The America We Deserve (courtesy amazon.com)

In his book The America We Deserve, Donald Trump (or his writer David Shipley) wrote “I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun.” If America elects Donald Trump, they’ll get the president they deserve. A man who now proclaims “Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own.” Notice the “loophole” in that statement . . .

What constitutes “good, honest” people? In the same way that the enemies of firearms freedom clocked the Supreme Court’s thumbs-up for “reasonable regulations,” using it to justify all of their gun control schemes, the antis could take that “good, honest people” ball and run with it — all the way to the civilian disarmament end zone.

Now you could say that Mr. Trump had a ballistic come-to-Jesus moment sometime in the last 16 years. With a few exceptions, the NRA could have written his website’s gun control policy page. As Mr. Trump regularly remarks when he’s called out on his flip-flops on various issues (e.g., partial birth abortion), conservative icon Ronald Reagan’s thinking on several important issues also “evolved” over time.

Hang on. That would be the same Ronald Reagan who signed California gun control laws. The same president who elevated the inherently anti-gun rights ATF to agency status. The same Ronald Reagan who wrote this in The New York Times in support of the Brady Background Check bill’s “cooling off period” (eventually struck from the Bill):

Since many handguns are acquired in the heat of passion (to settle a quarrel, for example) or at times of depression brought on by potential suicide, the Brady bill would provide a cooling-off period that would certainly have the effect of reducing the number of handgun deaths . . .

This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them. If the passage of the Brady bill were to result in a reduction of only 10 or 15 percent of those numbers (and it could be a good deal greater), it would be well worth making it the law of the land.

So, not a friend of ours. But then, who is? Whoever it is — and I’ll let you debate the pro-2A stances of the other Republican contenders for the presidential nomination — it isn’t Senator Bernie Sanders or former First Lady Hillary Clinton or any other Democrat who ascribes to the their party’s national platform (calling for the aforementioned “reasonable regulations”).

I know where TTAG readers stand on gun rights. I hope our readers “vote their guns” and support only those candidates who stand four-square for firearms freedom. But that’s not how America rolls. If you have any doubts on that score, I draw your attention to an article at csmonitor.com entitled In Hillary Clinton’s landslide S.C. win, an asterisk on gun control. Check out this bit:

South Carolina Democrats interviewed at Saturday’s polls offer something of a middle view on gun rights – supportive of the right to bear arms, but feeling that a line has been crossed and needs to be addressed.

Twenty-something Graham Holson pulls up to vote in Edgefield, S.C., in a jacked-up white pickup truck with a goofy pit bull riding shotgun. He claims he has “tons of guns – handguns, rifles, you name it.” A self-described white “country boy,” he also has a concealed carry permit, which means, “You won’t know when I’m carrying, which is how it should be.”

Yet Mr. Holson, a Sanders supporter, joined other primary voters, most of them African-American, in welcoming Clinton’s foray into the gun culture wars, suggesting, in his view, that America’s gun violence might be softening some hard-line views on gun ownership.

He said he’s open to stricter background checks to weed out “potential nut cases” and even reviving the Bill-Clinton-era assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004 after 10 years.

“As a country we’re becoming a cultural no-man’s-land where every house is a militia, and that’s not good,” says Holson. “Also, I don’t understand these banana clips that are this long – I have no need to kill 20 people in 20 seconds.”

I tried to find Mr. Holson to see if that is, indeed, what he said. It seems highly implausible and all-too-convenient. In any case, as our readers agreed in a recent post (Question of the Day: Is There a “Middle Ground” On Guns?), there is no “middle view” on Americans’ natural, civil or Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. You’re either for it or agin’ it. The “middle view” is nothing more than code for a diminution of that inalienable right.

I’m more interested in Mr. Holson’s statement that “every house is a militia.” Taking our cue from the Second Amendment, it’s true: every house is a militia. We the People are a militia.

That’s the entire point of the Second Amendment: every armed American is part of a collective force that defends themselves, their family, their friends, their community and their country from enemies both foreign and domestic. Every law that infringes on their individual ability to keep and bear arms, which is every gun control law written, is unconstitutional. Full stop.

The NRA and other gun rights groups oppose gun control proposals on principle, saying they’re all part of a slippery slope toward all-out gun confiscation. Moreover, tightening gun-ownership restrictions are likely to be used by the government to target certain kinds of people for confiscation, they believe.

“That’s silly,” says Kent Bacon, a former Edgefield County commissioner, who voted on Saturday for Clinton. “Nobody is talking about taking people’s guns away, in part because the country wouldn’t stand for it. Heck, I wouldn’t stand for it. But that doesn’t mean we just sit here and do nothing.”

If only people like Mr. Bacon would sit there and do nothing. Specifically, vote.

While Americans’ Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms is not subject to the democratic process, the truth is that it is. If nothing else, the voters who elect the next president will place in power the man or woman who will replace Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court Justice who helped form a firewall for firearms freedom. A liberal Judge would be an unmitigated disaster, gun rights-wise.

Deborah Holloway, an African-American union organizer in Aiken, S.C. . . . says people should absolutely be able to own a handgun for self-defense, but only if they meet a high standard of responsibility and good citizenship.

“Guns in the wrong hands is really the issue.”

Is it? The issue is who decides whose hands are the wrong hands? Voters who support any form of gun control support all forms of gun control, including confiscation, whether they know it or not. The candidates know this, but they’re not about to say it, are they? Not Hillary Clinton. And not Donald Trump. The lesser of two evils?

Recommended For You

119 Responses to Random Thoughts About Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and Gun Control

  1. This Mr. Holson comment sounds about as fake as they come. Tons of guns, a “pitbull” a truck, but he supports an assault weapons ban? BULL SH–! That is a bunch of garbage and anyone with a functioning brain can figure that out. NOBODY, but NOBODY with tons of guns, a truck and a Pitbull supports an assault weapons ban.

    • Whut? I thot he says “asphault weapons” and I don’t wan nobody throwin the street at me boy, no asphalt wepinz at all, right Cletus?

      Here’s the real issue: Trump is a PSYCHOPATH businessman. Do you want a psychopath running things?
      Hitlery is a PSYCHOPATH criminal. Do you want a psychopath running things?

      NO on both counts. If that’s “the ticket” consider me 3rd party. It’s no-win. Never Trump.

