Previous Post
Next Post
Trump background check bill
Courtesy CBS News and Twitter

All of Washington’s greatest minds are apparently laser-focused on background checks, in order to “come up with something that’s acceptable to everybody.”

If that doesn’t give you the warm fuzzies, nothing will. Check out the video below.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • This is a wonderful opportunity for Trump to seize defeat from the jaws of victory in 2020. I’m a soft Trump supporter at best, and there are many like me, but he’s absolutely done enough good (a lot more than I expected) since 2016 to make me something of a believer. But giving in on such an important issue to please… who, exactly? A bunch of rabid leftists who will never, ever support him no matter what? Just wait and see how quickly the soft, hold-my-nose Trump supporters abandon him when they realize he’s just as much of an opportunist as they always suspected…

      Then again, hold fast, and watch those soft supporters get more and more comfortable with – and perhaps even pleased about – another four years of so much winning we’ll almost be sick of it.

    • Direct access to NICS for your own bill of sale with no record of the firearm(s) in the hands of the government and just due dillegence to check buyer in NICS and get confirmation number for your bill of sale before transfer?

      • This is the compromise solution that would actually get enough votes to pass. I really wonder why no one in power has yet to proposed it.

        • I sent it to Toomey & Casey.

          I think it would be opposed by the Dems because we are the enemy and they want a registry followed by confiscation. This would move them further away from their goals.

        • Lol, compromise?

          A compromise is when both sides benefit. Since the 2a is a natural right, when have 2a supporters ever benefitted? And why are our rights being compromised?

      • I don’t like it, but I’d accept it.

        No way in hell it will ever happen, though; not only would it be an improvement over the current system in every possible way, it just makes too much sense.

        • I would welcome the opportunity to have a record of a NICS approval of someone I’m selling one of my guns to. I have a computer with an internet connection; don’t see why we should have to waste money and time going to a LGS to complete the sale.

      • How could you possibly enforce it without a gun registry?
        Without the serial number of the gun in some central database, I would just sell my gun to you and not bother with the mandated background check.
        Right now they can only follow the gun through the first sale from an FFL.
        As long as I have obtained it Thru a private sale or inheritance, they would have no way to know that I sold it to another person even if he was arrested with this gun in hand.

      • How could you possibly enforce it without a gun registry?
        Without the serial number of the gun in some central database, I would just sell my gun to you and not bother with the mandated background check.
        Right now they can only follow the gun through the first sale from an FFL.
        As long as I have obtained it Theu a private sale or inheritance, they would have no way to know that I sold it to another person even if he was arrested with this gun in hand.

    • Repealing some gun control would be acceptable to me. Not another “compromise” where we give a little and gun grabbers get a little.

    • Ever occur to you that he may just be drawing them in and stalling? That way he can appear like he’s doing something, but then let the issue quietly fade. Consider that polls are already showing weakening interest in gun control since last month’s attacks.

      Moreover, Trump made a full throated argument that the NC Democrat candidates were all about gun control (and sanctuary cities) and that’s why they must be defeated. He and even the DNC are crediting his support for pushing those races into GOP wins. Both districts are Republican, one more so than the other, but turnout among milquetoast suburban moderates was key. He just established that firearms freedom is vital for victory.

      He may do something around the edges, since he is a dealmaker, after all, but nothing major that would turn him into a one-termer.

    • Progressive gun controllers have even said “this is just a first step” just like red flag laws, etc. The universal background checks won’t stop anything except ensnare a couple of lawful owners and make private sales more of a hassle. Meanwhile, the Democrats will still say “do something, this isn’t enough, we need AWB, mag bans, silencer bans, body armor bans, registration, etc.” And they aren’t going to vote for Trump or other GOP or give them credit for it anyway.

      See also – California, each session they tighten the screws, they don’t say “whew, got our gun control compromise legislation, we are done, sweet!”

  1. Not that it seems to stop the left, but we have not given the federal government the Constitutional authority to regulate intrastate private sales. So what’s all this talk about universal background checks?

    • Gman,

      … we have not given the federal government the Constitutional authority to regulate intrastate private sales.

      Neither did we give the federal government the Constitutional authority to tell a farmer how much wheat he could plant and harvest exclusively for his own consumption on his own land. And yet a Progressive/Liberal United States Supreme Court majority affirmed the (non-existent) authority of the federal government to do just that in the case Wickard v. Filburn.

      Tyrants will never let words on a piece of paper stop them from achieving their objectives. That is what the Second Amendment is for.

