Trump: ‘We’re Going to Seriously Look’ At Banning Suppressors

President Trump Piers Morgan Suppressor Silencer

Courtesy – Good Morning Britain and Twitter

Earlier this week, as President Trump was readying to leave for the UK for the 75th Anniversary of D-Day, the President stated he didn’t like suppressors. While in London, the President sat down with Piers Morgan about the subject of suppressors and guns in America came up.

While it’s dangerous to put too much credence into his off-the-cuff comments, President Trump seemed to indicate that he’ll consider banning suppressors as a response to the shooting in Virginia Beach.

“Well, I’d like to think about it. I’m going to seriously look at it.”

On the other side of the equation, he defended civilian firearm ownership. When talking about the Bataclan Theatre massacre, the President told Morgan . . .

“If there was a gun on the other side it would have never happened.”

When asked why people want to own semi-automatic rifles, the President said . . .

“A lot of them use them for entertainment. They go out and shoot at ranges.”

On the discussion of gun rights, the President bounced all over the place. It appears that the President is in favor of banning suppressors, but defended the fact that armed law-abiding people stop armed criminals and smacked Morgan down by pointing out London’s rampant knife-related crime.

He jumped from targeting the Second Amendment to defending the individual right to keep and bear arms. So is he a firearms friend or foe? You decide and let us know in the comments.

comments

  1. avatar Texheim says:

    moments like these and he’s a real jack ass

    1. avatar Baffle says:

      Piers Morgan, Trump, suppressors, ban, all in one sentence.

      Will someone please explain how this is winning. Feels like losing to me. Is there a chance that Trump lied to us? Good thing the NRA has his back. I sure don’t.

      1. avatar Ing says:

        The president is a Fudd.

        1. avatar WI Patriot says:

          Feel free to vote for on of the 25 or so dems that are vying for POTUS, or perhaps you’d prefer to write in hillary…

          DOLT!!!

        2. avatar Ing says:

          Thanks for giving me permission. I’ll tell the Democrats you sent me.

        3. avatar OBOB says:

          “””WI Patriot
          Feel free to vote for on of the 25 or so dems that are vying for POTUS, or perhaps you’d prefer to write in hillary…
          DOLT!!!”””

          its 68 now….lol…like a parade of clowns!

      2. avatar AQ says:

        Please…the NRA is in on this as well.

        1. avatar Thixotropic says:

          Proof?

      3. avatar Southern Cross says:

        I’ll give the president the benefit of the doubt that he doesn’t know the legal status is suppressors in general and doesn’t know, like the rest of us, the legal status of the suppressor used in the recent incident.

        Hopefully someone briefs him soon.

    2. avatar MB says:

      In my mind, it’s a GHWB “Read My Lips, No New Taxes” moment….. people believed him, and when he went back on his word, as they all do, well, we can thank GHWB for Billary Clinton. Coming off a very positive note from the recent NRA speech, this was not very bright unless it’s another DJT negotiating strategy. Time will tell.

      1. avatar Draven says:

        in the case of GWHB, he couldn’t do anything… the dems had both houses of congress and *wanted* to prove him wrong after he said that

        1. avatar MB says:

          He did not veto the bill, if he did, the bill might not have made in by 2/3 when it went back to congress. Bush agreed to a compromise, which increased several existing taxes as part of a 1990 budget agreement.

    3. avatar Noel Singletary says:

      If he does ban them, he can kiss 2020 goodbye. I know I won’t be voting for him if he bans them. Hands off the second amendment.

      1. avatar Rich says:

        I hear ya Noel but what is the alternative for 2020? The Democrats want all our guns. Personally Trump made a comment, he won’t follow up with it.

        1. avatar knowNothing says:

          Refusing to make a statement by not voting for those who take your rights sends the message that you don’t care about your rights and they will not think twice about limiting them further.

        2. avatar AQ says:

          “I hear ya Noel but what is the alternative for 2020? The Democrats want all our guns. Personally Trump made a comment, he won’t follow up with it.”

          You apparently still believe we live in a two-party political system in America. Nothing could be further from the truth.

          Trump made a comment about slide fire devices, and he DID follow up with it…and illegally. What makes you think he won’t follow up on his words this time?

          What is the alternative for 2020? I’m not sure, but I’ll tell you what isn’t an alternative…another election.

        3. avatar B.D. says:

          YOu continue to vote for parties that don’t care about you. How about a vote that actually changes things?

        4. avatar Mad Max says:

          And he likely won’t follow-up because no one is really making a big deal about it; not even a photo of the alleged suppressor. Also, the cops haven’t said it contributed to the death toll or really made any difference.

          I think it is possible that it was either homemade, a fake suppressor and subsonic ammo, or not a suppressor.

        5. avatar Mark says:

          Primary the slime. No need for “Not Democrat” excuse-makers or “A vote for third parties is a vote for the Other” cowards.

      2. avatar Marc Mulkey says:

        You can’t just not vote for someone because of one or two issues. Would you rather have someone like Biden in there? Or any of the other liberal clowns who are campaigning HARD against people even having guns at all?

        Gotta pick your battles, man. And sometimes you have to be willing to lose one thing to gain 10 others.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          As far as 2A goes, we have lost enough already. There is no room for interpreting “Shall not be infringed”. If we live in a system where we are constantly giving up 1 or 2 things because parties sway their allegiance to the highest bidder, wouldn’t you agree that instead of compromising we should change it? Republicans and Democrats are the same shit, just a different toilet.

        2. avatar User1 says:

          What is easier to defend against: the repealing of the 2nd Amendment or a slow passage of infringements?

          I heard for like 9 years that a foreign born black Muslim was going to take all our guns. His AG and ATF buddies were going to strip us of everything. Everyone was saying to go out and get what you can while you can because Sandy Hook is going to be the nail in the coffin.

          Today I am hearing that a white anti American Satan worshiper is going save us from the big bad Commie multiculturalists who seek to unite Americans under European socialism. Yet there is more gun control being passed in the last 3 years than the 8 prior. The president is more worried about arming Muslims in another country than Americans. There is now an anti constitution AG who wants gun confiscation for law enforcement and an anti gun law enforcement officer becoming the ATF director. There are Republicans like Dan Crenshaw calling for precrime powers under Homeland Security for law enforcement that will combine with other Republican/Decmocrat red flag laws.

          Republicans are setting up a stronger police state and are passing gun confiscation powers for that police state before the Democrats take back control. It happened under Bush before Obama. Then Obama used it to spy on everyone and anyone.

          It’s like the Republicans and the Democrats are playing tennis with the American people. Then the Republican voters say at least the Republicans don’t hit us as hard as the Democrats, be happy about it and don’t change a thing. So under Republicans the hits are still coming and some of us are willing to absorb all of them because the Democrats know how to swing their racket well. That sounds like a bunch of pathetic scared losers willingly taking the smaller racket up the butt and asking for more.

          Please, sir! I want some more.

          The government you elect is the government you deserve.

        3. avatar Ing says:

          User1, you have it right.

          The is the cycle repeating itself. Bush set up the toolkit, Obama weaponized it. Trump expands the toolkit even further, the next Democrat in line turns even more powerful weapons on us. Wash, rinse, repeat.

          How the hell do we STOP it, is what I want to know.

        4. avatar B.D. says:

          Nobody likes the answer to “How to stop it”. You say it here and people start chiming in about you being a mall ninja. But the answer is very clear. Even most gun owners would refer to people who side with the only answer, which results in violence – as a means to end conflict of course (the responsible violence) – because they are complacent, and cannot fathom the idea of it working, or giving up their daily routines. Sadly, they are correct, because we have no organization and without mass gathering to organize, the forces who will carry out tyrannical orders such as the police and military, would not be forced to see the opposing sides refreshing the tree of liberty until a very bloody actual war has broken out. Someone said it here before “You take the kings shillings, you carry out the kings orders.” I did so in OIF and OEF, and made a commitment to myself that I would never fight for tyrants again. So the real answer is: War.

    4. avatar Howdy1 says:

      I think I would like to hear from John Boch on this.

      1. avatar User1 says:

        What does John have to say about Trump arming the Muslims in the middle east while he banned bump fire stocks, called for red flag laws and is now looking into suppressors like he did bump stocks?

    5. avatar Bill says:

      Out of context.

      So Trump when talking about banning suppressors said “Well, I’d like to think about it. I’m going to seriously look at it.”

      Is NOT the same as Trump said “I am going to seriously take a look at banning suppressors”.

      This is being read two different ways, one way is putting words into his mouth.

      The first implies that its an issue that needs attention and will be reviewed, even if its a yes or no.

      The way this article implies is that he wants to ban it and is going to seriously try hard, this is adding information that isn’t there.

      Again, read the title, it almost appears to sayL
      Trump says we are going to seriously look at banning suppressors.
      It should be titled : When asked about banning suppressors, Trump responds “Well, I’d like to think about it. I’m going to seriously look at it.”

      1. avatar Red in CO says:

        What’s wrong with you? I, and many others, gave him the benefit of the doubt when he said some stupid shit about banning a chunk of plastic. We know how that turned out and he no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt. Fool me once….

      2. avatar B.D. says:

        So naive. No wonder you voted for the idiot.

        SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

    6. avatar HillBilly from Hell says:

      Fuck this Shit. Everyone needs to stop being afraid of 2020.

      So a Democrat wins.

      So the fuck what?

      We were stuck with NObama 8 years and we flat out beat him on gun control. WE won. He admitted it was his greatest defeat. We can beat the next democrat too. We don’t need to live on our knees for Trump in fear of a Democrat boogeyman. He’s erasing our rights as fast as the leftists do anyway. The GOP will be forced back into defending gun rights then we can regain initiative for 2024. This isn’t a war we’re going to win this decade or even this century. It’s going to go on forever. We need to start playing the game like the Asians do.

      1. avatar Landen R Gulick says:

        Well said the 8 years with Obama zero gun legislation was passed because gun owners united and defended our rights, now the sheeple now believe that because Trump is a Republican everything is safe. Ya right, we need to stand up and always keep a close eye on whoever is in office republican or democrat. It’s like the gun owners are asleep, hopefully, they are awake now.

