Home » Blogs » BREAKING: President Trump Hints At New Gun Control Laws

BREAKING: President Trump Hints At New Gun Control Laws

Robert Farago - comments No comments

“President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US will ‘be talking about gun laws as time goes by’ in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting, the nation’s deadliest in modern history,” CNN reports. He had even less to say about the prospects of the SHARE Act, which would deregulate silencers . . .

The President was asked about a gun bill currently making its way through the House that would loosen restrictions on purchasing gun silencers. Trump said that he would talk about that later.

thehill.com reports that one of the President’s former advisors had a stern warning for his former boss, should the NRA-supported Commander-in-Chief decide to “pivot” towards federal gun control . . .

Former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon reportedly said it would be “impossible” for President Trump to move to the left on gun control following the deadly mass shooting in Las Vegas, adding that it would be the “end of everything.”

The president’s former top aide also told the news outlet that it would be “actually worse” for Trump among his base of supporters if he backed gun control legislation than if he backed an amnesty bill for undocumented immigrants.

Well, presidential support for a new federal gun control measure would certainly be the end of a great deal of the former reality TV star’s core support.

Photo of author

Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the former publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

0 thoughts on “BREAKING: President Trump Hints At New Gun Control Laws”

  1. The accuracy/understanding of firearms and how they are used/function in regards to tripod/bipod or any bump fire devise is circumspect when it come to the fake news/maine stream media.

    Reply
  2. To claim that such a statement, in that context, somehow “hints” at new gun control laws is utterly specious speculation – so much so that even the linked CNN article couldn’t even make that leap with a straight face. In fact, they even quoted Sarah Sanders:

    “There’s a time and place for a political debate, but now is the time to unite as a country,” Sanders said. “There’s currently an open and ongoing law enforcement investigation, a motive is yet to be determined and it would be premature for us to discuss policy when we don’t fully know all the facts or what took place last night.”

    Which, coincidentally, is exactly how I would have interpreted Trump’s original comment – at least, devoid of any attempt to project some secret intent on his part to enact gun control.

    Reply
  3. reports that one of the President’s former advisors had a stern warning for his former boss, should the NRA-supported Commander-in-Chief decide to “pivot” towards federal gun control . . .

    Former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon reportedly said it would be “impossible” for President Trump to move to the left on gun control following the deadly mass shooting in Las Vegas, adding that it would be the “end of everything.”

    The president’s former top aide also told the news outlet that it would be “actually worse” for Trump among his base of supporters if he backed gun control legislation than if he backed an amnesty bill for undocumented immigrants.

    Well, presidential support for a new federal gun control measure would certainly be the end of a great deal of the former reality TV star’s core support.

    The President should heed the sound advise of his former advisers if he should care to be reelected in the future.

    Reply
  4. From what is printed here, I’m not detecting any gun control legislation. What am I missing. Seems like he is diverting questions, which is acceptable to me, as we don’t want to draw any more attention to guns than we must to get this behind us.

    Reply
    • You’re not missing anything. The headline is dishonest clickbait, and Trump’s statement is nothing more than a noncommittal “I want to talk about something else” deflection.

      But sites like TTAG get more hits when gun owners are ginned up about fears of gun control, so those flames must be fanned.

      Reply
  5. Major gun control usually comes when there’s an incident like the one in Las Vegas and Republicans are pressured by looming elections to join with Democrats. Case-in-point: GHW Bush and the GFSZ Act. Trump will move toward another ‘assault weapons’ ban and much more, such as magazine capacity restrictions. Ryan and McConnell, same deal. It’s a done deal so buy your ARs and such now.

    Reply
  6. Wow, I knew the HPA was toast but if he actually reverses on this like he did with Obungocare and foreign policy it would be throw me for a loop for sure. He would go down in the history books as one of the greatest villains ever.

    He doesn’t need to comment on SHARE because it’s not getting to his desk now. Why inflame the media more?

