BREAKING: White House Unveils New Gun Control Proposals: Fix NICs and “Risk Protection Orders”

California gun confiscation team (courtesy

“More than three weeks after the Parkland, Florida, school shooting, the White House later Sunday is expected to unveil some proposals on guns and school safety,” CNN reports. A few minutes ago, Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos spoke to members of the press on a conference call. DeVos said that President Trump get his kicks from route Fix NICs. (The White House backs the bill.) The Executive Branch also supports . . .

the STOP School Violence Act. The new law would authorize $50 million a year on school safety provisions, including “training for teachers and students on ways to prevent violence.” 

[According to the National Association for Education Statistics, in 2014, America was home to 98,271 public schools. Assuming the aforementioned provision, I make that $508.79 per school. For comparison sake, that’s about the same amount of money as a new GLOCK 19.]

The President is forming a “Federal Commission on School Safety” to figure out ways to “stop school violence.” The body will reportedly “consider” raising the minimum age to purchase a long gun from 18 to 21. The age issue is “a state-based discussion right now.”

Ms. DeVos will head up the body, which will no doubt reach many of the exact same conclusions as the NRA’s comprehensive — and comprehensively ignored — National School Shield Program.

As for arming teachers, the Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council promised that the Trump administration will start working with states “to provide rigorous firearms training” to teachers and other school staff who volunteer to bear arms on campus. Specifically, Department of Justice funding for school personnel firearms training with state and local law enforcement agencies.

Along those same lines, the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies are now tasked with partnering with states and local governments to launch a “see something, say something” style campaign to encourage reports of suspicious activity in and around public schools.

We also learned that the President has ordered a “full audit and review” of the FBI’s tip line, after it failed to act on actionable intelligence indicating that Nikolas Cruz planned to attack Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

Most worrying of all, the CIC’s looking for ways to pressure enable states to enact what it calls “risk protection orders.” What California calls “Gun Violence Protection Orders” (enacted after the Isla Vista stabbing and firearms-related homicide). What Florida calls “Extreme Risk Protection Orders” (enacted in the post-Parkland hysteria).

No mention was made of due process.

[NB: This article was re-written after we learned that the press reports indicating that the White House would voice unqualified support for raising the minimum long gun purchase age to 21 turned out to be “fake news.” Or President Trump changed his mind at the last minute. Or something.]


  1. avatar jwtaylor says:

    The President will send a 20 year old man or woman to war, and depend on them to protect this country, but won’t allow them to protect or feed their family with a rifle when they come home.
    I hope this is false reporting from CNN and other outlets.

    1. avatar Bob H says:

      I know in Florida they gave a carve out for service members and LEO’s under 21, which creates a whole new set of legal and constitutional questions. Also does it address only new purchases? If so what do we do about the million of firearms already owned by the group (18-21 y/o’s) deemed so dangerous they aren’t allowed to buy a gun? If they aren’t confiscating them then this bill would have done nothing to prevent the Florida shooting. That kid already had his guns months before his crime.
      I’ve said it before but this is a perfect example of what wrong with populism. If Trump had run for president in 2008, 80%-90% chance he would have been a democrat running to the left of Obama. Trump sounds great when speaking to a room full of NRA members, but when the political winds blow left the populist follows. We coulda’ had President Cruz folks…

      1. avatar Gutshot says:

        Nope. We would’ve had a President Hillary. Cruz didn’t have the horsepower to beat that witch. He would’ve been curb stomped as she employed her evil tactics. Ted is too squeaky clean in his approach. I don’t think Ted would say shit if he stepped in it. Once again, we were forced to vote the lesser of 2 evils.

        1. avatar Chadwick says:

          Yep. Too bad our horse turned sick and started screwing his base over. One term Don.

        2. avatar JoelT says:

          I keep hearing this over and over again and it’s bullhonky spread by people trying to justify their choice in the primary. Almost anyone could have beaten Hillary, she was the 2nd most unlikable person to ever run for the office, second only to Trump, and if Hillary hadn’t been under investigation at the time of the election and hadn’t been exposed for rigging the Democratic primaries, the result might have been different. In otherwords, there were many factors out of Trump’s control that contributed to Hillary’s defeat, including Hillary herself. Find other reasons to defend your choice of candidate in the primaries, this excuse just doesn’t hold water. Hillary was the weak candidate.