      2. avatar SuzySig says:

        We didn’t all win in the Obummer years.
        NV had a few set backs as his parting shots.
        Now…. the state is going to hell in a hand basket and there seems no stopping it.
        I’m with those who say our only hope may be a civil war.

    7. avatar frank speak says:

      this asshole doesn’t seem to want our support…and he’s likely not to get it….

  2. avatar Shire-man says:

    Does anybody in Washington actually own and shoot? I know some say they do but when they open their mouths they come off as not knowing jack shit about anything.
    Losing bumpstocks sucked but there is way more money in peoples suppressors. Having thousands of dollars of your personal property taken by ignorant asshats for what amounts to no reason at all is outrageous.

    1. avatar Wiccabilly says:

      They’ll probably do it by leaving suppressors on the NFA and just closing the registry just like they did with full autos. Half the people with suppressors will probably get real excited since their range toys suddenly became a retirement plan.

      1. avatar Anymouse says:

        There’ll be millions of suppressors v. 141k transferable machine guns. Suppressors would go up in value, but people won’t be paying $10ks for a suppressor unless there was some else extraordinary about it. Besides the greater supply, suppressors don’t have the thrill factor of a machine gun. I’m not aware people dropping a couple hundred bucks to rent suppressors at a range for the afternoon. They’re utilitarian and the novelty wears off after a couple shots. Using a suppressed gun so we can eliminate ear pro is great with a beginner or while hunting, but electronic ear pro is a similar experience for $100-200. Hunting hogs is TX might be an irreplaceable application, but I don’t think the demand is enough to command premium pricing.

        1. avatar Landen R Gulick says:

          Fudd much.

      2. avatar IN Dave says:

        The registry was closed because of the Hughes amendment. It required passing the house, senate, and presidential signature. I don’t see it getting to trump’s desk. Now the argument can be made that this didn’t stop trump with bump stocks however this was done only after the NRA asked for it. I doubt this happens this time around. The problem is trump doesn’t know anything about guns. It was easier for him to say we are going to look at it and the conversation was over. If he said he doesn’t support suppressor ban then he would be asked why and he doesn’t know. Remember this is the same guy that made Diane Feinstein orgasmic by say he want to “look” at her assault weapons ban and now he is supporting ar15 ownership. As long as the NRA doesn’t support it, it will go away.

        1. avatar Nickel Plated says:

          That’s a pretty big “as long as…” you’re betting on there.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      “Does anybody in Washington actually own and shoot?” No, they don’t. And, what’s worse, they really don’t much care. Doesn’t matter if they’re a “D” or an “R” America’s retail politicians are cut from the same cloth. They think that keeping their job is the same as doing their job and so emerging political issues are always seen in terms of voting demographics.

      Piers Morgan is a sharp guy with a well honed production staff. He knows how the prez likes to riff on topical issues and so gun-controller Morgan worked up a provocative gun-control question and successfully mousetrapped the president. There were undoubtedly high fives all around the studio when Trump bit on the suppressor question.

      Trump, like most people, decode “suppressor” to mean “silencer” which they understand from movies as rendering a deadly weapon so silent that it’s report can’t be heard. Since his other comments about gun ownership and the need for people to defend themselves were quite cogent, let us hope that the people who set him straight about such fundamental 2nd Amendments issues will also bring him up to speed on noise suppressors. He obviously thinks they make guns go “pifft” “pifft”. Just like in the movies. Should he know better? Of course. Does he know better? Nope.

  3. avatar TomD in CO says:

    Will the NRA continue to stand behind him with comments like this?

    1. avatar Memetastic says:

      Too busy standing behind interns, in apt paid for with your $.

      1. avatar Sal Chichon says:

        Zing!

    2. avatar AQ says:

      “Will the NRA continue to stand behind him with comments like this?”

      Did the NRA challenge his illegal slide fire ban? Nope.

      Answer: Yes, the NRA will continue to stand behind him.

      1. avatar Anymouse says:

        The unindicted leadership? Yes. The rank and file? Not so much, especially if he takes action to limit or ban them. In a perfect world, he looks at it seriously, learns that they’re a safety device, and pushes for deregulation. Realistically, I expect him to shut up about it and do nothing once he reaches American soil and his handlers get ahold of him.

  4. avatar Ransom says:

    This might work out! Now that Trump has stated that he doesn’t Like suppressors the anti-trumpers will probably embrace them, suddenly seeing their usefulness.
    “If Americans must use firearms at Least they should be able to protect their hearing and their children’s hearing. Why does Trump hate Children and ears so much! Not my president!”

    1. avatar Andy says:

      Who is the quote from? Particularly the last sentence, “Not my President!” Um, yes he is. Just like the dumbass Obama was your president and every president that has ever been since the speaker has been alive. Just because someone doesn’t like the President doesn’t mean they are not their President. As far as POTUS remarks on suppressors, I believe he is only making that statement to appease all the anti screamers. After all can you really hate something you know nothing about?

      1. avatar rt66paul says:

        I read the same thing about suppressors after the flustecluck in Las Vegas, right here on TTAG.

        Trump used gun owners to get elected. While I mostly like what he has done, he is not pro 2A.

        1. avatar surlycmd says:

          Making the deal has always been Trump’s upmost passion. He will trade just about anything to get what he wants.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        You are confusing presidents with kings, Andy.

        1. avatar Andy says:

          Touche John. Is there really any difference anymore?

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          No difference as far as I can tell these days, Andy.

          Carry on, my friend.

      3. avatar Wiregrass says:

        I don’t think of Trump as My President just as I never thought of Bush or Obama as My President either. He’s the Chief Executive of one branch of the Federal Government. Treating Presidents like we are their subjects and allowing them to assume power as if they are is how we got into this fix in the first place.

      4. avatar RandomNYer says:

        Things you know little about are the easiest to hate. I was raised in a moderately anti-gun household in a rabidly anti-gun community, and I hated guns myself until I learned about them. Before I had hands on experience with guns (which probably happened much later than most people on here) they were made out to be these mystical death machines. It was only when the “magic” was taken away that I realized I was being an idiot.

  5. avatar MB says:

    Citizen Donald Trump has a CCW permit. He knows what a suppressor is and what it does, and what it does not do. I think this was politician Trump speaking, not citizen Trump. It would behoove all of us to watch and listen and write to our Congressmen and the Whitehouse in support of removing suppressors from NFA. If President Trump forgets that he works for “We The People” he will become citizen Trump in Jan 2021 instead of Jan 2025…

    1. avatar Herb Allen says:

      Good advice and showing sanity & calm as well. Write to the President and express your concerns. I agree that PDJT is just throwing out some chum; he knows what his base wants & doesn’t want. His namesake son is noted here as a suppressor fan. They are not unfamiliar with guns.

      Everyone except those who have fired a suppressed gun thinks the report is what we heard as James Bond uttered, “That’s a Smith & Wesson, and you’ve had your six”.

      BTW, the only S&W pistol I can think of from that time is the Model 39. It holds eight rounds.

      1. avatar Wiregrass says:

        Oh I get it, more underwater 4D chess.

        Since when has Trump ever shown a measured response in what comes out of his mouth politically. He was unnecessarily stirring up shit with the British before the plane touched down. Then when he’s on the ground talking to Piers Morgan, we get this. It’s all what do the people I’m talking to this very moment want to hear. And that includes gun owners.

    2. avatar JoelT1 says:

      I’ve met plenty of people who have CCW permits that don’t know a thing about guns. I’m sure a couple of Trump’s sons do, but I’m sure he knows nothing about them and is willing to say what ever sounds good at the time, like when he told Diane Feinstein that “we’ll just take all the guns” and sort it out later leaving Feinstein beaming with excitement.

      When he banned bumpstocks, that was an impulsive move too. Since then, any time it’s come up, hes quick to remind you that he banned them and it was Obama’s ATF that allowed them. He’s proud of it.

      Now this with suppressors… I gotta admit I’m surprised. I know suppressor companies were meeting with Trump Jr and co quite a bit both before and immediately after the election, and were building support for HPA. I’m surprised at Trump, but I really shouldnt be.

      He is NOT a 2nd Amendment supporter. If the winds blow against us in public opinion, I think he will sell us down the road in a heart beat.

      But… hes all we have. Just have to wait and see.

  6. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    President Trump’s stated positions are a mixed bag when it comes to our unalieanable right to self-defense.

    On the plus side, he claims to support:
    — semi-automatic pistols
    — semi-automatic rifles

    Also on the plus side, he appoints judges who support our unalienable right to self-defense to federal courts.

    On the negative side, he appears to oppose:
    — bump stocks
    — suppressors

    And if he opposes bump stocks, I imagine he also opposes full-auto firearms.

    I have not heard whether he supports standard capacity magazines, including standard capacity 30-round AR-15 magazines.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      So, merely supporting semi-autos (despite laying every bit of the groundwork for banning them) is enough to be considered a ‘mixed bag?’

      You people realize semi-auto bans weren’t even on the table in the mid-90’s, yes? Not even deserving of consideration. This debate on semi’s is something new, and a precursor to a full-on ban of civilian small arms. If they ban semi-autos, there will be nothing to stop them banning manual actions, we’ve seen this time & time again across the world. Semi-autos are *barely* capable of providing a counterpoint to modern infantry; bolt actions and shotguns are a joke, they cannot take, hold, and deny territory in practice.

      If supporting merely the last crumb left to us before full-on disarmament and everything that comes after as well as the judicial “mystery box” is good enough to earn “pro gun” supporters, we are well and truly fucked already.

      1. avatar disillusioned says:

        I got screamed on here last night for agreeing on voting third party with the usual that “was just going to get a “demon-rat” elected!!!11!!” I mean, what’s the point? He showed us who he is with the bumpstock heist. Game over. (Insert comments about SCOTUS appointments).