      • Most politicains are of the pathological breed. This is something that always has been and always will be true, with very few exceptions.

      • Is trump a great choice? No. Is he a better choice than Hillary? ABSOLUTELY. Letting Hillary win just because you don’t like Trump is like letting Hitler invade and control the European continent because you don’t like war. Sometimes you have to do things you don’t like, but that’s what being an adult is about.

        • Supporting Trump means losing freedom in slow motion, because you hold out hope that he’s one of us, or at least not particularly focused on firearms either way. In reality, he’ll make deals right and left, with your rights left behind.

          With Hillary, you know she’s a flaming red statist from the start. So you won’t budge an inch.

          Don’t be fooled by Trump. America is depending on you.

        • I don’t love or trust Trump.He reminds me of Obama promising, “I won’t take your rifle away, I won’t take your shotgun away, I won’t take your pistol away.

          I would vote for Cruz or Ben Carson in a heartbeat. If Trump is my only choice other than Hillary, he gets my vote, but he is not my first choice.

        • The CHOICE is Cruz. If you lean a bit towards immature RINO Rubio.

          Robert
          Hillary is to “Lady” as Billybob is to “Gentleman”. Spare us the strained and implausible honorifics.

        • Agreed, not perfect. However as we all know, the good is not the enemy of the perfect. I’d rather have good (Trump) than evil (Hillary) any day. I firmly believe she should be in jail right now.

          I also like that he is not beholden to any donors. Donors calling the shots is what has largely gotten the USA where we are today….open borders, staggering debt, stagnant economy, high unemployment and a Federal government totally out of control in terms of growth and power.

          Kind of reminds me of when I was young and used to drink…..nearing closing time at the bar. Do I go home alone or do I settle for “good enough”? Assuming she would agree, of course.

        • Aside from the nominating Supreme Court justices issue (which I’ll concede is a huge consideration), Hillary might actually be a better choice. The reason being, Republicans hate her, and won’t risk being seen as cooperating with her, so we’d likely have pretty much four years of deadlock (assuming the Republicans maintain control of Congress, which is likely). Congressional Republicans won’t resist Trump, and will probably let his authoritarian tendencies run wild. He might not touch gun rights, but I’ll bet he’d be another “big government conservative” like the Bushes were, and probably doesn’t have a ton of respect for the remainder of the Bill of Rights, even if he really did have a “come to Jesus” moment on the 2A (I don’t really think he did, he just knows he can’t run as an anti-gun Republican).

          Neither choice is a win for individual rights and liberty, though.

    • Well, (mark) I Don’t know if Mr.Holson is “Fake” though that is a possibility.
      The questiion is, Could a hard core “Hunter” type guy like, care or want an AR styled rifle?
      I believe, it can be possible, for someone to have a cache of (traditional looking) arms and not want, or own an AR style fiream..

      I DO Know of Card carrying members of the NRA, that believe the Assault Weapons Ban should Not have passed away. One ( guy) feels that a J frame and a Remmy (pistol grip) 870 is all he ( and anybody else) needs.
      He believes, “Nobody needs an “Assault rifle or pistol”, (pistols uzi type) or those large Mags.”
      Should Pistol -grips ever be outlawed, he would get a regular stock for the Remmy.

      article quote, RF
      I tried to find Mr. Holson to see if that is, indeed, what he said. It seems highly implausible and all-too-convenient. In any case, as our readers agreed in a recent post (Question of the Day: Is There a “Middle Ground” On Guns?), there is no “middle view” on Americans’ natural, civil or Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. You’re either for it or agin’ it. The “middle view” is nothing more than code for a diminution of that inalienable right.

      Well, RF I agree, there should be “NO MIDDLE GROUND” ( which the TTAG demographic polled here) probably mostly agrees.
      But unfortunately, there are those that are wishy washy about what the 2nd Amendment stands for and truly means. ( even card carrying NRA members) . Even the NRA has sold out the 2A over the years.

      We also need to attempt to enlighten/ educate them ( wishy washy gun owners) , TOO! Though that might also be a hard sell.

      But good or bad, like or Dislike, Mr. Trump might be the closest candidate to choose ( at this moment) to beat the “Hildebeast” and “her” agenda.

  2. Nobody is talking about taking people’s guns away

    If you like your plan, you can keep your plan

    Those that forget history are doomed to repeat it.

  3. Opinions on issues such as this can change. 10 or 15 years ago I wasn’t ani-gun; I just didn’t care since I wasn’t a person of the gun. I didn’t care one way or the other if there was a proposed restriction on magazine capacity or an AWB, or a requirement for background checks, etc. Now, I care, and as a person of the gun, obviously, my stance has evolved to being against those types of laws.

    Having said that, we don’t know if the Donald is simply trying to say the right things to win votes, or whether his stance in his mind has actually changed.

    Either way, I think he is better than the alternative on the Democrat side (although he isn’t close to my first choice for GOP nomination). The President has limited powers when it comes to changing gun laws with a major impact to most gun owners (non FFL dealers). That requires congress. Sure his executive action affects some of us, how badly, is yet to be seen. But I do know that we’ve had 8 years of anti-gun Obama and I still have as many 30 round Magpuls for my AR-15 as I can reasonably afford, and could buy larger capacity mags if I wanted. If Obama could have legally outlawed those as President, obviously he would have.

    • @FlamencoD I couldn’t have said it better myself. Views can easily change. Half the people that I shoot with now didn’t even own a 22lr 10 years ago and now they pack ARs in their truck daily. I am not saying that this is what has happened to Trump but I can’t discount the possibility. He is not my first choice, or my second, or even my third-but I will let that be known by voting in the primary, that’s why there is a primary.

      If he becomes the nominated then I will vote for him because I always vote and I won’t vote for either of the democratic choices.

      As long as we keep pro gun people in house, senate, and SCOTUS then it really doesn’t matter who the president is but I don’t see Trump pushing for gun control like Hillary would. I could actually see Trump signing something like a national reciprocity law if the house and senate could get it to him, can you say the same for Hillary?

      • “Views can easily change”

        Problem is, this goes both ways. Absent any kind of conviction or ideological basis, one is just a leaf blown around by the prevailing wind.