    Reply
  7. As I predicted yesterday the idiotic new silencer bill is now dead and gone forever even among die hard Republicans. Its politically an impossibility as people are now realizing how much worse the Las Vegas mass murders would have been if the nut case had had silencers on his guns. The crowd would have been even slower to realize they were being shot at and the direction of the fire would have been more confusing for the police who were trying to locate where the shots were coming from. Even broken windows could have easily been missed by eyesight from 400 yards away if it had not been for the sound of the gun fire coming from them. Again the new silencer bill was pure lunacy right from the beginning and it took just one more mass killing to wake people up as to its absurdity.

    Reply
  8. WHERE’S THE FING OUTCRY OVER THE PEOPLE WHO WERE TARGETED?

    Kind of convenient for a dbag from NV to go shooting up a huge crowd of most-likely conservatives.

    John Rich sang “GOD Bless America” 90 minutes before the shooting and the whole crowd joined in.

    Looks like another POS (D) job – just sayin.

    Reply
  9. Likely the reason it took the popo SEVENTY TWO MINUTES to breach is that they were complying with “contact prior to arriving” BS. Or something.

    Reply
  10. Murphy acknowledged that it’s not yet clear if stronger background checks would have prevented Sunday’s shooting, but argued that it could have saved dozens of others who are shot, on average, each day in the United States.

    I’ll take How To Politicize An Atrocity for $200, Alex.

    OMG! This evil thing happened! We’d better enact more restrictions on law-abiding people, even though those restrictions wouldn’t have done squat to prevent what happened. But never mind that. Look at this shiny object over here…

    Reply
  11. “Looks like another POS (D) job – just sayin.”

    From TTAG commenter- Mark Kelly’s Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist’s Dummy.

    “Read & Weep: https://twitter.com/paydirt101/status/915043092088188929

    Shooter was a DEMOCRAT since 1984 when he was in Palm Beach Fl.

    Additionally Kevin Martin (a Black Conservative) working for President Trump’s administration as an advisor reports that the shooter belongs to nearly ALL the same “anti-Trump” Facebook groups as Scalise shooter James Hodgkinson including being OFA/Obama and big Rachel Maddow fan. Scroll down his page to see the post: https://www.facebook.com/kevv.martin?ref=br_rs#

    “The shooter, Stephen Craig Paddock, 64.. a white liberal Democrat, hated President Trump and spoke openly about his political views. They are as follows…

    Political Views per his Facebook page:
    -Proud to Be A Democrat
    -The Rachel Maddow Show​
    -Thank You Obama
    -Anti-Trump Army
    -Progressive Day,
    Organizing for Action (Soros)
    -Not My President
    -Fight Trump
    -Boycott All Things Trump
    -Impeach Trump

    I am sharing, because the media won’t.”

    Reply
  12. I don’t think Trump is going to run for a second term. So that’s out. Trump would fear impeachment, when our elected officials do not stand up for our Constitution, an oath they swore to uphold, does that not make them traitors? …

    Reply
  13. Can you imagine if the guy had a flying saucer with laser armaments and drop pods full of shape-shifting lizard alien shock troops?

    The carnage would have been unbelievable. Thank Christ this wild hypothetical can be the basis of public policy!

    Reply
  14. Bulldoze CT on to barges and sink them out in the Atlantic.

    CT is a piss ant little state that likes to dictate, and they can ALL STFU and go sit at the kiddie table.

    F them all.

    Reply
  15. Great photo of Senator Chris Murphy with his mouth in the default position. This probably applies to most other politicians, too.

    Reply
  16. Yeah, the only sense you can use to detect a shooter is bullet noises. (facepalm) Not sure if lying or just ignorant.

    Even if the bullets were magically completely silent, I still think the hail of bullets and smashed windows would have given you SOME hint as to his whereabouts.

    Reply
  17. Folks need to start looking at hotel web sites for firearm policy. I was at the Post Oak Hilton in Houston a couple of weeks ago and found they were a gun free zone. The only folks allowed to have guns on the property are on duty police and military. Not even off duty or retired police. Time to start voting with our money.

    Reply
  18. Big problem with this line of thought:

    The guy had a clean record and routinely passed background checks. Had he wanted to silence his rifles, he easily could have. He had clearly been planning this attack for a long time, a 1 year wait for some cans would not have been a barrier. Making suppressors easier to get has no bearing whatsoever on this.