        1. avatar Big E says:

          I won’t scream at you, BUT if you think: A) An Independent has any chance of winning or B) Any Democrat will be better than Trump (on anything) you aren’t paying attention.
          I believe Trump is a jackass and I don’t like him personally or sometimes politically, but he’s BY FAR the best of any viable options for the immediate future. I can stamp my feet and create fantasy scenarios of “teaching him a lesson” all I want, the fact is we’re stuck with him as the least bad option for the next election.
          I’d rather cut off my left arm (Trump) than my head (Communist/Democrat).

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          I’m sure Shotgun Joe Biden will reverse that bump-stock ban.

        3. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

          The republicans have shown they are not our friends and we know the democrats are our enemies. Whats the point of voting Trump if he screws us? We get screwed with lube instead of without?

          I have not voted for a republican or democrat from the time I started voting in 1992 until 2016, when I voted for Trump. If he doesn’t come correct on gun rights I will sit the next one out and go back to my tradition of buying ammo instead of voting.

        4. avatar disillusioned says:

          “Big E says:
          June 5, 2019 at 08:37
          I won’t scream at you, BUT if you think: A) An Independent has any chance of winning or B) Any Democrat will be better than Trump (on anything) you aren’t paying attention.
          I believe Trump is a jackass and I don’t like him personally or sometimes politically, but he’s BY FAR the best of any viable options for the immediate future.”

          Thanks for not screaming. I really hope you are right. Don’t get me wrong the current list democrat candidates is the worst I’ve seen in my lifetime. But my fear about President Trump is, if re-elected he won’t even pretend to to give two shits about the 2nd since he has nothing to lose. I look at this way, if my wife cheated on me just once, I could never trust her again. Good chance she will do it again. I look at life that way, once someone does something, there is a good chance they will do it again. Frankly, it seems to be losing scenario anyway I look at it.

        5. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          On the other hand leaving your wife who cheated on you once for a prostitute with the clap wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense now would it. Unfortunately we don’t have the option of being single again, so pick your poison and if you don’t like it get active in the Republican primaries – and not just the presidential ones, you’ll need to get involved with state rep primaries as well.

        6. avatar disillusioned says:

          Gov. William J Le Petomane says:
          June 5, 2019 at 08:59
          “On the other hand leaving your wife who cheated on you once for a prostitute with the clap wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense now would it.”

          Good point.

        7. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “Unfortunately we don’t have the option of being single again,”

          Yes, we do. That’s what Thomas Jefferson was talking about so long ago. In fact, our current dancing partner (US Gov) is taking us completely for granted. It’s well past time we dump that bitch.

        8. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          John, you’re never going to get rid of the old ball and chain. You can swap one for another, maybe a younger, prettier ball and chain, but give it a couple hundred years and she’ll get bloated and fat and you’ll be left pondering if it’s worth all the bloodshed to get a divorce or maybe you could try to get her to lose a little weight and maybe life wouldn’t be so bad. But unless you can find a yet undiscovered island in the middle of the Pacific to live on, there’s always going to be a nagging wife telling you what to do all the time. Metaphorically speaking.

        9. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

          The chance of ‘disillusioned’s vote being making a difference in the outcome of the election is probably less than his/her chance of get hit by lightning on the way to and from the voting both. It is certainly less than his/her chance of getting killed by any means on the round trip. Probability is a real thing.

        10. avatar barnbwt says:

          @ Gov;
          “On the other hand leaving your wife who cheated on you once for a prostitute with the clap wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense now would it.”
          And what if she cheated on you with the prostitute, so now they both have the clap. Because that’s exactly what’s happened here; Trump laid down with anti-gun dogs (his entire life) so he’s got the same fleas, ie wants to ban the same things. Anti-gun states passed their own silencer bans, lest we forget.

          If Vegas hadn’t had some bump stocks present (maybe), then he’d be calling out the 100round Surefire magazines that every gun used, and if there’d only been 30s, he’d be calling out the guns themselves. Fooled once, shame on you, fooled twice…let’s not get fooled again, for the sake of our precious egos. There’s enough of a pattern here to draw conclusions about Trump’s mindset, without invoking ridiculous strategies or conspiracies.

        11. avatar John in Ohio says:

          I don’t disagree with you, Gov. When she turns into a constant raging bitch, dump her ass and start fresh with another. That, IMHO, was what Thomas Jefferson was on about. Each generation must either suck it up or throw her out. The current ho should be so out of here by now.

          To be clear, I am referring to whole governments as well. This one has passed its prime… rotten by now really.

      2. avatar Bob says:

        barnbwt

        Diane Feinstein back in 1995 flat out told the public that if she could have gotten the votes for an outright ban on semi-autos and all firearms actually. She would have gone after them.

        https://youtu.be/Mj4AcjyuV38

        The assault on the ownership pf semi-autos isn’t a recent thing.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          As I said, it was clearly not on the table, though; she had her hopes & dreams, but she was not trying to pursue them with legislation. Now we’ve got multiple prominent Democrats openly discussing it as a serious policy goal, trying to get it added to the party platform, and multiple municipalities/states working to implement the policy at a local level, in direct challenge to federal court precedent.

          We’re in uncharted waters, and the fact Trump & his supporters seem willing to meet them even halfway is so much more radically anti-gun than anything we’ve seen since 1994 it is downright chilling. “NOT ONE MORE INCH” –remember that one, from back in 2013? “Stupid plastic toy loophole” –remember that one, from back in 2018? The ‘Overton Window’ has shifted so dramatically under Trump, that obviously hostile Fudd positions on the RKBA are being embraced as pro-gun once again…so long as they don’t explicitly admit to banning the symbolic AR15 by name –but every other hair-brained restriction seems like fair game to the “I support the 2A, BUT” types, lately.

      3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        ‘You people realize semi-auto bans weren’t even on the table in the mid-90’s, yes?’

        Uh, a semi-auto ban was very much on the table in the 90s. There are people who are still mad at Bill Ruger for his supposed support for the mag limit when the truth was he was only in favor of that INSTEAD of banning the guns because he knew that the mag limit could be overturned and it would really have little effect, but banning the guns would be much harder to turn that around. They weren’t just after the ARs, they wanted the mini-14 as well.

        Banning all handguns was also on the table.

        1. avatar Howdy1 says:

          What was wrong with Bill Ruger stating he wasn’t for ANY of the proposed restrictions?
          That argument is was just as weak as it was then as it is now.

        2. avatar Anymouse says:

          He wanted a 15 round mag limit so his P8x guns could compete against Glocks. He made 30 round mags for the Mini-14/AC556, but he refused to sell them to the general public. The libs took his idea, dropped it to 10 rounds, and ran with it. The real effect of the mag limits was the explosion of the sub-compact class of guns that were no bigger than needed to hold 10 or fewer rounds.

      4. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

        Liberator.

        You can use them to get another gun.

      5. avatar neiowa says:

        barnbwt

        Semiauto’s damn sure were on the table down at the DNC. Don’t me a dramaqueen.

        1. avatar Mike V says:

          What’s on their table and what’s on our table should be two different things. They are mainstreaming the idea of an outright ban. Sure the activists have always wanted that, but the rest didn’t. Whether they will be successful, we’ll see.

      6. avatar John in Ohio says:

        “we are well and truly fucked already.”

        Some of us have known this for a while.

        1. avatar Pg2 says:

          US Sovereignty was murdered in 1913. Final nail in coffin November 1963.

    2. avatar Wiregrass says:

      He supports semi-autos because he thinks of them as “entertainment”. Nothing about your right to own them, but because they are fun for some people. You should be concerned about that coming out of the mouth of the President of the United States.

  7. avatar FedUp says:

    Too bad it was Pierced Organ.
    A British Journalist (a low standard that’s miles above Pierced) would have pointed out that moderators as they’re called in the UK are considered about as harmful as putting mufflers on cars.

  8. avatar NM says:

    It isn’t about what he says… it is about what he does.

    Not saying he’ll go one way or the other with suppressors, but people seem to forget that a large part of politics is just optics and talk – not actual action 😉

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Okay, I’ll play your game;
      -He said he’d ban bump stocks, for a full fucking year while guys like yourself said “look to his actions, not his words” (even though guys like you promoted him as a ‘straight talker’ during his whole campaign)
      -Then he banned bump stocks, showing steady progress over the course of a full fucking year, while guys like yourself said “it’s just a ruse”
      -Then afterward, guys like you said it didn’t matter because they were stupid ‘loophole’ items anyway and “real gun owners” didn’t use them

      Fucking Fudds, every last one. Worse than Fudds, since at least they thought they were standing up for a sport they believed in, the only way they could; you Trump sycophants are accepting the destruction of the last of our civil liberties at the hands of a ‘friendly’ who won’t even be in office (or alive, most likely) to be held accountable for the aftermath. Hell, worse than that even, since you guys clearly support an imaginary version of the man that never even existed in the first place.

      Here’s the real question; why WON’T Trump try to ban silencers the way he did bump stocks? I’d like one logical explanation how this situation is different in any way whatsoever, apart from (maybe) the scope of the ban. Even then, the bump stock ban was several orders of magnitude farther reaching than the previous executive gun ban (Clinton’s declaring drum-fed shotguns to be DD’s)

      1. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

        With the bumpstock ban Trump set the stage for executive bans of anything they want simply by having ATF reinterpret their previous opinions.

        Obama could never have dreamed of pulling that off.

        Everything is in danger now.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          Bing-go! Including…bum-bum-buddah-bum…silencers!

        2. avatar AQ says:

          “With the bumpstock ban Trump set the stage for executive bans of anything they want simply by having ATF reinterpret their previous opinions.”

          Forget ATF-related items. Trump set the stage for the executive banning of ANY ITEM they want. Firearms, gasoline powered car engines, BBQ grills…literally ANYTHING.

          The biggest (un/under-reported) story going on right now are the four active lawsuits against the federal government involving the illegal banning of slide fire devices. If the lower courts uphold the reg change, and SCOTUS upholds the lower court rulings (if they even take the cases), it’s literally game over for America.