        3. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

          “Hillary was the weak candidate.” and a Hideous,Harpy,Hag to boot !

        4. avatar Joe Brown says:

          Trump was the 2nd worst candidate in history, only slightly behind Hillary… Trump didn’t win, Hillary lost.

        5. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          “Almost anyone could have beaten Hillary . . .” No, they couldn’t. None of the republican candidates were strong enough to prevail against the democratic machine that thought it had everything nailed down. Hillary would have won handily had the R’s kept to their traditional play-book which looked to the same demographics the democrats used. Trump went out and created an entirely new conservative constituency and, with that entirely new class of voters, went on to win a completely unexpected election.

        6. avatar Gutshot says:

          Holy snowball effect Batman!

      2. avatar Erik says:

        Cruz would have been sued immediately to not be sworn in because he’s Canadian. When he fills out a 4473 his place of birth is not the USA dummies.

        Further, you obviously haven’t read his amicus brief on heller where he says “reasonable gun control like California and New York have is constitutional.”

        Bonus round, his wife is a Council on Foreign Relations globalist.

        You are very glib and immature to think Cruz was or is anything more than a typical blow hard republican. But I will be sure and thank you when the commies come knocking.

        1. avatar YARB0892 says:

          You’re ignorant and ill-informed of the definition of the phrase ‘natural-born’ if you think mere geographic location makes you a legal citizen or not.

          A talking dog turd could’ve beaten Hillary, especially after she imploded.

        2. avatar Bob H says:

          Lol is this not a post about TRUMP proposing gun control? I voted for Trump in the general election but you Trump people have an inability to see his flaws when he’s wrong. Tax cuts and killing ISIS get an A+ from me, but this “take guns now, due process later” gun control sh*t and stimulus 2.0 are terrible ideas and we need to call him out when he does stupid things.

          Calling Ted Cruz a globalist is like calling Donald Trump a constitutional conservative. If we can’t call stupid ideas stupid without Trumponians loosing their sh*t we are definitely in serious trouble.

        3. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

          Ted Cruz has always struck me as a snake, even though I agree about 90% with his politics. But just as a person, he strikes me as a snake. My fear is that perception of him would have prevented him from beating Hillary. Trump’s comments on, “Take guns now, worry about due process later…” might just have been a way of getting Democrats to show their true colors. It could have been a brilliant move on his part, or maybe him showing some anti-gun attitude, I don’t know. Nobody quite knows how the gears turn in Trump’s head. The main issue though is what he actually seeks to do legislatively.

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “Trump’s comments on, “Take guns now, worry about due process later…” might just have been a way of getting Democrats to show their true colors. It could have been a brilliant move on his part, or maybe him showing some anti-gun attitude, I don’t know. Nobody quite knows how the gears turn in Trump’s head.”

          Holy shit. You can’t be serious. O___________O

        5. avatar barnbwt says:

          “Ted Cruz seems like snake”
          That man is out defending RKBA, from Trump, TODAY, and you still can’t see past his jowls. What a fucking joke. I suppose you’ll be voting for Kamala Harris cuz she’s hawt you dumb, shallow, fool.

      3. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        That’s who I wanted also. I only had the choice between hildabeast and Trump. Voted for ted in the primary.

    2. avatar California Richard says:

      England does the same thing with 16 year olds….. good luck buying a gun there for home defense at any age.

      Although in England, they can smoke and drink at basically any age without much trouble.

      1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        And whatever England does is relevant how? This is ‘Merica and we have the 2A. BECAUSE of them in fact.

      2. avatar Mark says:

        Who the fuck cares about England? We stomped the shit out of them well over 200 years ago. Problem solved. Tired of them having a comment on ANYTHING let alone OUR COUNTRY. FOAD.