        Compare this to what I assume is Trumps, and most others, views regarding eating the brains of newborns. Not particularly likely to change, since there is actually some fundamental concern about that particular “right.”

        Still, though, a random gadfly that can swing either way depending on the weather, beats a dedicated opponent any day. Trump over Hillary any day. Trump vs Sanders….; I would honestly be more concerned about a Bloomie rush down the middle, than either of those two.

    • It all depends on how far Trump as president would actually be willing to push things with EOs.

      At least, based on his rhetoric so far, he actually sounds like he’d try to legislate via EOs a lot more than anyone before him, and more along the lines of what GOP said Obama would do (but didn’t).

  4. We are screwed either way. Just decide if you want to be entertained while being terrified(Trump) or just terrified(Hitlery).

  5. Trump sounds like the Republican version of an antichrist — a popular charismatic leader swept into office, but his whole platform is based on lies, deceit, narcissism, dishonesty. And the evangelicals are eating it up.

    Seriously — a guy who can’t quote a single bible verse, who thinks Second Corinthians is pronounced “2 Corinthians” (and blames Tony Perkins for the error, because Tony wrote “2” on the note he gave … which, without it, Trump wouldn’t have even known a bible verse at all) — a guy who cheated on his first wife and married his affair and then divorced her, and who brags about all the married women he’s slept with, who gambles and runs casinos — and the evangelicals are eating it up. Really?

    A guy who’s pro-Planned Parenthood, pro-assault weapons ban, pro gay marriage, a lifelong Democrat, and the Republicans are eating it up. Really?

    A guy who’s failed horribly at nearly every business venture he’s had, other than real estate. Failed at his airline, failed at and bankrupted his casinos, failed at his board game, failed at his vodka, failed at his football league, failed at his “university”… guy has a reverse-Midas touch, everything he touches turns to crap — and yet he promises to “Make America Great Again” and John and Jane Q. Public are absolutely eating it up. Really?

    A guy who shows zero knowledge of, or even complete disdain for, the Constitution of the United States. Who wants to erode First Amendment protections (so he can sue journalists, or beat up protesters). Who want(ed) to erode Second Amendment protections. Who clearly doesn’t care about the Eighth amendment (even calling or at least repeated calling Ted Cruz a highly offensive vulgar name because Cruz didn’t want to torture as much as Trump wants to torture). And I see many of the POTG on this board supporting him. Seriously?

    A guy who wants us to violate every international law on warfare to kill the family of terrorists. Who clearly wants to be a dictator, rather than a president.

    Even the National Review has come out and said that they think that, possibly, the country might be better off if Hillary were to be elected over Trump. At least in that case the evil would be obvious, known, and combated, rather than let gleefully into our house to run statist all over us with our permission.

    POTG, do something about this. Vote Cruz, vote Rubio. I don’t care which. But don’t let tomorrow’s Super Tuesday just fall into Trump’s hands without some serious competition.

    • And there’s the answer to the “lesser if two evils” comments. By the time we get to the general election, it’s too late. But tomorrow is a chance for folks to choose a greater good or least evil.

      • A greater good or less evil? Voting the lesser of 2 evils is still choosing evil, and the phrase ‘greater good’ is a universal propaganda phrase designed to condition people to accept the erosion of their individual rights in the name of the greater good. not sure what your point was?

        • and the phrase ‘greater good’ is a universal propaganda phrase designed to condition people to accept the erosion of their individual rights in the name of the greater good. not sure what your point was?

          Gee, sounds similar to “COMMON SENSE SOLUTIONS” !!!

    • Spot on.

      I’m willing to believe Trump on some things — maybe he really did change his mind on guns, for instance (I was on board with the “assault weapons” ban in the ’90s too, but I’ve since learned better) — but he’s not going to quit being who he is.

      Look at his long history in the public eye. If you vote for Trump, you’re electing THAT GUY, not a conservative savior.

    • This is the correct answer. Vote Cruz or Rubio in your primary, and then vote for the one that wins in the primary. Trump only whens if we let him.

    • “Even the National Review has come out and said that they think that, possibly, the country might be better off if Hillary were to be elected over Trump.”

      The National Review is in on the fix on illegal immigration. That’s why they are so anti-Trump, and no other reason.

      • Trump’s plan is a touch back amnesty for illegal immigrants. If NR were in the tank for amnesty they should be fine with him. Your assertion falls flat.

      • True. Alas, I’m afraid that the astonishing reality that the magazine of William F. Buckley is now openly supporting the election of a hard-left progressive for president is completely lost on a good portion of our colleagues on this otherwise fairly perceptive site. There’s not much else that can said . . .

        • NR is in no way supporting the election of a leftist. They’re only showing that in the question of the worse of two evils, they think Trump may be even worse. The strategy appears to be to get conservatives to look at their options (and there are at least five options available) and not settle for Trump at all.

          They’re saying to look at the long game. The ultimate enemy is Hillary. Don’t pick Trump in the short term, because (they argue) he’d be even worse than her.

    • +1. For any Trump supporter, other than on immigration, what is it that you like about him?
      Do you like that he is a snarky to his fellow candidates? Seriously what do people see in him? I know that politics is ugly but I have a hard time seeing Washington using Trumps language and mode of thought. Cruz is the most liberty minded. To sad that our country is going to get either Hilary or Trump. I won’t vote for either.

  6. “Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” NRA is “working hard” to promote gun control and citizen disarmament also. When NRA contract lobbyist for Illinois Todd Vandermyde put Duty to Inform w/ criminal penalties in Rep. Brandon Phelps HB183 “NRA backed” carry bill in 2013, it was the IL Chiefs of Police who pushed for DTI. Vandermyde handed it to them on a platter.

    Chief Tim McCarthy of Orland Park was president of the IL Chiefs when Vandermyde cut the deal on DTI in 2010/2011. That’s the same Tim McCarthy who was a Secret Service agent when President Reagan was shot, and the same Tim McCarthy who does press events WITH Jim & Sarah Brady to promote gun control.

    NRA and the Bradys’ are all on the same side. Promoting the criminal police state where armed citizens can be shot down at will with legal cover for the cops. Go team NRA!