        3. avatar User1 says:

          The direct actions of Trump [the NY Democrat] has created a Democrat field that now says they can write out black guns with executive action. He has willfully given them that power. How do you defend against those Democrats when the “best Republican president ever” has not only talked the talk but walked the walk with the support of the NRA.

          Republican gun control or Democrat gun control! How is that an alternative?

      2. avatar Biatec says:

        Yeah. We need to always look for long term politics when voting. The only excuse people have for Trump is short term gains at the expense of centralizing government power for the long term. I don’t understand how anyone can think he is good at this point.

        Me: It will be worse because of trump when another fudd or the democrats are in control again

        Trump Supporter: It’s more than guns! Immigration, economy and all that!

        They don’t understand none of it is going to matter. It’s short term feel goods for long term losses. His supreme court picks are not good!

      3. avatar NM says:

        As I said, I’m not suggesting for a second he won’t follow those words with some kind of action – I don’t believe in the 4D Chess/Friend of the 2A characterizations at all. (Politician’s are nothing if not fluid with their loyalties.)

        I do believe much of the decision of what comes from those words will rest on what kind of pressure he is put under and what benefits he would see from a particular course of action.

        1. avatar User1 says:

          I remember when the previous owners of the UFC wanted loyalty from their fighters, if they gave it to the owners they were promised great treatment. Then the owners betrayed the fighters multiple times before selling the company for billions, which led to even worse treatment and no ability to fight back.

          That’s how big business guys do things. It’s all about the corporate structure that benefits them. The small guy is a human resource that will be used and abused then tossed in the trash when broken.

        2. avatar User1 says:

          Speaking of the corporate structure and the change in American culture that leads to violence and big government take over… When I watched this video it reminded me of the Virginia shooting and our current situation that has been a problem since the 80s. Today’s issues have been on full display since Reagan [the Cali Democrat].

  9. avatar Shwiggie says:

    I’m starting to feel that single-issue voter itch again….

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      …and only three years too late to matter

    2. avatar Shwiggie says:

      That’s quite presumptive of you.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        You’re not the only one feeling that itch; it’s still three years late for it to matter

  10. avatar Tom RKBA says:

    Remember his first debate where he AGREED with HRC’s stance on gun control. She wanted “Australian style” policies.

    Next, he allowed non-firearm accessories not to be regulated. This is a very bad precedent that will be expanded upon.

    Now, he will go after suppressors. We need to get off ours butts and explain them to him.

    Keep in mind that the gun vote was the margin by which he won many states. Trump needs to be reminded of this.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “We need to get off ours butts and explain them to him.”

      Only, if only the King understood!

      Today’s America is a sad, distorted reflection of a once free people. You don’t explain things to a King. You show him! We provided that eye-opener for a King once and it changed the World.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        As did a bunch of guys when the Magna Carta was put together. Trump has his responsibilities to us, and he knows them; he just doesn’t have any reason to give a damn, because we refuse to give him one.

        What doesn’t make sense, is what he gets out of this…and then I remember that Trump *really* likes screwing over people that he’s pulled one over on, historically, even when it doesn’t actually profit him.

  11. avatar Pete says:

    Perhaps he has never been exposed to a suppressor in real life and instead thinks they are like the Hollywood depiction, with a muted pop when fitted to a gun?
    Can someone let him witness a real demonstration of how they only lower a gunshot from permanent hearing damage from a single shot to just really loud?

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Maybe he’s senile, and doesn’t remember his son (they one he named after himself) is one of the most prominent silencer advocates out there, and the reason why his supporters thought he might sign HPA in the first place?

      Maybe he’s just another rich anti-gun New Yorker. Nah, couldn’t be.

  12. avatar Dz says:

    Honestly mr president fuck with suppressors and watch how many of your former supporters stay home on Election Day.

    1. avatar Bob says:

      LOL…. Gun Owners will vote for him in droves.

      1. avatar eric says:

        not this one. straw that broke the camels back here bubba.

  13. avatar Cloudbuster says:

    Soapbox and ballot box may not be working out….

  14. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Does anyone know if it was an actual registered silencer, even the dammed ATF? This could be nothing more than a damned dog whistle making the anti-gun Democrats bark and whine over a barrel shroud.

    1. avatar Maggot4lyf says:

      Yup, according to the article I read, it was registered.

  15. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    There used to be several videos of President Trump’s sons shooting guns on You Tube. I have posted them before on TTAG. One of the videos was of them shooting their personal machine guns. I’m currently looking for a video of them using a suppressed firearm. Just as I have asked, I want to know what white, connected, privileged, (besides Rosie O’donnell) homosexual(s) in california have gun permits, I also want to know if the sons of Donald Trump have suppressors. They can certainly afford them.

    btw
    Thank you to the US Suppressor Association for their work in getting 31 states to make suppressors legal to own and to hunt with with. Where were you NRA?????
    Hearing Protection Act gets NO SUPPORT from the NRA????
    Is it only about bolt action rifles and double barrel shotguns? Are these the only the things the NRA only cares about?

    Donald Trump’s son Eric Trump shoots at gun range in Saginaw County

    1. avatar Bob says:

      Donald Trump Jr doesn’t give a damn. His wealth puts him above the petty issues. If he enjoys shooting so much and they regulate it. He can simply fund a company to manufacture such products and he can play with them as much as he wants as the company owner. The business doesn’t even need to make a profit.

      He clearly is removed from his Father.

    2. avatar miforest says:

      eric needs to throw the net ofver his old man. I gave money and worked hard for him in 16. if they do go after suppresors then I will vote for someone else in 2020 . maybe I’l just write in pat buchannan.

      dumb republicans often do this . they trade the loyal base for a few puff piece media appearances that don’t win them a single liberal convert.

      A bigger issue is that trump seems to have no loyalty at all to those who support him . You could see this in the way he turned on ann coulter, corey lewandowski, and steve bannon as soon as they tried to hold him to his promised policies .

      1. avatar Wiregrass says:

        What is really infuriating about this is that it was completely unnecessary for him to respond as he did. He could have stated that the use of a silencer/suppressor was an insignificant detail regarding use by the Virginia Beach murderer and then pointed out that despite Britain strict gun laws, suppressors are quite commonly used with the firearms that the people are allowed to own. In fact, not using one is frowned upon. That would have been the end of it right there but of course he doesn’t bother to educate himself before going into something like this.

  16. avatar barnbwt says:

    “While it’s dangerous to put too much credence into his off-the-cuff comments, President Trump seemed to indicate that he’ll consider banning suppressors as a response to the shooting in Virginia Beach. On the other side of the equation, he defended civilian firearm ownership.”

    You guys realize he did this after Vegas & Parkland, too? Said that armed guards were needed…as he worked to ban more of our guns? Almost as though he was trying to make it difficult to portray him as anti-gun in the media, even as he enacted anti-gun policies?

    There’s some 4D chess going on here all right.

  17. avatar barnbwt says:

    An estimated 1.3 million silencers registered, as of 2017. An estimated 500,000 bump stocks. Approximately 1 million new felons able to vote in Florida. Approximately 1 million people aged 18-21 in Florida who can no longer buy a rifle but can still vote. I would mention the 5 million NRA members…but at this point I’m certain that number is both a lie, and largely composed of Republicans & not gun voters.

    Is Trump even trying to win in 2020 at this point, or is he simply positioning himself to pin the inevitable loss on gun owners? It’s not enough that he deceived so many of you then actively worked to harm us, but he’s going to punish us for it, too?

  18. avatar Pg2 says:

    He knows he’s winning in 2020….he can alienate the constituency that helped elect him without worry.

    1. avatar miforest says:

      I think that is a miscalculation if he really thinks that . also , what does he gain from doing this to us ? not one single catlady SJW will change hr vote from bidden to trump if he banned them all and sent the batf house to house to get them . It’s just silly.

      1. avatar Pg2 says:

        Going after suppressors will help his re-election, not endanger it. How many lies, flip-flops has he done from his campaign positions? He’s in, he knows it, and it’s going to be rude awakening for those who still think he’s fighting the swamp.

    2. avatar AgingDisgracefully says:

      He knows that he is winning in 2020 in the same sense that I know I look like Chris Hemsworth. If he loses even 10 percent of 2A voters then at least 3 of MI, PA, OH, FL and NC are gone, and there is no electoral math under which he wins in that case.

      1. avatar Pg2 says:

        You haven’t figured it out yet…..no worries.

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      winning in 2020?…by no means a certainty….staying home is certainly starting to look like a viable option…

  19. avatar David says:

    Maybe he needs to speak with his son because I seem to recall when there was a big push for the Hearing Protection Act, that Donald Jr. was a backer of the effort. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/gun-silencers-are-hard-to-buy-donald-trump-jr-and-silencer-makers-want-to-change-that/2017/01/07/0764ab4c-d2d2-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?utm_term=.8b487d1e1706

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Bob, you are right, the trumps did talk a good game of second amendment support right up until they were elected. Then the billionaires laughed at all the rednecks once again, as they walked away counting their money stolen from the working people‘s pockets.

        Get a grip folks, Trump and the Republicans are just using the POTG for the votes, they share none of your concerns or internal motivation’s. Their God is Mammon and greed rules their lives.

        Trump and Republicans will continue to lower wages, make working place conditions less safe for the workers, and continue to decrease taxes on the wealthiest Americans who have profited most from the economy.

        The correct strategy would be to make it clear to the Democrats that gun rights, like other civil rights, should be protected and then elect some Democrats.

        Otherwise, the Republicans will continue to fool you with fake religious faith, lies about wealth inequality and more black lung and other industrial disease as they put profits over people.

        1. avatar FullMagazineClip says:

          ^^^ Who let the commie in here?

        2. avatar barnbwt says:

          “The correct strategy would be to make it clear to the Democrats that gun rights, like other civil rights, should be protected and then elect some Democrats.”

          LOL, no. We’re not voting for your socialist tards, comrade.