        1. avatar GunDoc says:

          Mark, it amuses me how historically ignorant most people are. Including, clearly, yourself.

          The notion that the Colonials “Stomped the shit” out of the British is hilarious. The Colonial army had its ass handed to it in 90% of the engagements. In a stand-up fight, it was more like 100%. The British left the field of battle after an arrangement was made with the King (and it wasn’t really “the King,” since his brain had long since been fried from end-stage syphilis).

          No, the Colonials were made a franchise of the Crown (which is what the US is to this day), in the same way that Canada, Australia, and New Zealand were “created” out f whole cloth. The only differences were that the “Founding Fathers” negotiated themselves a much better deal, and knew they needed to keep the hoi polloi happy in order to stay in power (after all, 25,000 KIA made this the costliest war in US history by percentage of the population).

          Just ask yourselves: why would a victor nation pay several billion dollars in today’s dollars to the “vanquished” nation? A cursory reading of the Treaty of Paris will demonstrate that the British Crown got what it wanted (remuneration for the material and manpower losses incurred in the “Revolution,” and a cut of revenues in perpetuity- after all, where do you think all the Revenues collected by the IRS go? Hint: The Crown).

          But again, at least the US had a few more benefits to the subjects, some of which are still recognizable (though under constant assault). Another hint: the 2nd does not mention Citizens. It mentions People. If you are a Citizen, you are not a People. Doctrine of Exclusion.

          I would say wake up, but it’s way past time for that. I would say good luck, but Lady Luck has left the building. History is remorseless when it comes to ignorance.

      3. avatar NateInPA says:

        The UK is in the process of confiscating anything south of plastic knives right now, sooooo…

        How’s that whole “gun control utopia” working out?

    3. avatar jwtaylor says:

      “I hope this is false reporting from CNN and other outlets.”
      Although I don’t like the other options, I am very glad that the original report did turn out to be fake news after all.
      The original report was difficult for me to believe.

    4. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Donald Trump Jr. is a committed gun-rights and 2nd amendment supporter. Let’s hope he’s talking long and hard to his father.

  2. avatar Jim B says:

    If they are going to raise the age requirement it should be for centerfire semi-automatic rifles only. That way an 18 year old hunter could still buy a shotgun or a big game hunting rifle of the type over 90% of hunters use.

    1. avatar anarchyst says:

      I must respectfully disagree with you. Compromise is not the answer. Haven’t we compromised enough?
      Besides, the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting…

      1. avatar Chadwick says:

        With all that history has shown us when we start to compromise on the 2nd I would say there is no respect needed. If someone can’t learn what a right is and can’t see that we don’t need to compromise on at the very least #1, #2, and #4, then they don’t reserve much respect.

        1. avatar California Richard says:

          +1… age had nothing to do with this guy’s (Florida dude) derangement. If anything he was a ticking time bomb that only got worse with age, not better. Maybe with the failing university system they want people in that 18-22 age range to waste money on an unnecessary and useless education, than cheap crappy guns….. I didn’t know a decent gun from my ass until I was 30 something.

      2. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        Yes, the 2A is about having the means to prevent our government from taking away our rights.

        It’s time to start joining your states militia. The politicians have stopped listening.

        1. avatar Marcus says:

          Hahahah.. you’re joking right?? Be an example of what you believe in. The groups using the term militia to identify themselves are overwhelmingly rediculous in thought, action and organization. If you join one report back on your grave disappointment

        2. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

          @ marcus. I’m not joking and I am going to be an example of what I believe in. HP38 was passed by the House over a year ago. Mitch McTurtle is sitting on it. Florida SB 7026 is a step backwards. It’s passage can be laid at the feet of Trump because of comments he made. And at a meeting on feb 28 Trumps answer to Rep Steve Scalise “we want to get something done” was absolutely INSOLENT!!!

          Politicians aren’t listening and I’m done expecting them to.

    2. avatar Booger Hook says:

      Yeah, let’s preemptively grab our ankles, in anticipation of the next ****ing the Dems and RINOs send our way.