      • Yeah I guess Ralph-demo boy is full of shite. The folks he vilifies are heroes in Illinois. Maybe Todd owes him $. BTW I HAVE sent $ to Ted Cruz-not just bitched on the interwebz. I trust the orange faced one only a tick more than the hildebeast. This country is sooooo screwed…

    • I have a tendency to bash the NRA from time to time and refuse to join for reasons I’ve explained elsewhere.

      But even I think your obsession with this is a waste of your time…and ours.

      • “But even I think your obsession..” Even I, reasonable and mild mannered guy that you are? Obsession? You pack a large amount of pride and condescension in one or two sentences. Luckily I studied 100 level logic and reasoning at a Land Grant institution when I was nineteen, so it’s easy to see that you are insulting, not so thinly disguised as world weary cynicism. Nice try though, more veiled than most of the crude losers. You might have a few years of education after high school. Perhaps junior college or a trade school?

        Besides insulting and lecturing others as to what subjects are acceptable to discuss from your lofty perch, were you ever trained in investigations or fact finding of any sort? The next time you judiciously criticize NRA in your fair minded manner, would you please ask Chris Cox or Chuck Cunningham at NRA-ILA if they have seen Todd Vandermyde’s FBI file? If that’s not too impolite for your tastes.

        They can have Vandermyde request his own FBI file for review as a condition of his continued employment. Vandermyde worked as a lobbyist for William Dugan, when Dugan was president of the Intl. Union of Operating Engineers local 150 in Countryside, Illinois, and was convicted by Chicago U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald in 2010. Some NRA members are a wee bit concerned that Vandermyde worked for a union that may have had some organized crime influence, and that the NRA lobbyist is writing bills that affect 12 million people in Illinois, plus all you good folks from out west that may pass through.

        Here’s the U.S. Attorney press release from October 14, 2010, should you deign to read it for yourself:
        https://www.fbi.gov/chicago/press-releases/2010/cg101410.htm

        • Sorry we all didn’t study “logic” at 19 demo dude. All I see is your OCD hard one for Todd V.and Co. THAT makes you a troll. Or a democrat operative. Or a Brady goon… Pray tell what have you done for Illinois gun rights?

  7. “Not Hillary Clinton. And not Donald Trump. The lesser of two evils?” -Perhaps. But when presented with two evils, you should always choose the lesser. Choosing not to choose is effectively a choice for the greater evil. People who chose not to choose in Obama v McCain and Obama v Romney and put Obama in the White House – both times.

  8. Infringement in all its forms inhibiting lawful self defense must end. Trump has a conceal permit, which opponent remaining has one as well? Also if he wins Super T, start investing in concrete and steel.

    • No way to know, unless they reveal it, as that information is private.

      We do know that Cruz filed a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Texas supporting Heller, in perhaps the most important case ever won regarding firearms freedom, so — there is that. And he’s a Texan, so … the odds are pretty good, but again, we don’t and can’t know unless the person in question decides to tell us.

    • If he wins Super T, start investing into guns and body armor.

      I don’t know what a Trump supporter riot will look like if he wins the nomination and then loses the general. But I doubt it’ll be pretty.

  9. I’m not buying all the Trump fear mongering. Whether he is personally pro or anti gun, I don’t care about either. You know why? Most of your favorite politicians are lying to you about everything, even the things they fight hardest for. They do this for personal gain. But succeess in fighting for their particular cause is directly linked to thier personal success. For instance, Rubio may not personally give two shits about abortion, but fights against it, to gain that support. Trump? Doing the same, likley. He’ll likley remain a friend to gun rights. It’s not certain, but WAY more certain than Hillary. With Hillary, we a garunteed a liberal SCOTUS justice and an AWB if the houses flip.

    • Interestingly, the National Review failed to even mention Supreme Court appointments when they argued that the country may actually be better off under a Hillary presidency. Their case was mainly that with Hillary the evil will be obvious, known, and will inspire a united Republican opposition to it, resulting in gridlock. It’s an interesting argument, but the Supreme Court argument is at least if not more compelling.

      Well, it may all be wrapped up tomorrow and might become academic. Or, maybe Cruz and/or Rubio will put up enough of a fight that the nomination will have to be earned state by state.

      • Raising the BS flag here on knowing Hillary’s faults somehow improves a RINO Congress..there is not one thing Obama has done that was “presidential”. He’s repeatedly lied to us while circumventing Congress at every opportunity. Yet this Congress has not used its powers to stop him. To suggest Hillary should be installed as the leader of the free world cause this Congress could control her is insanity.

  10. The purists are hilarious. Trump is winning, and is going to win, precisely because the hard line conservatives are not a large enough block of voters to stop him anymore. The party MUST abandon some of the past to survive, the people are just leaving it behind on too many issues. If you want to hold out for a “true” conservative, fine, but you’ll be doing it from the losing side as liberals run your business, family and liberty into the ground.

    • It’s amusing that you’re calling it “advance”, when what it is is basically the shedding of all the actual advances in right-wing conservative thought pretty much from Reagan on, and unwinding the clock all the way back to the “states rights” (i.e. “we want to be racist without federal interference”) Southern Democrat / new Republican platform of the 60s, except it’s country-wide this time.

      A real advance would be GOP reinventing itself as a mostly libertarian party. I’m still hopeful that, once Trump is done ruining it, libertarians will be the ones that benefit from the process of reassembling the pieces; but we shall see.

      • Both Republican and Democratic theories on government have been a nice experiment but they have both failed miserably. Partially to blames for their failure are Libertarianism and its other Utopian ideological partner Socialism for accelerating their demise.

        Utopian ideals always fail to recognize the human element, and rely entirely on everyone going along to get along. Humanity does not and will never work that way.

        Trump and Sessions are heralding a return to Nationalism and Cultural politics much as the founders intended. You can play at revisionist history but the truth is their vision for America is more aligned with the founding principles of this country than any politician going back to Lincoln.

        • Oh yes, I remember that Great Wall that they’ve built to keep the riff-raff and the Muslims out… under Jefferson, was it?

        • Libertarianism?? Really?? When has this country ever been libertarian or ever held libertarian ideals? There has always been control, regulation, and cronyism. Yea libertarians are the problem….wanting people to live their lives as they see fit leaving others alone….yea you are full of shit.