          What needs to happen, is some prominent, known-quantity gun rights personalities (those like Adam Kraut), need to start running as single-issue Pro-Gun Democrats. Insurgent caucus within the party that steals some of its name recognition, and is such a departure from the main branch that it garners attention. Remember the Log Cabin Republicans? Same idea, different insignificantly-small-but-vocal group (only we’re a hell of a lot more numerically significant than the gays and always will be). This is essentially what the Miner’s socialists have done to reach prominence in the DNC, btw.

          “But what if that means the DNC gets control of a house and can name committees/etc?” Well, if the little insurgent group that could is solely responsible for them getting over the 50/50 hurdle, it’d sure be a stupid thing to punish them for it –they just might run as Republicans again. Hell, if you completely sideline their pro-gun policy goals & make it impossible for those elected officials to respond to their constituency, it’ll be really hard to get an even less popular Democrat elected in the next primary/general. Winning seats is all that matters when it comes to wielding power, and the RNC has made it clear they are unable to represent gun owners at this time. We can either see if the DNC can do better, or whether the RNC will do better by us with some competition, or be crushed trying to mount a completely standalone third party effort that unites both main parties in our destruction. But this slavish devotion crap is clearly not working.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      I will not pay the Washington Compost to read their sh*t.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        Who does? Ba-dum-tish!

  20. avatar GS650G says:

    Considering how easy it is to make suppressors from oil filters it doesn’t matter. Anyone with criminal intent will not be dissuaded by another law, much like the other gun laws.

  21. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    If I had known that Thedonald would be a mixed bag on the 2nd Amendment I probably would have voted for him in 2016. Bump-stocks were the lowest hanging fruit. We’ll see if anything happens with suppressors, but my guess is the the Hearing Protection Act is dead for the time being and they’ll stay on the NFA list. If that’s the worst of it, I don’t see how anyone would think Shotgun Joe or Crazy Bernie would be better.

  22. avatar Forrest says:

    Fudds gotta fudd.

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie, the Original Party Fudd says:

      Oh yeah!

  23. avatar Charlie Foxtrot says:

    Said President Trump in a country with strict gun prohibition laws where silencers are not banned.

    Cue the blind NRA supporters telling us that we don’t need silencers and that they are a stupid accessory that is not covered under the 2nd Amendment.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      I have read many comments from people who have 6 or 7 gun safes and their grandfathers shotgun saying just that on TTAG going back many years now. They see no reason to have a suppressed gun. FUDDs are a never ending problem.

      1. avatar Charlie Foxtrot says:

        FYI: The Fudds in the UK do use silencers! Something to think about how we have let the other side define the narrative.

        The NRA’s decades long reactive defense-only strategy is showing its results again. Gun owners, once again, are backed into a corner. While companies, like SilencerCo, made big efforts in educating politicians and the public with their Fight The Noise campaign, the NRA, claiming to be the largest voice, was busy with Angry Dana videos and taking business away from the USCCA.

        https://youtu.be/N8QkWeRzBnw

        1. avatar Wiregrass says:

          True I follow a group for CZ rimfire shooters, most of the members are in the UK since a bolt action .22 rifle is about the only thing most of them are allowed to have. And nearly every one of them sports a can.

        2. avatar barnbwt says:

          Fudds are just lazy cowards; they’ll anything they’re told to by the people they are afraid of. You can have just as good a time getting drunk in the woods with a flintlock or bow as you can an AR…and deep down they know that.

  24. avatar Mike V says:

    I think this President who is a gun owner, is most proficient at shooting himself in the foot.

    Absolutely perplexing.

  25. avatar Trollolol says:

    Waiting for PWrserge to come in about 475D chess

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      No doubt it will start off with, “Sorry kiddo…” I keep my muck boots by the desk for just such bovine excrement situations.

    2. avatar pg2 says:

      Waiting for serge to post something coherent and truthful is like waiting to catch Santa climbing down your chimney on Christmas Eve.

  26. avatar Aono says:

    “While it’s dangerous to put too much credence into his off-the-cuff comments”

    Here’s a statement that’s equally true:

    “While it’s dangerous not to put enough credence into his off-the-cuff comments”

    Anyone who still believes it is worth reading the tea leaves that gurgle from his word vomit is a thoroughly boiled frog. If you were surprised or disappointed by his suppressor comments, you need to reevaluate all of your sources of information and start to climb out of that pot so you don’t make the same mistakes again that will cost all of us our rights and freedmos. This loud mouth NYC assclown is an enemy of the 2A and always has been. Where’s Obama’s “Miss me yet?” billboard on I10? What did he actually DO? Restored our rights in National Parks. That’s it. We never thought to say things like “it’s dangerous to believe his words.” And he never thought to do things like ban bumpstocks. Choke on it, Trumpers. You’ll get no quarter from me for your support of the Orange Menace.

    1. avatar CarlosT says:

      Obama wanted to do all sorts of things to gut the Second Amendment. He was vigorously opposed at every turn. This was easy, because he was a Democrat, and the Republicans looked good to their donors opposing him. Result: no gun control.

      With Trump, he’s on “our side,” so when he puts forward some infringement, everyone is afraid to oppose him, because it’s “disloyal.” Result: gun control.

      Gorsuch was a good appointment. It’s too early to tell on Kavanaugh. Overall, though, this is more confirmation for me of the benefits of divided government and gridlock.

      1. avatar miforest says:

        No carols. during Obummer’s first two years , he had 60 dem senators and a democratically controlled house . I thank my luck stars he never did anything with the power , but he certainly could have . they chose to doo obamacare instead , but they could have done both.

        the GOP proved they are no real friends in Florida , Colorado, and several other states too.

        To be honest , we don’t have any real friends in Washington except a few maverick gop congressmen hated as much by their own party as by the democrats.

      2. avatar Dave says:

        Kavanaugh is a horrific disaster on 4A and 10A. But everyone here worships him because he was nominated by not-hillary.

  27. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Yes Eric Trump we do need to make our own guns in this country. I hope your father still believes this.

    ERIC TRUMP @ Tommy Gun Warehouse Grand Opening Clips

  28. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I glad Eric Trump had firearms when he was a kid that helped to keep him out of trouble. Presidents Jefferson and Madison also said children need to be educated in firearms handling and safety. But does your father also believe this for other American children???
    The 2A discussion begins at time 1.32 minutes.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlAM9GcOqz0
    Eric Trump Discusses That Little Syrian Boy, and How Guns Kept Him From Drugs

  29. avatar Mad says:

    Regardless of our feelings Trump is still the best we have at this moment in time,as follower of Christ and gun owner God’s word teaches the world is going to end up a terrifying place to live Christ is the only answer choose you this day whom you will serve and keep your powder dry

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      God helps those who do nothing to help themselves, then?

  30. avatar ANG Pilot says:

    After the Las Vegas murders Trump made almost the same comment regarding bump stocks: “we’re going to seriously look at banning them”. This guy isn’t a very deep thinker and he doesn’t really understand the 2nd amendment . His “support” is purely tactical. He’ll support bans on anything if he thinks he’ll gain an advantage from it.

    Just like bump stocks, I wouldn’t be surprised to see another Executive Order come down the pike in a month or so directing ATF to waive its regulatory magic wand to ban suppressors as well.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Bing-go! Merely an accessory, and a fairly obscure one, so it’s banishment won’t hit too many pocketbooks, and weak-willed “gun rights supporters” can & will still claim “he hasn’t banned anyone’s guns.” HPA has already been annihilated due to his & fellow anti-gun Republicans’ stalling until they lost the House (it was THE MOST visited bill on congress.gov for a solid year, people, and couldn’t get a Senate vote), so the lobbying apparatus & popular support for cans has lulled pretty badly. They are more common, but more people aren’t paying attention with HPA no longer on the horizon (and Trump’s campaign no longer promoting its passage)

  31. avatar Joatmon says:

    I was overjoyed when Trump beat the Hildabeast. I mean, I was grinning ear to ear.
    I thought to myself, “Here we go, a president for the people”.
    Now, I catch myself reading what he says and scratching my head. Did he really say that?
    As for 2020 elections, my gut says he won’t be reelected.

    1. avatar arc says:

      No reelection unless he pulls his head out of his ass.

      Hes trying to play all sides and hes not winning too many votes doing that. Luke warm water, its repulsive. You can’t backstab your voter base and expect to win again. The last thing he has going for him right now is the border wall, and if he can’t get it done, then I might as well vote democrat and at least try to end the war on drugs.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        “Mmmm, it tastes like shit & cherry cola at the same time! Yummy!”

    2. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      You’ve got nothing left to bargain with. He’s got what he wants from you and will get reelected first because 90% of people here are too gutless to not vote. Like: B-b-but what if a Democrat wins and takes all the guns?

  32. avatar Scooter says:

    Even if you voted for Trump, by this point I hope we’re catching on to the fact he’s ignorant about a lot of things. Also, he is a politician… better to appear to “do something” when bad people do bad things.

  33. avatar Jon Snow not voting for Dany in 2020 says:

    Another, more generic, problem with Trump is that banning gun stuff is among very few things he is able to do without resistance – a low hanging fruit on almost fruitless tree. So if he is eager to do something at all, this must look very tempting.

    1. avatar miforest says:

      I just don’t see what he “gets” for doing it . Not a single raging socialist or SJH will change their vote from any dem to trump no matter what gun control he gives them.
      This must ba a sop to the big GOP donors who are “fiscally conservative ” but “socially liberal “.

      It may get him a few $ for the campaign .

      1. avatar Jon Snow not voting for Dany in 2020 says:

        The only thing he gets is a psychological satisfaction from ‘succeeding’ in doing something. He’s like a bullet that is allowed to move only in one direction – toward gun control.

        1. avatar Aono says:

          What you’re describing is an insecure bully’s desire to dominate, as a way to separate himself from that which he hates and secretly knows himself to be: weak. GOP congressmen would not blink if he told them to cut to the chase and just start goose stepping. They are weak lickspittles. The NRA is mired in scandalous corruption. It is weak. He doesn’t need a reason – he only NEEDS to show these “weaklings” that he is not one of them, by “taking on” the NRA in a way the GOP congressmen were “afraid” to do, as he put it. People say he is “transactional,” which is horsesh*t. He would have to understand actual terms to be transactional. He’s a bully, and you’re weak, so he’s gonna hit you. That’s the beginning and the end of what “succeeding” is to him.