    3. avatar bobo says:

      I have to Disagree with you 100%

      doing that…signaling out semi’s would be a VERY bad idea on our part as firearm owners –that woulds be like agreeing with the Gun grabbers terms of—they are weapons of war and now so you all agree now!===they win!

      never give an inch

      I live for now in cali and I have seen what ‘giving inches’ leads too!

    4. avatar Brian says:

      You do realize people use AR15s to hunt, right?

      1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        Yes,very useful for that purpose especially the various 45 calibers,however the Left has to sell the agenda that AR’s are good for only one thing,even though they are wrong as with all else.

  3. avatar anarchyst says:

    There are two ways around this…one way is private sales. FFL dealers may not be permitted to sell firearms to those under 21, but private sales are still legal in most states. The other way is for parents and guardians to circumvent that restriction by purchasing firearms themselves and then “gifting” them to those under 21. The ATF has already ruled that “gifting” a firearm is not a “straw purchase”…

  4. avatar Bob Toner says:

    I am sick and tired of the same ol’ stick: we only will ever have gradual erosion of our rights, never restoration nor rescission of ineffective policies. SHARE act? Lol no. Reciprocity? Fugeddaboutit. Hughes amendment repeal? Hahahahah.

    This is outrageous and continues the trend of creating special classes of citizens. If they can classify you as a minor citizen without rights until you are 21, why couldn’t they do the same until you are 30? 50? 99?

    Why are they capitulating now? What did the NRA spend all that donor money for, anyway?

  5. avatar TexasGunGal says:

    Guess “Gun Free Zone” for schools eliminations was not part of legislation? So this is effective for responsible gun owners but not for the bad actors?

    1. avatar Stereodude says:

      That’s because they don’t want to actually solve the problem. If they do, what grounds will they have to come back around for another slice of the cake to further chip away at our second amendment rights?

      The solutions aren’t supposed to work. They’re just supposed to give the appearance of doing “something” while diluting the second amendment just a little bit more.

      1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        That post is a total understatement.
        This whole thing is a long continuous crap spiral.
        Have unstable student raised in one parent family and indoctrinated by godless socialists.
        Never report student abnormalities and coddle under Promise Program. Just give drugs.
        Ignore student violence and police arrests and reports.
        Ignore social media threats.
        Never harden schools or even lock doors.
        Never arm security officers and teachers.
        Make sure students and teachers huddle in middle of classroom.
        Make sure procedures are to cordone and wait during shootings.
        Blame guns and NRA.
        Pass badly needed useless legislation. Bump stocks.
        Eliminate due process and individual rights.
        Feel good as we did something.
        Wait for next shooting and repeat.

  6. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    If theDonald really wants to lose my vote in 2020, go for it.

  7. avatar Hannibal says:

    “Assuming the aforementioned provision, I make that $508.79 per school. For comparison sake, that’s about the same amount of money as a new GLOCK 19.”

    Something tells me not every school will take him up on the offer.

  8. avatar derfel cadarn says:

    What part of the word INFRINGED do they find difficult ?

    1. avatar fiun dagner says:

      it is not the word infringed they have trouble understanding. they have that word down cold. the word NOT on the other hand…

  9. avatar Nanashi says:

    The number of democrats this will make vote for him is between zero and zero. The number of Republicans, independants and conservative democrats who this will make avoid him like the plague is far, far higher.

  10. avatar Ddub says:

    All he had to do was nothing, all the people pissing and moaning about gun control were never going to vote for him or any other republican anyway. WTF, this is retarded. I miss Obama, at least the republicans stopped his stupid shit. *mostly*

  11. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    I guess the important thing is ‘what do we get’? I’m fairly confident such a violation of civil rights will be tossed out in the courts, so maybe there will be something worthwhile left.

    1. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

      Tossed (maybe) in 10 years. What do free legal law-abiding American Citizens get? Less Freedom!!!! Just another trip down the slippery slope.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        ‘What do free legal law-abiding American Citizens get?’

        Reciprocity. Or at least that would make it an acceptable trade. And it doesn’t matter how long it takes for the courts to work it out if the law is blocked by an injunction.