  11. Robert, perhaps a bit disingenuos to critisize Reagan signing the brady bill and then to go on to quote the nra as being a full stop supporter of 2a when, and correct me if I’m mistaken, but wasn’t it the nra that helped lay the ground work for California’s ridiculous gun laws with the melford act of 1967 with support of then senator Ron Reagan in response to the perceived threat of the black panthers and was in fact in full support of restricting 2a rights when it was a minorities turn to exercise said rights?

  12. In my dreams I would love to see a Cruz-Rubio ticket just to see the heads of liberals explode and to see if some of the liberals on TV actual go forth with their threat and leave the USA. It would be hard for the liberals to say the Republics hate Latino’s when there are two on the ticket.

    I am not sure that Trump would be horrifying. I believe he knows how to play the crowd, his position and words would soften once he goes into office. IMHO, he is either a RINO or Social Republican, not sure which but he is certainly not a conservative.

    Hillary is bought and paid for and is running on pure ego. She has promised to keep Obama’s policies and she has already tacking to the Left to make her base happy. She could have been the most centrist of candidates but that went out the door when she did not poll well.

    It is more likely than not I will vote for anyone other than Hillary because we do not need another 8yrs of Obamanomics. I do not care what the employment number say, I pass 16 homes for sale just on my way to the highway and 2 more with official foreclosure auction signs ( I can only assume governments do this to invite burglars and other into the neighborhood).

    In the end it will be purely about voter turn-out. Candidates on both sides suck, but which side will rally the most and hold their nose to win. The shifting of the court is held in the balance. This is more about voting for the SCOTUS of your political choice than who is POTUS because this is the nation we have become.

    If a Democrat gets into the WH, I predict the following: 1) Continued rise in gun sales 2) Continued ammo shortage 3) Pay raises for conservative talk show hosts as they have 8 yrs of bloviating to the crowd and crying into milk. 4) a stagnate economy not unlike what Japan is today. 5) People who did not vote on principle complaining the loudest in all the forums although they refused to vote.

  13. I’ve donated hundreds of dollars to Ted Cruz’s campaign (as well as Scott Walker, Rand Paul, and multiple other pro-gun candidates). Want to do something more effective than bitching on TTAG? Send pro gun political contributions, join the NRA, SAF, Calguns, FPC, and your local pro-gun group. Vote with your dollars. Fill out Firearms Policy Coalition letters opposing anti-gun bills. Write your opposition to things like the M855 ban in the future. Take a newbie shooting. Wear pro-gun clothes. Open carry if it’s available.

    There are a lot of “pro-gun” people sitting on their assess if the NRA only has 5 million member.

    Everyone who owns or cares about guns should vote in every election for either the most pro-gun candidate or furthest away from the known anti-gun candidates such as Sanders or Clinton.

    These actions are the ones that separate the talkers from the advocates.

  14. “Guns in the wrong hands is really the issue.”

    Sorry, but the actual issue is who gets to decide which hands are the wrong hands.

    The Second Amendment clearly states that the government not only does not have that authority, they are PROHIBITED from making such decisions: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” And this is further strengthened by the consideration that “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state…” since the creation of a militia to fight the imposition of a tyrannical government would be impossible if that same government had the authority and ability to decide in advance who may or may not keep and bear arms, and what arms they could keep and bear. The wording of the Second Amendment was thoroughly considered and is intentionally unambiguous.

  15. Trump openly mocks the fraudulent political system, and people mistake that for honesty. Make no mistake, he is very much a player in the system he mocks so well.

  16. My choices from favorite to despised are:
    Cruz > Rubio > Kasich > Trump > Sanders > Clinton

    If Trump wins the Republican primary, he is still a better choice than Sanders or Clinton. For one thing, as another commenter pointed out, he has a concealed handgun carry license. That alone puts him squarely ahead of Sanders or Clinton. (Note: if Trump becomes President, he will be the first in U.S. history to have a concealed handgun carry license.)

    There is another important angle to this: Trump’s son Eric Trump. He is definitely one of us “people of the gun” and I have no doubt that he will have a significant influence on Trump Sr.’s policy positions. This is a fairly big deal that few people ever seem to notice or mention.

  17. Screwed either way?
    Stop and think for a moment.

    The Second Amendment is teetering on the brink of extinction in the Supreme Court. Who is more likely to appoint a Justice (or three) who will save it? Who is more likely to appoint a Justice (or three) who will destroy it?

    Hint: A SCOTUS filled with Hillary appointees will make the 2A something we speak of in the past tense.

    God help us all.

    • A growing number of freedoms have gone past tense; people who recognize and exercise their 2nd Amendment rights should have been as alert and wary of the other rights that they silently watched flushed down the toilet.

  18. People who said “no way” to both Mitt Romney due to his soft RINO positions on many issues and people who said “no way” to McCain because he took on Sarah Palin as his running mate are exactly why we’ve got Barack Obama…. who Mr Farago also insisted was “never coming for our guns” or something to that affect.

    If people don’t like Trump and insist they are going to write in Daffy Duck for POTUS or just sit the election out, that’s fine… just don’t complain when Hillary Clinton does everything she said she’s going to do in regards to the 2nd Amendment.

    We know there’s a chance that Obama’s replacement will pick Scalia’s replacement. There’s also the possibility for another 2-3 justices to get replaced during the next POTUS tenure so think long and hard about which of these two are going to ensure there is a 2A to talk about in another 10 years.

  19. Trump and Sanders poll very well because they aren’t party politicians.

    Sanders is an independent (like Angus King from Maine), although he caucuses with the Demoncrats because that’s what socialists do.

    Likewise, Trump is an independent who has supported Republicans and Demoncrats because that’s what pragmatic businessmen do.

    Finally, We the People have been screwed by the Republicans and Demoncrats because that’s what politicians do.

    So now, society is in turmoil. The economy sucks, race relations are the worst I’ve seen since the heyday of the Civil Rights Movement, the divide between the police and the policed is wider that the Grand Canyon, the international situation is so bad that I’m nostalgic for the Cold War, and people want a real change.

    One thing I’m sure of. We won’t get a change — at least, not a change for the better — if that vile, crusty old b!tch wins the WH.

    • I’ve suspected from the start that Trump was put into place to guarantee a Hilary win. The media could have easily blacked him out as they did Ron Paul, instead they gave his antics unlimited coverage. Time will tell, but you can guarantee one thing, if Trump gets the nomination, the GOP will do their job and undermine him for a Hilary victory.