  34. avatar Arc says:

    Banned item? Build your own!

  35. avatar former water walker says:

    Dunno’ if Donnie will survive the Republican revolt over destroying trade. Ban silencers and I’ll leave the Trump train…or “MORE Obama than Obama”(who also LOVED Pierced Organ).The bigeared Kenyan couldn’t get chit but Odumbcare. And l’ll just lock n load my 65year old butt!

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      Blazing rhetoric but end of the day what are you going to do? Maybe withhold your vote after being a tool foor 4 years. Pfft. After the slobbering affection Trump, the GOP and the NRA have recieved from gun owners even if you and a million like you were to stop voting it would take 20 years for a major political party to take notice. Can you go that long without succumbing to false hope or to tribalism or just forgetting why you’re mad? For those who were adults in the 90’s probably not, because this has all happened before and they learned nothing.

  36. avatar Vorkon says:

    Even though I didn’t agree with him on it, I was willing to overlook the bump-stock thing, because 1) they’re a useless range toy that serves no tactical, safety, hunting, or self-defense purpose, and 2) while the NFA should be unconstitutional, the sad fact is that it is not currently considered to be so, and I can understand the legal argument behind classifying them as already being regulated under it, and saying that previous administrations had simply made a mistake.

    If he continues to push THIS, however, I’m not voting for him, no matter what nut-job the Democrats run against him. Politicians need to understand that they can’t just take their voters for granted, and if a few years of an even worse President are the price we need to pay for sending that message, so be it.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Any high-end 22LR target gun or scope with higher than 4X magnification is an equally “useless range toy.”

    2. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      You sound like a battered spouse defending and talking about leaving their abuser.

  37. avatar Political gristle says:

    No one caught this? “When asked why people want to own semi-automatic rifles, The president said…..
    ” A lot of them use them for entertainment, they go out and shoot them at ranges”

    NO, Mr President that is NOT what semi-automatic rifles are for…………..

    Low hanging fruit keep getting trimmed,
    Bump stocks
    Suppressors……what’s next?

    Pistol style rifles with arm brace?
    Shock wave style shot guns?
    Threaded barrel firearms?
    Standard capacity magazines over (+10 rds)
    .50 Cal rifles?
    “Sniper rifles” aka hunting rifles that can shoot up 1,000yrds?

    Pretty soon when the low hanging fruit has been trimmed away, the not so low hanging fruit gets cut untill the tree of liberty looks like Charlie browns scraggly pathetic little Christmas tree.

    1. avatar Mike V says:

      I agree, his rationale for semi auto rifles was horrible, just begging for exploitation by antis.

      1. avatar JP Ruiz says:

        So long as Prince and Princess Jared and Ivanka are his “Senior Advisors”, he will continue to stab his base, such as gunowners, in the back.

        OpenSecrets.com has all the dirty laundry donations of Jared and Ivanka, and they’ve donated to gun-ban groups.

        Also, Prince Jared and Princess Ivanka are self-described “humanitarians”, and that’s probably the reason that the Borders are still wide open with floods of Illegal Aliens pouring into the country.

  38. avatar Dude says:

    From the same interview, Trump on meeting Prince Charles:
    “He is really into climate change, and I think that’s great. I want that, I like that.”

    Is anyone worried about him rejoining the Paris Climate Accord or subsidizing “green renewable” energy? You guys realize he’s a FOS schmoozer, right?

    I’d say be concerned. Tell the NRA or whoever he’ll listen to, to educate him on suppressors (maybe they can actually do their job). It isn’t time to gather the pitchfork mob quite yet.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      10$ says you took him at his word (and told others to) when he said he was going to pull out of the Paris accord during the campaign. He’s simultaneously a 4D chess master with a silver tongue who can only be known by his deeds (as if that’s a good thing), and a ‘straight-shooter’ who isn’t afraid to tell it like it is even if it is unpopular. You guys can’t have it both ways with the man; he’s doing enough of that by himself already.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        He did pull out of the Paris Climate Accord.

  39. avatar Anonymous says:

    Trump: ‘We’re Going to Seriously Look’ At Banning Suppressors

    Yeah – that’s not going to happen. This is just Trump claiming he is going to “ “ “ look “ “ “ at banning them. It’s a statement to quell the libs. Actually trying to ban them would be political suicide.

    1. avatar Pg2 says:

      “Spamming with stupidity” should be your profile name here.

    2. avatar lucky43113 says:

      He banned bumpstocks and is in favor of red flag laws

    3. avatar adlib says:

      “I’d like to think about it. I mean nobody’s talking about silencers very much. I did talk about the bump stock and we had it banned and we’re looking at that. I’m going to seriously look at it. I don’t love the idea of it”

      good thing he himself connected the dots in his thinking for you.

  40. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    Well, give him a tactical reason to go the other way on suppressors. He enjoys poking back.

    Position it as handing DiFi a victory n he’ll do qnything else.

    The Orange Crush isn’t a deep political philosopher. He is a quite talented opportunist of a particular kind. Feed him with: “banning suppressors is dumb” plus a chance to Do Something the issue-mongers will hate, n he’ll be all over it.

  41. avatar pg2 says:

    Trump fought the swamp and the swamp won. He’s officially a swamp-thing now.

    1. avatar Mark says:

      No. He successfully gaslit his own constituency. He is no defender of limited government.

      1. avatar pg2 says:

        No shit. NO-ONE makes it to that level, on either side of the fake Left vs Right aisle, who is for limited government.

  42. avatar todd says:

    I hope this doesn’t come as a shock to anyone, but:

    Democrats are vehemently opposed to guns. Every last 2020 candidate is openly talking about bans. The’d love to confiscate all guns, but recognizing how hard that would be, they are taking a second approach as well: make gun ownership legally dubious (e.g. gun “transfers” following a universal background check law), expensive (taxing ammo, requiring various licences), inconvenient (shutting down gun ranges due to noise ordinances, stopping internet ammo sales), and use activist judges to whittle away the 2nd (e.g. one of the retired supreme court justices said a NY gun ban was legal because you could always to to another state to shoot/hunt)

    Republicans are ambivalent about guns. They are smart enough to realize this is a winning issue if they support gun owners, but, few could honestly care less if the 2nd were to go away.

    Given a choice (albeit a bad one), I opt for the second.

    1. avatar adlib says:

      gun owners should decide if i can’t vote for a guy like Larry Hogan (because he can’t be trusted on guns) or if i HAVE to vote for a guy like Trump (because the alternative is worse). because you can’t have it both ways.

  43. avatar GunnyGene says:

    A ban (a form of regulation) appears to be within the existing authority of ATF per the following. While effectively banning suppressors might be politically difficult, it would be legal, imho. Bear in mind that several States already ban them, so there is legal precedent.

    [QUOTE]any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code)
    https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/which-firearms-are-regulated-under-nfa

    And the reference US Code:

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921

    [/QUOTE]

  44. avatar lucky43113 says:

    Trump is not anti or pro gun He is what every those fudds at the NRA tell him to be remember they helped write the NFA called for bumpstock bans and red flag laws. This is the very reason I never bought an NFA item if they ban suppressors they will get them they know where they are at.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      You do willingly give up your rights when you purchase a NFA item.

  45. avatar Eric Woodard says:

    Howdy Mr. President,

    My name is Eric Woodard, owner of Rebel Silencers. What you did here is irresponsible and you ought be ashamed of yourself. You owe myself and my employees an apology for an unthoughtful comment that will have a very real impact on our livelihood.

    How will this shake down Mr. President? You have a registry of say 5 million citizens with suppressors in this country. These people waited a year for their tax stamp as the ATF purposefully sat on their application while they cashed their $200 check within a week or two.

    Let’s dive in to this. Are you going to require suppressors from taxpayers, of whom you have their address from the registration process? Can you imagine being that unfortunate ATF agent that will be in charge of going door to door to collect something that was rightfully purchased and taxes paid on? Would you want that job? What do you think will be the result of such an obvious assault on the second amendment?

    Suppressors make shooting safer, it makes far more sense to make them mandatory than to ban them. FAR MORE SENSE. Making them mandatory would be silly, but I hope you understand my point.

    You have officially lost my vote in 2020, even after your inevitable recant of your anti-american statements.

    Good day.

  46. avatar possum, destroyer of arachnids says:

    Trump, a rich entitled child who pays an illegal immigrant to wipe his ass.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      I am sure his current wife is a legal resident.

      1. avatar disillusioned says:

        Now, that’s seriously funny.

  47. avatar Jim Warren says:

    Looking like I’ll have to vote differently.

  48. avatar Bill Meyer says:

    I can’t wait to read dozens of comments along the line of “The President is engaging in 5, no, 10, no, even better TWENTY DIMENSIONAL CHESS as the Jedi Master is working hard protecting your firearms rights….Trust the plan. (sarcasm now off)

  49. avatar Sven79 says:

    Junior needs to talk to his Dad and explain that these don’t work like they do in the movies. And where does Piers get off asking about suppressors anyway? In a lot of European countries, it’s considered rude to hunt without a suppressor. Even in New Zealand, suppressors are sold off the shelf; no extra tax, no background check, no waiting period.

  50. avatar bob says:

    Don’t blame Trump for anything.

    Know who was at fault for the bump stock ban? We were, you, me, you’re neighbor, the people around you.

    More people wanted them banned than didn’t.

    No president just walks out one day and bans things or makes laws. Laws are made by majority complaints, and guess what, the anti bump stock people complained the loudest.

    Think of it this way, if Trump came out tomorrow and said “I am seriously going to look at banning having anymore children in the US….”

    Would it be illegal to have kids?
    No, why? Because the country would stand up and say its piece.

    Well, guess what, time to speak your piece.