      2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        The other thing is that if the courts strike down the long g un ban, the ban on handguns can’t stand since in the Heller case the court acknowledged that handguns are the overwhelmingly most popular weapon for self defense.

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          See NRA v. BATFE where the 5th Circuit upheld the under 21 handgun sales ban.

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane5th says:

          5th Circuit. And SCOTUS?

          If it’s ruled unconstitutional to deprive law abiding adult citizens of their 2A rights altogether, it’s not much of a stretch to imagine that barring possession of the most popular means of defense could be considered an ‘infringement’, and if not, what’s to keep our overlords from banning handguns for the rest of us?

          Not that at least 4 of the justices aren’t guaranteed to vote their political loyalty rather than a fair analysis of the Constitution…

  12. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    Political useless BS. Trump is bending in the wind and bowing to the new political strong hold of the Tide Pod eaters.

  13. avatar Stereodude says:

    So, which state is going to be the first sanctuary state for gun rights?

    1. avatar Rick says:

      It will be hard, because new sales are going through FFLs, that’s Federal, and there are going to be few dealers willing to defy, and then what about distributors and manufacturers. That’s just a fantasy, won’t happen, its the courts or nothing, that assumes this passes, which probably isn’t a done deal, actually I’d only put it at 45%.

  14. avatar former water walker says:

    Trump already lost my vote in 2020. The goons on FOX are still covering him like he’s the 2nd coming(pardon me Stormy)…Cruz in 2020!

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      Mr. Trump may have a Stormy reelection,especially with all of his supporters from the resistance movement.

    2. avatar Publius says:

      Rand Paul is the only high profile Republican with a spine and who actually cares about freedom.

      1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        Rand Paul is one of the sane people on Capital Hill.

  15. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    Youth gun homicides escalated in the early 1990s, tripling between 1985 and 1993. In 1994, President Clinton signed into law the Youth Handgun Safety Act, which generally bans possession of handguns by people under age 18, and prohibits adults from transferring handguns to juveniles. Before this amendment, FFLs were prohibited from selling handguns to anyone under age 21, but there were no federal restrictions on the possession of handguns by juveniles or the transfer of handguns to juveniles by non-licensees.

    The Youth Handgun Safety Act does not apply to long guns. Since enactment of the Gun Control Act in 1968, FFLs have been prohibited from selling long guns to persons under age 18. However, no federal law prohibits possession of long guns, including “grandfathered” semiautomatic assault rifles, by juveniles. Nor is it unlawful for an unlicensed individual to transfer a long gun to a juvenile.

    IIRC when it made it through the courts the result was that 21 for handguns is acceptable as long as 18 year olds had access to long guns, rifle and shotgun.

    Back to the courts,all to find out there was already a determination.

  16. avatar Scott says:

    I don’t see anything in the post about GVRO’s as the title of the post implies. Perhaps someone could clarify that for me?

  17. avatar luigi says:

    Paul 2020 baby!

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      That’s where I’m at,Paul, in fact Primary Mr. Trump,he’s facing a Stormy reelection in the first place.

  18. avatar Alexander says:

    Time to increase the voting age to 21. The Tide Pods generation is clearly not ready for the responsibility of either owning a gun or voting.

    1. avatar Rick says:

      There’s this thing called the 26th Amendment. It was 21 until 1971 and that is explicit, there’s no argument over what 18 years of age and citizen means.

      1. avatar Alexander says:

        There was a bit of sarcasm in my comment, but on the whole, after the erasure of the Second Amendment, the rest of the Bill of Rights will be erased. Not right away – a bit at a time. And not necessarily by laws that are explicitly against the Bill of Rights, but just by ignoring the rights. With no ability to have an effective voice, the sheep will do what sheep always do – conform. It is good to remember that Stalin’s Constitution was remarkably similar to the US Constitution, except that it did not have the Second Amendment.