      • Some in the GOP are already saying “anyone but Trump” and strongly implying that means even Hillary would be a better choice.

        This should surprise nobody. Hillary will keep the status quo for Washington power brokers and elites… where-as Trump will almost definitely shake things up.

        The funny thing about Trump though is he really does appear to be the Teflon Don. Nothing sticks to that guy. They are throwing everything they can at him and he is polling better and better every week.

        If he is elected I think it’s going to be hilarious because for a change it will be the hard core Liberals that will be freaking out and building bomb shelters in their basements.

  20. Unless a dramatic shift occurs before voting begins tomorrow that results in Ted Cruz winning half of the Super Tuesday delegates, we will be voting in November for someone who could sink us at any moment over someone who will do everything in their power to sink us.

  21. who voted on Saturday for Clinton. “Nobody is talking about taking people’s guns away

    LIE!

    We are at terminal velocity. We tried the Bob Dole’s, McCain’s and Mittens route.

    The country is fed up with politicians. Especially RINO’s that burn us, ignore us, and pursue the establishment agenda.
    Tell us what we want to hear at election time and blow us off or cave to the Dems once inside the beltway. Lather, rinse, repeat.

    Rubio voted against CCW in Florida parks, because more whiny lib mayors got to him than pro gun folks. It passed anyway.

    Cruz talks a good game, but there is something about him not POTUS material.

    The tree of liberty needs to be shaken and pruned of its current diseased branches. And a Socialist, and possibly indicted corrupt woman ain’t the answer.
    So much more at stake.

  22. Not a fan of Trump, but won’t be the first time I’ve had to hold my nose while voting. Super Tuesday, Cruz is my guy. If nothing else RINOs politicians hate him And for those who have brought into “he’s a wacko”
    ‘ because he read Green Eggs and Ham, a child’s story book, he was reading it to his kids as a bedtime story, while filibustering. Just don’t sit on your hands or write in Mickey Mouse, and give the White House to Hilary.

  23. Trump’s conversion on the 2nd Amendment since that book was written has come from his own experiences and thanks to his two sons, Eric and Don Jr., his closest advisers, both of whom are rabidly pro-gun. Trump despite having one of the nearly impossible to obtain NYC CCW permits has realized he is prohibited from carrying in N.J. at one of his golf courses thus he now supports “National Concealed Carry” and has promised to enact it.

    We must take into account and understand many in the USA don’t think about “gun rights” as often as we do, some like Trump are occupied with their business (look at how he admitted neglecting his fist two wives for “business”) and only come to recognize what’s been happening when it directly affects them or when someone/somebody alerts them to what we’re facing.

    I commend Trump on his change, I don’t think he actually knew the difference between a semi-auto and a full auto and how they operated, I also don’t believe he was aware of the fact that the term “assault weapon” was created by the anti’s in order to demonize a particular class of firearms in order to influence and scare the uninformed (like he was at the time) into supporting the proposed ban.

    I appreciate when someone publicly admits they were wrong and that they’ve changed, it’s a sign of “strength” indicating they have “character’ and are “open” to hearing all sides (unlike our shrill opposition) thus I WILL be voting for Donald J. Trump.

    • Amen. How many of us were pro-gun 16 years ago? How many politically active and pro-gun?

      My entire close family has converted since then.

      • Double Amen. Trump’s sons purchase 12 gauge reloads, shoot and hunt with an acquaintance of mine. He tells me they are both extremely pro-Second Amendment and have educated their Father on this issue. That’s good enough for me to believe Trump will be supportive to all Americans on this issue.

        If Trump continues on his path to become the Republican nominee, anybody who stays home on election day and fails to cancel out a ghetto vote for Hillary is a fool and deserves the full radical socialist agenda that’s coming our way…..

  24. Sad to say, it is going to be between Trump and Hitlery. I am more of a Cruz person, but it just is not going to happen.

    • I WAS for Ted Cruz too that is until he allied with his sworn enemy, Mitch “The Chamber of Commerce Bitch” McConnell, and went to Mississippi to lead the smear campaign against TEA Party Mississippi Senate candidate Chris McDaniels (who won the Primary but lost the runoff to 80 yr old Thad Cochran). Cruz lead the charge tagging McDaniels as a KKK supporter and “racist”. I’ll be voting for Trump as Cruz went against his own declared principles for personal gain.

        • Since his “conversion” and announcing his candidacy Trump has NOT “flip-flopped” on ANY of his policies his competitors on the other hand saw how popular “The Donald’s” positions were with the electorate after initially criticizing them (his policies) and adopted them for themselves, they ARE the dishonest ones. Visit DonaldJTrump.com and read his position papers they are detailed explaining just what he will do as Commander & Chief.

          Get over it already, Donald J. Trump WILL be the GOP nominee it’s inevitable. As a former pollworker for over a dozen years and someone who talks to many of my voters when out in public and others in and around my area I can attest “conservatives”, unaffiliated & independent voters in addition to many blue-collar Democrats here in the NY/NJ Metro Region as well as Northeast Pennsy are chomping at the bit for the opportunity to cast their ballots for Trump (N.J.’s Primary is the first week of June).

          Add to what I’ve stated above even the Indian (Hindu) and Turkish (Muslim) immigrants who own the gas stations and convenience stores in my area support Trump and his policy including the one on “refugees”, the Blacks and “legal” Hispanics feel the same way, for them it’s Trump or no one.

  25. people are talking about voting Trump “to protect our rights”. Seriously? The guy has already taken positions that violate the First, 2nd, Fourth, and Eighth Amendments. You know that whole “no law respecting religion” part? How does a ban on people because of their religion fit into that? Oh yeah, he doesn’t care, because he’s “going to make America great again!”

    First Amendment? Let someone try to speak up with an opposing viewpoint at one of his rallies, and he offers to punch ’em in the face and practically cheers on a mob that assaults one of them. How’s that for protecting free speech?

    Want more free speech? He’s already vowed to change the laws so it’s easier to sue “journalists” for slander. Because that’s exactly what this country needs, right? Government intimidation of a free press?

    His avowed fascination with torture and killing terrorists’ families — exactly how do those square with the Eighth amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment?