    Anti gun crowds work every day to ban guns, pro gun crowds only rally when they think the Anti gun crowd might win.

    Open carry everywhere, talk to your neighbors, talk to your local representatives, make your voice heard.

    No fellas, Trump didn’t ban bump stocks, you did.
    Everyone missed the boat when he said he would kick it to the public to work with the ATF to review it. Hello, giant window saying now is the time to prove why it shouldn’t be banned. Instead too many sat back and waited to see what the results where instead of helping create the results.

    “we’re going to seriously look at it”

    Well, lets look at it!!! OVERWHELM your representatives with proof a suppressor is merely a muffler and not Hollywood magic.

    1. avatar Matt says:

      You can hardly say we are at fault when the government just does whatever the fuck it wants and we have to slog through the courts for any form of recourse. We have abdicated too much power.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        He’s just trying to transfer his guilt onto the rest of us. Only someone in denial about the bump stock ban for a full year would say that. If I were speaking of the gun community as a whole, I’d perhaps say ‘we’ deserved it because of our over-reliance on the RNC, but it sure wasn’t something we did to ourselves, that was all Trump.

      2. avatar bob says:

        If the government did whatever it wanted we wouldn’t have any firearms at all.
        I think you guys forget that Trump has to represent the entire nation, not just the guys on here, if he stood there and barked all one sided you would be tickled pink but we would also lose 2020 because he would lose any votes he would of received from the left.

        As much as I would love to see someone run on an absolute “shall not be infringed” platform, that has about the same effect as we would expect from someone running a Dem ticket on a “ban all firearms” platform. We laugh them down, why wouldn’t you think they’re doing the same to us?

        Also, you cannot have a president who just refuses to sign anything, no matter how many approvals it gets, it works both ways.
        The bump stock ban went into effect because anti gunners wanted it and some pro gunners were ok with it.
        Grow up and stop placing the blame on one guy.

        We have the same problem here on a small scale in Pa, the game commission is open to the idea of using semi auto firearms for hunting but it keeps getting shot down because there are ones who are against it and there are ones who are set in their ways and think its just an unnecessary toy.

        Thats exactly what happened with bump stocks, too many pro gunners didn’t give a crap because they thought it was a piece of plastic junk anyhow and were OK with it getting banned. I watched hundreds of you guys on here say it “well if we’re gonna have to lose something, might as well be bump stocks, they’re useless anyhow, maybe it will appease them and keep them off our backs….”

        I want the NFA done away with, bump stocks are not firearms, and suppressors are just mufflers.

        But then again, I talk to my representatives often, do you?

        1. avatar Matt says:

          My representatives don’t give one flying fuck about me because I live in CT. I stopped wasting my time on them after Sandy Hook when the best responses they could muster to my polite opposition and petition, if I got any at all, were form letters saying thanks for the support.

          I’m not laying the blame at one guys feet, I’m pointing out the fact that one guy told the ATF to reinterpret something that doesn’t fit a statutory definition and that was previously determined not to meet that definition. Lets see what else happened, ATF decides to make M855 classified as AP ammo, we won that one luckily. ATF reinterprets shouldering a pistol brace as manufacturing a SBR then rereinterprets it to not be that again. ATF determines 7N6 to be AP ammo. IRS is instructed to make life for conservative orgs hard. Hillary has a private email server in her home containing classified information and is conducting official business off of it. CT legislature passes AWB 2.0 after 12 hours of public testimony against the laws. Eric Holder is still in contempt of congress. Mass surveillance captures all of our data without warrant. And on and on and on. Please explain to me how the government, its agents/functionaries, and it agencies don’t do whatever they want or how these are not examples of that.

        2. avatar Matt says:

          Oh and it sounds like a conspiracy, but you know as well as I do that any immediate and severe or drastic change like LOL NO GUNS FOR ANYONE would have immediate, severe, and drastic consequences and so inrcementalism continues to chip away at everything.

  51. avatar KGM says:

    The question, I don’t have a clue.
    I have NO trust in any black robed and gray suited political thugs. Yes, Trump is a political.

  52. avatar StWayne says:

    Mamma always said that stupid suppressors is, as stupid suppressor does. The problem with Mr. Trump is that he’s too quick to remark off the cuff without knowing his facts, when he should be “silenced” on the issue. Firearms suppressors are already illegal to own, and require a mountain of paperwork just to justify why you should even have one, as there is no Constitutional guarantee that a musket loader be silenced into anything. All a new firearm law has ever done is further handcuff the law abiding citizen. Too bad knives are so quiet. Maybe they should pass a law on that, demanding that all sharp objects go “Schwing!” just before doing what it is they do: kill people.

  53. avatar Lawbob says:

    He’s pacing. He’s done this countless times only to not follow through. It buys time.

    1. avatar Aono says:

      Oh, like he “bought time” with bump stocks? BOHICA, you’ll love it!

      1. avatar Mad Max says:

        The fat lady hasn’t sung yet on the bump stock ban.

        I believe it will, at minimum, be ruled a “taking” by the SCOTUS and the ATF will need a fat checkbook, requiring an appropriation that may not pass Congress.

        We might do better. Only time will tell.

  54. avatar Matt says:

    Is this legitimately a case where we can say thank god for the NFA? Not that he wouldn’t try or wouldn’t do it via EO, but suppressors are regulated by legislation, and thus require legislation to amend those regulations putting the ball squarely in congresses court… not that the separation of powers means a whole lot these days.

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      Machine guns are regulated by the NFA, but they banned bump stocks by calling them machine guns through some twisted logic. He could have suppressors declared to be machine guns. He could have his anti-gun police union boss become ATF director and have him not staff the NFA approval department, or declare silencer Forms to be the lowest priority. If Form 1s aren’t processed, manufacturers can’t make new ones, and civilians can’t get them if Form 4s aren’t approved.

      1. avatar User1 says:

        I heard the ATF is now considering bolt action uppers for the AR-15 to be a firearm.

      2. avatar Matt says:

        I’m skeptical of that happening, there is simply not as much gray area to play in as with bump stocks but that certainly doesn’t mean they/he won’t try.

        The slowing down processing to a crawl would be more likely.

        My point was that the existing law, being almost 100 years old on top of it, makes it that much harder to outright ban them since they are very heavily regulated by statute.

  55. “Authoritarianism, Yo! ” Welcome to the New World 🌎 Order !
    (Examples: Unconstitutional Red Flag laws= that can be expanded upon. Other Star Chamber type of activity. Secret Goverment watch lists, No fly, no buy…TSA type forced property searches….Government intelligence operations being conducted on American citizens. See Snowden. Operation : Prism….And many others…)

    1. avatar User1 says:

      Homeland Security is a Nazi idea brought to life in America for Americans. It attempted to utilize Communist community spying tactics then moved on to NSA spying of everyone. Now in 2020 you will need a Real ID to travel on airplanes because traveling is considered to not be a human right. Eventually you will need your papers to travel anywhere via anything and you will be tracked the entire time. Then you won’t be allowed to own/drive cars because it’s not a human right. You won’t be able to fly out the country if you did something unacceptable…

      Your ID and serial number will become tied to everything and you will need it to buy or sell. That’s already happening in other countries. So it’s not just some crazy bible concept, it’s your technological future.

      1. avatar Pg2 says:

        The population will be required to show proof of ALL government(industry) recommended vaccines before traveling. This is not speculation. There are over 200 new vaccines in the pipeline.

  56. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    Trump is going to piss off a lot of his voting base…

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      Yeah but his base are losers who take what they’re given, so it doesn’t matter if they’re angry, there are no consequences.

  57. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

    Again? Still?

    When he does ban cans you’ll be all like “Suppressirs aren’t firearms anyway, we have no right to them. Chess not checkers.”

  58. avatar Mad Max says:

    Don, Jr. needs to educate his father about suppressors.

    Donald is acting like someone who only has (incorrect) knowledge of suppressors from the movies.

    If a real suppressor was actually used in the Virginia Beach shooting (where’s the technical info/photos?), the only benefit it provided was to help protect the hearing of the survivors.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      He’s acting like the anti-gun NYer he’s been his entire life. Stop making (lame) excuses.

      1. avatar Mad Max says:

        Well, you want Hilliary, Bernie, or Shotgun Joe instead? There isn’t any choice other than Trump.

        When pressed with technical details, Trump usually reverses course (especially when suppressors don’t really provide a tactical advantage/increase the killing effectiveness of a firearm).

        If the foolish Democrats are successful in nullifying the Electoral College, we might get an advantage by getting many 2A supporters on all of the states’ ballots. Voting by popular vote gives opportunities to independent candidates. It becomes possible to become President with less than 20% of the vote.

        Ross Perot, anyone?

        1. avatar Fudds McKenzie, the Party Fudd says:

          You probably think you’re being a good gun-nut bringing up the other candidates, but you’re whining. Like “what else am I supposed to do?” I don’t care who wins, the important thing is I didn’t vote for them. It’s a good feeling.

          I wouldn’t have minded Hillary. There are so many banana mags and giggle sticks in private hands, including my own clutches, that a new AWB would be toothless relative to me personally, even if I live another 80 years. So my interest in gun rights now is centered on expansion of gun rights, and the principle. For that Trump is worse than Hillary, because he gets all you deplorables confused. You start thinking you’re playing 4D chess, or damage control, or, you won’t admit it but that you can trade gun rights for a border wall or an abortion ban or something.

        2. avatar Mad Max says:

          Not voting for the Republican candidate is a vote for the Democrats.

        3. avatar Mad Max says:

          If Hillary had won and we wound up with a Democrat majority House and Senate and all of the mass shootings had happened, we would have a AWB, a semi-auto ban, ammo restrictions, much worse red flag laws, and confiscation along with a liberal majority Supreme Court that would uphold anything the Leftists wanted for the next 40 years.

          Elections matter. I very much dislike Trump but have no other choice. Trump is sociopath but at least he keeps some of his promises (judicial appointments).

          My preference would be to have someone from the freedom caucus as President (Mike Lee or Ted Cruz maybe) and a majority of Congress also be Originalists.

