catch-22.
The best there is.
I believe the author Joseph Heller referred to the quandary as, Catch -22.
To paraphrase, if you want to own a gun you will, by future law, need to see a psychiatrist. And if you see a psychiatrist you are thereafter ineligible to possess a gun.
That's some catch, that Catch-22.
The best there is.
Oh boy. Now they can discuss who is a "terrorist" and who is a patriot exercising his First Amendment rights to advocate the violent overthrow of the "evil" United States government that wants to take away his Second Amendment rights to own any gun he wants.
4
This is what life is evolving to in the west. It was inevitable. It's time for all of us to stop being shocked and to be prepared. Your/my life has changed, look for more of this, not less.
1
By all means, Donald, keep potential terrorists and flyers from obtaining assault weapons. These people have killed almost double digits.
Meanwhile, roughly 30,000 Americans are sacrificed on the NRA's holy 2nd Amendment altar every year. Anyone have the guts or brains to address the real problem? Omar Mateen was a dime-a-dozen angry thug with access to weapons of mass destruction. Not sure? Comb any Google or Yahoo forum relating to the massacre, and remember that these commenters have the same access Mateen did.
The 2nd Amendment was enacted at a time when our country had no army, militia, or organized body of civil defense. It was not enacted so that Americans--and Mateen was one--could slaughter each other.
The genius of the Constitution was that it was written to flex with the times. It's time for it--and us--to flex, and honor the 'well-regulated' stipulation at the very least.
Meanwhile, roughly 30,000 Americans are sacrificed on the NRA's holy 2nd Amendment altar every year. Anyone have the guts or brains to address the real problem? Omar Mateen was a dime-a-dozen angry thug with access to weapons of mass destruction. Not sure? Comb any Google or Yahoo forum relating to the massacre, and remember that these commenters have the same access Mateen did.
The 2nd Amendment was enacted at a time when our country had no army, militia, or organized body of civil defense. It was not enacted so that Americans--and Mateen was one--could slaughter each other.
The genius of the Constitution was that it was written to flex with the times. It's time for it--and us--to flex, and honor the 'well-regulated' stipulation at the very least.
14
"The Second Amendment was enacted at a time when our country had no army, militia, or organized body of self-defense."
That statement is flat-out, 100% false.
That statement is flat-out, 100% false.
2
And 24,000 of those are suicides
1
The Founders in their wisdom made provision for repealing amendments. The solution to the US's gun fixation and insanity is simple:
REPEAL THE SECOND AMENDMENT
REPEAL THE SECOND AMENDMENT
1
If the outcome of this meeting nudges the Republicans along on gun control--from a backdoor deal--then it is a tainted outcome. If this passes within the Republican-controlled congress, I fear we face decades of suppressed gun legislation, under-written by the NRA, as they bask in the goodwill of this most obvious and sensible measure (pushed by the Democrats for many years).
Yet, it may also say someone of the onerous reach of the NRA, that, by only kissing their poisoned ring and accepting their demands, that significant gun control can be passed within this country.
So much death and the only odor I smell is politics.
Yet, it may also say someone of the onerous reach of the NRA, that, by only kissing their poisoned ring and accepting their demands, that significant gun control can be passed within this country.
So much death and the only odor I smell is politics.
7
Very important to clarify most Americans are against assault automatic weapons, not guns in general. The trick the NRA and their political stooges make is to turn the argument into restricting access to guns. When they do that the issue gets drawn out, until people lose their passion, and it goes away until the next massacre. Each time people ask, what is it going to take to make changes, like the killing of school children years ago wasn't enough?
7
What's depicted in Westerns mostly didn't happen; people weren't in constant shootouts. That said, we have a civilized police force that protects us now, and the need for all of to be armed against invasion, marauders, etc. is well passed. No Western country but ours has this level of gun violence. The answer is to have less not more guns. If no one is packing no will get shot.
America and its hyper decadent violence is like Rome in its waning years.
America and its hyper decadent violence is like Rome in its waning years.
9
So Donald J.Trump, who boasts that he is beholding to no individual or organization, is meeting with the NRA to fundamentally ask if it's OK to ban the sale of guns to anyone suspected of having ties to terrorists.
Last I checked federal laws on gun ownership are established by Congress. Wouldn't Trump be better off mending bridges with the now alienated GOP leadership and propose they introduce such a bill?
Doesn't Trump understand that federal gun policy for the USA is the job of Cngress not established
Last I checked federal laws on gun ownership are established by Congress. Wouldn't Trump be better off mending bridges with the now alienated GOP leadership and propose they introduce such a bill?
Doesn't Trump understand that federal gun policy for the USA is the job of Cngress not established
14
Trump did not soften his position on guns - he could care less about gun laws. Trump does what he does to be the one who gets to make the deal, that is the only thing the initial bluster is about. That he is the master and not the next person, whether Hilary or any of the 17 GOP wannabes. Once he gets the upper hand, as he may have on this one, he then can dictate the terms, even if he dictates the terms of the other side. When he's in charge, the Donald Trump brand benefits. With the NRA, he's in charge, and that's all he wants.
6
This is a publicity stunt that will give Trump great talking points. Some tiny compromise will be reached and then promoted as a great negotiation. The real outcome will be simplified and then obfuscated by hyperbole.
8
The NRA's response to Trump's tweet seems to indicate that while they're happy to meet with him, no meeting has actually been scheduled. Trump will clarify that his tweet meant that he will meet with the NRA *after* he's been elected. A Trump/NRA meeting about "no fly-no buy" (or any other meaningful gun legislation) will never happen. After all. He met with their legislative group on Tuesday and according to them, "no fly-no buy" wasn't on the agenda. Strange.
Every large casualty needs forensic report. There are one hundred or more casualties (include deaths) in this Us soil's case. How many were killed or wounder by gunman and how many were killed or wounded during gun fights between police and gunman? Public forensic reports especial about bullets will help clear this event.