    The fourth amendment? Demanding that Apple cave in to the FBI and build in a back door so the government can invade your privacy? He claims it’s a “one time exception” — yeah, how’s that worked out for government power before? And the Justice Department’s already said that it’s not just this one device, they’re already asking for 9 more.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/24/technology/justice-department-wants-apple-to-unlock-nine-more-iphones.html?_r=0

    So, yeah, i’ll admit he’s saying the right things on the 2A now… now, after saying many of the wrong things in the past. But he’s also saying absolutely terrifying things about a whole lot of our other rights. And that’s not years ago, that’s RIGHT NOW.

    This guy has zero knowledge of, or respect for, the Constitution of the United States of America. It is pure insanity to consider voting for him to lead this country.

    Yes, Hillary’s horrible. Yes, Bernie’s horrible. But Kasich doesn’t look that bad. Rubio is tolerable. And Cruz sounds pretty good. Why – why – why roll over and hand your country over to a guy who has zero respect for its highest law?

    • Because, as it turned out, a good half of Republican electorate doesn’t care about the Constitution, and never did. They cheered on the politicians who did, sure, but only because those politicians were saying other things they liked. Now that Trump is saying those things without the baggage, and explicitly moves it out of the way where it contradicts his promises, they’re ecstatic.

    • Eye-roller,

      “How does a ban on people because of their religion fit into that?”
      First of all, Trump most certainly was NOT calling for a ban of any religion. Rather, he was advocating to temporarily ban entry to foreign visitors and “refugees” who are Muslims. Given the fact that:
      (a) Muslims have killed over 3,000 people in our country in overt acts of terror/war since September 11, 2001,
      (b) Muslims have attempted dozens of mass murder events in our nation since September 11, 2001,
      (c) Muslims (Al Qaeda, Taliban, and ISIS) have declared war on the United States, and
      (d) Muslims terrorists have entered countries disguised as “refugees”
      There is a lot of merit to a temporary ban on foreign nationals entering our nation. Whether or not you like such a policy, it certainly does not indicate that the author of that policy is irrational or a lunatic.

      Keep in mind that I am not a Trump fan-boy as well.

    • Eye-roller,

      “First Amendment? Let someone try to speak up with an opposing viewpoint at one of his rallies, and he offers to punch ’em in the face and practically cheers on a mob that assaults one of them.”

      Newsflash: First Amendment does not mean that we get to disrupt someone’s speaking engagement. You have no right to shout over and interrupt a featured speaker at an event for that speaker. If you do that, you are a heckler and we call your actions disorderly conduct. There is nothing wrong with encouraging the people around that heckler to stop the heckler from interrupting the event.

      Again, I am not a Trump fan-boy.

    • Eye-roller,

      “He’s already vowed to change the laws so it’s easier to sue ‘journalists’ for slander.”

      I don’t know the details of these proposed changes. What I do know: if journalists do their homework and present facts, they cannot possibly be guilty of slander and have no worries. Given how poorly many journalists conduct themselves these days, I am thinking it might be good to give journalists more incentive to present facts and act with integrity.

      • The whole reason why US slander laws are considered “weak” is because, in order to find the defendant guilty, the plaintiff has to prove that they lied knowingly. If that bar is removed, the result will be like UK, where politicians sue journalists over any slight regardless of truth, because truth, or lack of mens rea, are no longer defenses. And it will, in practice, suppress free speech significantly because, facing a barrage of lawsuits, most major media outlets will prefer to settle and self-censor, rather than fight it in court, with an uncertain outcome, and with significant legal expenses even if they do prevail in the end.

        What Trump proposed wrt slander is nothing short of disastrous, and betrays his authoritarianism.

    • Eye-roller,

      “His avowed fascination with torture and killing terrorists’ families — exactly how do those square with the Eighth amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment?”

      First of all, I believe Trump was referring to terrorists in foreign countries. From an academic standpoint, our Eighth Amendment does not apply to foreign countries — much less enemy combatants in foreign countries. On a practical level, it is impossible to fight a war with zero collateral damage. If we can apprehend or kill a terrorist leader without harming the family, great. If our only chance to stop that terrorist leader unfortunately involves killing the terrorist leader’s family, so be it. Better that a few innocent people die than thousands of innocent people die. And, in the end, it is not explicitly OUR fault for killing the terrorist’s family members — that is the fault of the terrorist. Don’t try to kill us and your family will not be in jeopardy.

      As for torturing a terrorist captured in a foreign country, it certainly is not something that makes me feel warm and cozy. I also have GREAT concerns for our military capturing some person without any hard evidence which shows that he/she is a terrorist … and then going on to torture them anyway. That would be a horrific crime. I am not settled on this topic.

      • First, the Constitution does apply, broadly, to anyone who is under US jurisdiction. This includes POWs. It doesn’t mean that they get the full constitutional protections, as warfare has long been considered a major exception, and not just for the enemy – soldiers don’t get First Amendment free speech protection either, for example, nor Fourth Amendment protection against warrantless searches. But “cruel and unusual punishment” does apply in general, even if the bar may be lower (e.g. death penalty is considered “cruel and unusual punishment” for many civilian crimes, but wouldn’t be for the same crimes under martial law).

        Second, Constitution or not, there are some things that civilized people just don’t do. Like slavery, rape, and, yes, torture.

        Third, Trump didn’t just say that he’s okay with torture – he enthusiastically embraced it, and not just on utilitarian basis. He said that he’d “waterboard them, and much worse … even if it doesn’t work … because they deserve it”. In effect, he’s saying that ISIS has the right idea when they burn people in cages – it’s all about getting your revenge and satisfaction from it.

    • Eye-roller,

      I agree that Trump is wrong on the Fourth Amendment demanding that Apple create software access to their devices.

  26. I think it is going to be hilarious to see Trump as the nominee. It pisses off the R’s and D’s, alike, and that’s good enough for me.

    I’m not voting for Bernie the “I’m going to give free crap to everyone, ’cause Communis… I mean Socialism” Sanders or Hillary the “I don’t need to stinkin’ secured sever” Clinton…

    So, my vote is going to Trump. The system is broken, anyways. I figure why not get some good laughes before it’s over with.