  19. avatar Bob Watson says:

    This legislation will achieve it’s intended purpose, the suppression of the free exercise of the right to keep and bear arms. This has always been and will always be the goal of every gun control law or regulation. Republican and democrat politicians share one common, supreme value, contempt for and distrust of the citizens of this nation.

  20. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    1. “Creeping Incrementalism-Period! Enough is Enough! We need overwhelming organizational present and voters to rise up. Drown out the Globalists and the Neo-Communists!

    2. Florida voters should be figuring out how to remove all RINOs and DemoCRAPS from THEIR government halls.

    3. This whole thing is a mess of epic proportions!

    4. So, How many US citizens are going to become Enemy’s of the State and targeted “wrongfully” by “Paramilitarized, Gun Confiscation, Police Commandos!” Where will “Due Process be….” Will US citizens and maybe some LEOs die in clearly Un American, Unconstitutional acts….! Who will be accountable in government and in law enforcement?!?!

    5. Wow! Imagine that…Government and LE community going after lawful US citizens instead of illegal aliens in our country…Who haven’t had any “Expanded universal background checks!?!?”

  21. avatar mandrake the magician says:

    because, like, “school shootings”/”mass shootings” are really real, dontchaknow?
    i mean… c’mon!
    there’s ALL this evidence that’s been tested in courts-of-law and, hey!….some of them have even gone all the way through the entire appeals process…..
    and…what’s more….the courts’ findings have been confirmed by independent committees with a total mandate to meticulously examine all the evidence…..
    you can’t “argue” with that…..
    yeh!…..these things are totally un-predictable events….
    that’s why we can’t let people have assault rifles and that…..
    and…what’s more..there were these plebiscites/referendums which actually gave da gub’mint full authority to tamper with the US Constitution…..
    hey!….so….when you consider all that: the evidence presented in court ON OATH, the ind. committees and the plebiscites/referendums ….hey!…yeh!…..that means that they can change the gun laws to ban stuff….yes it does!

    eh…. and….hey!….don’t go calling me “a coincidence theorist” either…….. k [?]

    1. avatar Leroy Jenkins says:

      Punctuation and capitalization are not your enemy.

  22. avatar Red Forman says:

    RIP Bill of Rights

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      It was dead a long time ago. We are just now thinking about funeral arrangements.

  23. avatar ironicatbest says:

    508$ don’t think of that, think of the big number, like when Trump donated big money numbers to some charity, when you do the math it comes out to like .0003 percent of his yearly take.

  24. avatar J says:

    Please help save our 2nd Amendment rights. The petition web site has a lot of pro-2nd Amendment petitions that need people to view and sign if possible. Look at these and decide which to sign. There are too many to link here.

    A lot of anti-2nd Amendment petitions are post there also.

  25. avatar John in Ohio says:

    Nah, savior Trump is just toying with the antis. Boy, are y’all going to feel stupid when he shows his ninja-like political prowess!

    I was at a RKBA rally yesterday. MAGA and Trumpism ruled the day. It was so different, in a bad way, than the other gatherings. What a waste of my time and that of the group I brought along with me.

  26. avatar Joe R. says:

    “Government” at any and every level needs to be compelled to publicly declare and post their sworn / notarized statement that “Government” cannot, and DOES NOT, protect you on an ‘individual level’.

    Government cannot even protect itself, its members, or even its security staff on an individual level (If any examples are needed to be cited here then FU stupid).

    It is WRONGFUL, not just wrong for them to claim that it is so, and it is COUNTER-SOCIETAL, and damning FOR THEM TO CAUSE the bona fide U.S. Citizenry THAT IT SERVES, to RELY ON SUCH STATEMENTS IN ANY WAY.

    If government cannot protect you, then it is taking such measures MERELY IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROTECT ITSELF, by CONTROLLING YOU. And we all know how that goes. They only need to protect themselves so that they can do TYRANNY, OR ELSE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE FEAR-ONE.


    Investigate all the gun-grabber MFs for their foreign ties, and seize all of their assets. Water board the MFs to give up names of their funders and go HUNT THE MFs. Kill a commie for mommy.