    So what’s the noise?

    Reply
  19. When you believe and follow false narratives, you are hostage to their inevitable outcomes. Problem, reaction, solution. Lone wolf, white shooter, no known motive, limited firearm experience, multiple reports of more than 1 shooter, no political or religious affiliations….right as 2 pro gun pieces of legislation were looking promising. What timing.

    Reply
  20. “Up to 99.9 percent of the weapons that are used in these shootings are legally obtained.”

    A) And if the shooters passed the vetting process the first time, what would keep them from getting through the new vetting processes? Just knowing, in your heart of hearts, that the next time will make a difference?

    B) If registries aren’t about confiscation, then how does this ‘annual safety check’ have any use, if it doesn’t result in confiscation of guns from people who don’t pass?

    Reply
  21. I’m not surprised. In NYC criminals own guns while the law abiding citizen can’t obtain a Conceal Carry Permit. The law abiding citizen in NYC has become a target, a victim because of people like this individual and his asinine recommendations.

    Gun Control laws only affect law abiding citizens.

    Firearms don’t kill people, people kill people!

    Reply
  22. Mr. Police Commissioner said “..a hundred rounds a second..” in the audio clip.

    He’s one that needs to be checked for mental clarity to own a weapon since it’s his idea.

    And his big idea of yearly mental checks is a rabbit hole that no rational person wants to pursue.

    Reply
  23. “And it it [sic] time to end the political career of any political figure who made his way to the White House dog-whistling to his Second Amendment people.” First off, Donald Trump was explicit in his support to “his Second Amendment people.” A “dog-whistle” is “a subtly aimed political message which is intended for, and can only be understood by, a particular group.” Keith is saying Trump is subtle. Additionally, every time I hear about a dog whistle, it’s someone claiming that some phrase is a message intended for people like me, but they are the particular group that understood it. All these politicians are whistling to the wrong dogs. This along with the terrorism bit just goes to show that Keith doesn’t understand what words mean.

    Secondly, I stopped by my Congressman’s local office today to voice my support for any and all pro-2A legislation. Specifically stating that what happened in Vegas has not changed my stance.

    Reply
  24. Surprising nobody, Commissioner No Safir asserts a “right” (to be “free from harm”), then doesn’t even try to connect what he proposes to being “free from harm.” Indeed, he proposes imposing harms on people who have done nothing wrong, making us No Safir.

    Explain how any of this helps, in your own terms.

    Oh, wait; surveillance, registration, restrictions don’t have to do any good when they are the point, themselves.

    In order to do that in a civilized society we maybe have to give up a little bit of our privacy . . . I understand that this individual had posted things on social media [ED: no reports confirm this assertion]. The police need to do more mining of social media.

    We need to make people responsible for the guns they own. I’m not saying that we should do away with Second Amendment rights. What I’m saying is, for instance, we should have a required safety check every year of somebody who purchases a gun. Bring in your weapon.

    There should be a database for police departments and federal agencies of people who have been sex offenders, mentally disturbed where e before you get a gun these people have to be cleared in order to process them.

    I know the NRA will be against it but until we start doing sane things about weapons possession this is going to happen unfortunately again. Up to 99.9 percent of the weapons that are used in these shootings are legally obtained.

    Reply
  25. Filmed himself, eh? Well, that is truly demented. But at least it disproves the conspiracy theory making it around the interwebs that unidentified ISIS terrorists invaded his room, committed the shooting, and then made it look like he’d done it himself. Hey, at least it is a better theory than the guy who posted–as he always does–that this was a false flag event and all of the wounded were paid actors. Now HE bears “watching.” (I am certain that he believes–fervently–that he already is. But of course, if his beliefs were true, he’d have disappeared already.)

    Reply
  26. Falling for it indicates he would be tricked or fooled into agreeing. That spineless jellyfish is going to hop in with that harpy whole heartedly.

    Reply
  27. Pelosi lacks any “common sense” in demanding special counsels now to determine any gun control BS! The victims aren’t even cold in their graves yet and all she can do is flap her lips (NOT the ones she talks with)!

    Reply

Leave a Comment