  27. For starters I disagree the “. If you are not against any guntrol you are for all gun control” quote mine.
    I have guns. I own them. I practice regularly with them. I enjoy them and I agree with a background check. I also emphatically believe that no one as a civilian needs an assault weapon with armor piercing bullets and 20 plus round magazines.
    I also believe in and will demand my right to own them but please DO NOT TELL ME THAT I MUST BELIEVE ALL GUN CONTROL IS BAD.
    Some is good and necessary. The ridiculous nonsense of most gun control stands by most politicians though is not good gun control.

    • I also emphatically believe that no one as a civilian needs an assault weapon with armor piercing bullets and 20 plus round magazines.
      Wait until you stare down three armed thugs and you will not think so.
      As far as armor piercing goes, most rifle rounds go through most bullet proof vests. M855 is not really all that great.

    • Some is good and necessary. The ridiculous nonsense of most gun control stands by most politicians though is not good gun control.
      There is no good gun control because it is all proposed and run by power seeking gun grabbers who cater to statists of both low and elite classes. The larger problem with “good” gun control is that criminals do not follow rules and laws and purchase through gun stores, they get their guns from the illegal drug river. Gun control only helps the criminals.

    • Actually, you are for all gun control. Did you happen to read the last assault weapons ban? Read it, then get back to me.

  28. If Trump was truly sincere about his 2A position, he would sit down with Cam on the NRA show for 30 minutes and do questions and answers. 10 seconds of unchallenged mic time is not enough. Nor is “I’m very strong on the Second Amendment.” This issue is too important. I don’t want some long sentence with a “but” in the middle of it after he sees another mass shooting.

    • Read Trump’s position on the 2nd Amendment for yourself (https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/second-amendment-rights) it’s spelled out in black & white. Use the bar on the page and read where he stands on other issues.

      You must remember unlike but ALL of one of his adversaries Trump is NOT a “polished” “politician”, he can be bit scatter-brained (he doesn’t use a teleprompter) at rallies and debates BUT in one-on-one interviews if he’s NOT being constantly interrupted (which he ALWAYS is it’s a tactic the dishonest media uses to get candidates they hate off their game) he explains his policies in detail.

  29. I suspect Mr Holson may exist, but the writers chose to embellish his claims. He’s probably a Fudd with a few Remingtons (nothing wrong with that) who didn’t feel affected by the AWB so he doesn’t much care if it comes back, until the gun-controllers decide that his Remingtons are a “problem”.

    Mr Holson, learn your history – gun control never stops somewhere unless good people intervene. Unchecked, gun control, everywhere in the world, has never stopped. Even in gun-control paradises like Australia, Europe, and France, the lawmakers constantly whittle away at what little gun rights the people have left.

    Yes, it’s true – Australia embarked on a wholesale confiscation move on most rifles and most pistols. That wasn’t enough. Their latest target is lever-action shotguns.

    • Late to the party today, since I was offline yesterday, but it looks like there really is a Graham Holson. Here is an obituary from three years ago.

      Frances “Frankie” Graham Holson

      web posted January 14, 2013
      EDGEFIELD – Mrs. Frances “Frankie” Graham Holson, 93, wife of the late Robert L. Holson, Sr., died Saturday January 12, 2013.

      Graveside Services will be held Tuesday January 15, 2013 at 11 A.M. at Sunset Gardens Memorial Park in Edgefield.

      Mrs. Holson was born in McClellanville, S.C. and was a member of Edgefield United Methodist Church. She was a retired School Teacher.

      Survivors include 1 daughter-in-law- Marlene Holson; 1 Grandson- Graham Lee Holson.

  30. All I know is that “the establishment” (RINOs/sellouts) and Liberals (of ALL stripes) hate Trump, they despise him and wish him dead if just for that I’d vote for him but there are many other reasons to cast my ballot in his favor. Can you imagine the level of “butthurt” (it’ll be epic) when Trump is declared the winner before midnight in November? Imagine how defeated and despondent all those despicable Leftists who foisted Obama upon us despite his inadequacies and inexperience and enabled his crippling of our nation will be, they will either commit suicide in despair or leave never to be heard from again, THAT is called “WINNING”.

    • I think that fucking up a whole country just because someone would hate it goes more under the category of vandalism… just on a massive scale.

      And Trump is a troll. All it takes to see the obvious is watching one of the debates. He is very literally trolling everyone on stage, just like internet trolls do – carefully timed insults, personal remarks, and very little substance.

      Given that everything the man says can therefore be considered not genuine, what he’ll actually do is elected can only be guessed. I actually wouldn’t be all that surprised if he ends up being a decent moderate president with a thing for economic protectionism, and all of that Muslim ban and wall BS just fades into obscurity. But, I don’t know. No-one does.

      • And just who “fucked up” our country? It sure as hell WASN’T Donald J. Trump I can tell you that, he’s NEVER held elected office. Ok, so he did contribute to politicians, politicians of ALL stripes, yes Democrats, Republicans, conservatives, liberals and middle of the road office holders, name ONE, just ONE, well known “businessman” who hasn’t.

  31. Your Mistake was not to make ron and rand paul winning the elections and getting them 4 praesident …………

    Now trump is the “best” 4 gun owners

  32. Can a man change his long held beliefs? And can you believe him? We will all answer that question when we walk into the voting booth.
    There is an interview with Donald Trump’s two sons on the Shooting USA program on the Outdoor Channel. In the Shot Show 2016 episode the two sons speak about the love for hunting reloading and gun collecting. I have not seen pictures of them doing these things. But one of the sons works for a firearms company.
    Donald Trump jr. works for Creedmoor Sports INC. He was wearing the company badge as a ammunition buyer at the shot show.
    The father has said he two sons changed his mind on guns and the second amendment. It is news to me his sons work in the firearms industry.

    • Trump’s sons reload? Now THAT’S being “fiscally responsible” unlike Syphilitic Slick Willy Clinton who admitted taking a drag off a joint offered by a friend and not inhaling (if you believe him). When Billy Boy said that I said to my wife “that’s ‘fiscally irresponsible’ wasting his friends money, I can’t vote for him” (besides other reasons). Just for the fact that even with their wealth Trump’s sons have learned to and are reloading their ammo is an indication they were raised correctly ie. not to waste money.

Leave a Reply

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