    1. avatar RogueVal says:

      Guy, you need to spend less time on CAPS LOCK and more time on communicating in a manner that conveys actual thoughts.


      So would you rather do, nationalism? That has not been a historically a good thing. And what does “do globalism” even mean.

  27. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

    Gun confiscation orders from the state governments are one thing, from the Federal government, I am very wary. Law enforcement at that amount should at most be a state thing, not a Federal issue.

  28. avatar Joe R. says:

    Posts disappearing.

    1. avatar UPS Driver says:

      Don’t you mean:


      1. avatar Joe R. says:


        I think I may be coming around to your kind of thinking.

        Don’t you mean “I wish I was an driver” ?

  29. avatar CLarson says:

    Yeah, I have moved from Trump 2020 to skip the top of the ticket. Making Trump a one term loser will be a powerful signal to the rest of the cucks in the Stupid party.

  30. avatar Sprocket says:

    And not a single thing requiring schools to use law enforcement to handle violent students or fast tracking involuntary commitment for crazies. Great work.

  31. avatar Kenshinwulf says:

    Wait until your liberal neighbor, coworker, or “friend” sends the Gestapo to your home because of your bumper sticker. Forget bump stocks, these “Extreme Protection Orders” are where we need to make a stand. Its the removal of a civil right without due process. Its confiscation. How many arguments have you gotten into with liberal family members or friends? How about on Facebook?

  32. avatar Matt says:

    I don’t know what’s funnier. People thinking politicians are on their side or people thinking inept law enforcement will enforce any of the laws that will pass.

    Government at all levels has been wiping their asses with the constitution since it’s inception.

    You don’t wanta deal with fix nics you can just buy from a private seller. And if you think LEO’s have the man power or initiative for that matter to confiscate guns on anonymous tips without due process I have swamp land for sale.

    1. avatar Eli2016 says:

      Well at least one person here has the intelligence to see through these absurd comments. Thank you Matt for seeing the big picture. Everyone else who comments in these forums can’t see past their nose or should I say bump stock. Bunch of silly rabbits.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Some of us know how destructive gun control is and are wise enough not to support it in any form.

  33. avatar Support the Second says:

    Kudos to the Donald for bringing us a great Republican Christian conservative brand of gun control. As the bible says, ban bump stocks to keep from raising Cain. Which will keep guns out the hands of Stormy Daniels, who is occupied with more important things.

  34. avatar Zoe says:

    Bill 7026 – Thanks Florida GOP!

    The possibilities lay groundwork for the destruction of the 2A, I do agree with some of the Bill but without fine tuning definitions will render the 2A impotent.

    If you see it differently give me the prospective.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “I do agree with some of the Bill”

      Thanks Zoe, you support gun control. For you, it is only a matter of degree. Apparently, the 2A and the unalienable individual right to keep and bear arms doesn’t mean much to you.

      1. avatar Eli2016 says:

        No. It means a lot to many people I’m sure. But by several estimates there are roughly 300 MILLION guns in the U.S. Granted, not all of them may be in functioning condition, but even the most jaded 2nd Amender will have to admit that it’s a lot. Even if only half that estimate were true, that’s a helluva lot of guns for the government to confiscate. I know it takes some thought but it’s a very critical election year. I would hope that some of you understand the political game and not overreact as your buddies on the left do with this stuff.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          I’ve been an unalienable individual right to keep and bear arms supporter for much, much longer than this recent election cycle. 😉

          The real exercise of unalienable individual rights is rarely restored incrementally. You, wittingly or not, are supporting gun control. Supporting something to your own detriment that, after your enemies achieve their goal, will result in you being thrown under the bus is indicative of a useful idiot, no?

  35. avatar Wiregrass says:

    C.W. Cooke was on NPR this morning and I think he called it right. Trump didn’t come up with any of this, he just conferred with Ryan and McConnell to see what they thought would fly.

    There was a gun show here this weekend, 80% lowers were sold out in no time at all.

  36. avatar BierceAmbrose says:

    Trojan-horse government: The issue is never what they say they’re doing, but what they’re sneaking in with it.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email