          Then we could expand gun rights substantially.

        4. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

          “Not voting for the Republican candidate is a vote for the Democrats.”

          Number one, that’s moronic. Not voting R has about the effect of giving the D’s half a vote. Number two I wouldn’t give a rat’s ass if it were true, I explained that already. I know you don’t agree but don’t kid yourself, not all gun owners share your irrational fears. Finally if you don’t see the value of not begging for the lesser of two evils, lol. You’re unprincipled, gutless and in no position to preach to me.

        5. avatar Mad Max says:

          My fears are not irrational. Only someone not looking would think there isn’t a very serious threat to existing 2nd Amendment rights if Democrats get elected.

  59. avatar LarryinTX says:

    I actually own a suppressor. I will not surrender it. Won’t that be fun!?

    1. avatar User1 says:

      Another Waco?

  60. avatar Hannibal says:

    I’m sure a lot of people will follow this up with “but we needed to vote for him, imagine what HRC would have done…”

    Would she? Are we really better? How much gun control did Obama do? In fact, has Trump actually done MORE on gun control than Obama, thanks to the bump-stock nonsense? If Hillary would have been elected it is much more likely the legislature would have stayed GOP. The wildcard here is SCOTUS and judges in general. We have yet to see a major pro-gun ruling, so I’ll hold judgement on that.

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      Indeed. I think the court nominations are false hope. First they’ve been against us since 1877, including Heller I think, with the little present Scalia left in it. So it will be a historic event if that changes. Second, best case it takes money, lawyers and will take decades to use the courts, during which, I don’t want to give anyone nightmares here, but the political winds might shift a bit. But even if the courts become and stay pro-gun on average, long, expensive path. Third having one branch of government on our side at a time presents an obvious tacticular disadvantagement, operationally speaking.

      1. avatar Mad Max says:

        I think the courts are our only slim hope.

        We will never have a pro-2nd Amendment majority in Congress and we are slowly drifting closer to a gun control majority.

        The free States are slowly also drifting closer to a gun control majority due to changes in population.

        If the SCOTUS doesn’t protect the 2nd Amendment, the right and gun ownership will be eliminated in a generation.

  61. avatar Mad Max says:

    Let’s face it, we will never win through electing politicians to serve in Congress or as President. The American electorate is collectively too stupid to understand the Constitution or natural rights.

    No one that is an Originalist and fully supports natural rights will ever be elected President and Originalism/natural rights will never hold a majority in Congress.

    The Founders had the advantage of restricting who could vote (white, religious, men only). We are at a disadvantage because the mob can now vote and holds a majority.

    The only hope we have is the SCOTUS. If the opposition continues to ignore SCOTUS rulings upholding the 2nd Amendment, we would be justified in using the cartridge box to restore the Republic.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      Majority of the voting public is white. The issues we have in America are from white people bringing back European ideas into American society; the ideas many escaped from hundreds of years ago.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        gun owners costing trump the election…would send a viable message to all concerned….

      2. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

        Yup, Old world, pre-Enlightenment ideas, I think. Platitudes about liberty notwithstanding, lots of modern-day serfs being all superstitious, tribalistic and craving some strongman’s butt to sniff.

      3. avatar Mad Max says:

        A substantial majority of the population was white in 1776. It was the educated, white, religious males that voted. Not women, not blacks, not Hispanics, not Asians.

        I’m saying that the eligible voters were very aware of the principals of the founding and natural rights and they were white, religious, men.

        Now, whites make up 62% of the population and educated (in the founding principals), white, religuous, men are a small minority.

        1. avatar David Katz says:

          That’s racist! How dare you bring up inconvenient facts about the ingredients of this once great nation?!

          You need to go to school to unlearn this mess, preferably in Florida. You need to learn you some guilt, you’re no victim, 6 billion of your people didn’t even perish in a holocaust™, which was only one of literally hundreds of historically documented expulsions of the chosen people for no apparent and consistently recurring reason whatsoever.

        2. avatar Mad says:

          I was going to respond to user1but decided against it because you can’t really fix stupid he is a complete idiot

        3. avatar Mad Max says:

          And you just explained why the 2nd Amendment exists.

          Besides, my brain is made of reinforced concrete. I seriously doubt that I could be retrained to accept Multiculturalism at this point.

        4. avatar User1 says:

          That’s the fault of white people not teaching white people about liberty, independence and responsibility. Yet they want to escape personal responsibility by blaming non whites for the break down of American society. Black, brown and yellow people did not make white people godless, drug addicts and European socialists.

          Even the religious gentiles are taught to be slaves and they accept it with a passion. They commit sins on the behalf of others. They carry out mass human sacrifice. They enslave their own people. They condition their people to love their slave masters. They sacrifice their children for the Synagogue of Satan. They commit these sins to allow the antichrist to take over the world and destroy everything.

          The non Christian Democrat whites want “socialism.” The Christian Republican whites want “socialism.” Both sides want enslavement of all peoples and they both love their police state that will give them that. They work hand in hand to force white, brown, black and yellow people to kneel before the chosen ones [the elites]. Don’t forget most cops are white males.

          By the way, I remember seeing that it’s like 70 something percent white in America right now. The reason certain whites say it’s 60 something percent is because they don’t include Hispanic/Spanish whites.

          It is true that most white people need religion and refuse it so they can commit crimes/sins. I am not exactly sure why they require it — seeing that east Asians can do fine without it — but they do need that guidance. However, religion can’t be forced upon them for they will reject it for Satanism/statism.

          The white people that reject reality will call for violence to solve the problems they created and that violence be brought upon mostly the other. So instead of fixing the problems in their house they blame their neighbors. This cycle has yet to be removed from the minds of white people and it has infected black Americans’ minds too.

  62. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    The Republicans will cave in on silencers just like Bump Stocks because the majority of the gun owners do not own one so its a political move to make the public at large look like their doing something about the gun problem in the U.S. (which they are not). It will cost Republicans few votes in 2020 and they know it and they may pick up far more votes then they lose. If there is another mass shooting with a silencer it certainly will be the final nail in the coffin for silencers in the U.S. with the ban bill sailing through Congress. Even the NRA will stand down as they are masters of Politics and will travel which ever way the political stench is blowing as they too know the votes from silencer owners are not worth even worrying about. And SCOTUS will not even consider hearing an appeal.

  63. avatar 1776Patriot says:

    Sic semper tyrannis
    necisque libertas

  64. avatar Warlocc says:

    These comments are gold.

    “We can’t vote for socialist/communist/demon-rats! They might take our stuff! We gotta keep the guy that’s already taking our stuff!”

  65. avatar John in Ohio says:

    Trump was and is a safety valve, a placebo, a Judas goat; just like Negotiating Rights Away has been. Y’all aren’t going to be able to vote your way to liberty. They system is too rotten to allow that at this point. Basically, fight or you’re fucked.

  66. avatar Mad Max says:

    I really don’t get why anyone would worry about suppressors.

    They really don’t do that much (like going from 164 dB to 130 dB – makes it easier to protect your hearing) unless used with a .22 and subsonic ammo.

    If someone is going to shoot me, I hope it is with a .22 with subsonic ammo.

    Furthermore, Europe doesn’t seem to have anything against suppressors (I guess because the government has to pay for the cost of hearing damage).

    1. If you were to replace the word “supressors” with “the second amendment” your statement would ring more true.

      The reason we have to worry about any law, even if it were to regulate a silly little ejector spring, is precedent.

      The more they chip away the more precedent gets set to take more. I respect your right to speech, yet so many gun owners said the same thing about bump stocks, 5.45×39 bi-metals, AP rounds, the list goes on.

      And every time they take another accessory, bullet or right, many people repeat this “I dont know why people worry about blank….” lie. There will come a day when people will say it about the second amendment.

      Why should we justify tyranny, vs defend freedom? Well, what is left of it.

    2. avatar Wiregrass says:

      The reason we worry about something that doesn’t do that much, like suppressors, is because the most persuasive argument the President of the United States could come up with to justify the right to own a semi-automatic rifle in conversation with Piers Morgan is entertainment. He doesn’t get it, and it’s too late to expect that he ever will.

  67. avatar bearhugsfromak says:

    My President is defending my right to bear arms.
    NOBODY is ever going to agree 100% with another person all the time.
    I have firearms. More than one. I have no ‘bump stock or suppressors’ and they all work great without either accessory. Look, I don’t give a crap about the junk that is useless and pointless. Maybe we should be taking a closer look at them trying to keep Ammunition away from us…especially the ‘poor’. If they raise the tax on ammo, who can afford to buy it then???? Yep, we really need to learn to pick our battles.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Bless your little heart.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Very nice blog! I can’t believe that I hadn’t stumbled across it before.

          https://thegunpsy.com/

  68. The Second Amendment is 27 words. Any attempt to add to those words with a law is gun control. Period. The constitution protects us from our own best intentions.

    The president made similar comments regarding slide fire stocks. They are banned, all with the NRA’s help of course.

    The president said, “Take the guns first, and worry about due process later.” Unconstitutional Red flag laws are now being implemented across the country.

    If the last 2 examples of the past are to tell us anything about the future, you can bet if he is re-elected in 2020, supressors will be next.

    Then what? Semi autos, bolt actions, finally muskets, till nothing is left…. MAGA? Drain the swamp? Breaking the Supreme law of the Land will not make US great.

    At some point we must stop compermising with tyrants (left and right). Freedom once lost, is lost forever.

  69. avatar Mudskipper says:

    If this comes to pass, I’m going to install DeGroat Flaming Pigs (or equivalents) on everything I own. Rifles. Handguns. Everything.

    The goal in mind being to make every gun I own as loud as it possibly be.

    Just to annoy people who don’t like hearing gunfire. People like my across the road neighbors, who have no idea I shoot on my property because I shoot suppressed exclusively. Because I’m a good and considerate neighbor, and don’t want to force noise on the people around me, even though I’m totally within my rights to shoot on my land.

    If cans get banned, that’s over. I’m going to make as much noise as I possibly can.

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