  2. This is infuriating. What do you do, vote for the people that are slowly but surely eroding gun rights, or vote for the people that hate you strictly out of principle?

    • This is why I have never been a fan of Trump. He’s not on our side. He may not have a pathological hatred of us like others do, but he’ll sell us out to them if he thinks it’s good for him.

    • MouseGun,

      What should we do? Vote for the candidates who will install United States Supreme Court Justices who will uphold the Second Amendment.

      That means holding your nose and voting for Trump in 2020 who has already appointed two U.S. Supreme Court Justices who appear to support the Second Amendment.

      It also means (holding your nose if necessary and) voting for Republican United States Senators who will confirm Trump’s U.S. Supreme Court nominees.

      We still have a decent chance of obtaining powerful and far-reaching U.S. Supreme Court decisions which will eliminate (or at least de-legitimize) state and federal government ability to enact policies and laws that infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.

      Remember, Progressive Democrats have had a strangle hold on the U.S. Supreme Court for at least 100 years. Let’s not “throw out the baby with the bath water” and waste this opportunity to have a solid conservative U.S. Supreme Court working FOR us for a change rather than AGAINST us.

      Disclaimer: I am NOT a Trump fan-boy. I am even less of a fan of refusing to vote for Trump and enabling a much more dangerous politician to occupy the Oval Office.

      • The Ruth Bader Ginsburg argument (though Breyer could go first) is the only reason I haven’t given up on the whole bunch. If at some point the left succeeds in legalizing 20 million illegals the whole voting thing will be dead, and it will be wall to wall Socialists and you can kiss the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution goodbye, just like the 10th has been trashed already.

        If the leftists ever succeed in converting the 20 million illegals in this country to citizens, you can kiss this country goodbye. They will have permanent control of the Presidency, the House, and the Senate first they raise your taxes a bunch, and the next thing they will do is steal your 401k, since they will just put it in your Social Security Administration account with the excuse that you won’t have to worry about it not being there if there is a market downturn. They will suck it all out for a worthless IOU and use it to bail out the public employee unions in Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and California since they have promised out far more than they can pay.

      • And when the Supreme Court doesn’t protect rights, then what? The Court has already wiped its collective ass with the Constitution again and again. It takes in a case and hands back fragments of protection. Piece by piece, liberty loses in the Court. Do you ACTUALLY expect the Supreme Court to magically restore the exercise of your rights? It’s not in the Court’s interest to do so. The only thing that makes sense for the Supreme Court is to throw enough of a bone each time to keep the suckers buying into the scam.

        Government (ALL of it, including SCOTUS) is Lucy an you are Charlie Brown waiting to kick the football.

        • John in Ohio,

          I understand and share your frustration as well as your pessimism.

          And I remind you of a critical element to my comment: Progressive Democrats have had a strangle-hold on the United States Supreme Court and Appellate Courts for at least 100 years. Of course all those Progressive Democrat judges issued decisions that are good for the Ruling Class at the expense of the Working Class.

          We could finally be on the precipice of a period where conservative judges are numerous and issue decisions that are good for BOTH the Ruling Class AND the Working Class. We owe it to ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren to give it a go.

          If Trump loses 2020 and Democrats resume their strangle hold on the courts, then we can say that we have exhausted the soap box, ballot box, and jury box and have no hope of ever restoring the free exercise of our rights via any or all of those three boxes. Of course our only two options at that point are to acquiesce or to fight back. We will cross that bridge when we come to it.

        • @uncommon_sense

          I understood the critical element of your post the first time around. However, I do thank you for pointing it out in case I missed it. The bottom line for me is that I do not see the Court as any sort of a solution but rather a potentially slower slide down. Why I think that is dangerous is because as the generations march on, less and less is known about unalienable rights and liberty by the masses. IMHO, the best hope for restoration of individual liberty happens sooner rather than later. Delay, again IMHO, worsens the odds.

          “Of course our only two options at that point are to acquiesce or to fight back. We will cross that bridge when we come to it.”

          More than likely, I will sit out the 2020 election. In all honesty, I do find it difficult to vote directly for declared leftists but I also cannot vote for Trump. I like Trump as a person. I really enjoy his tweets. I didn’t think he was best for the nation the last election but I wanted so much for him to prove me wrong. I want to like him as President…

  3. “On guns and background checks, President Trump says he’s working on coming up with “something that’s acceptable to everybody”

    President Trump, there is nothing about the proposed background checks in any form that is acceptable to any right-thinking gun owner – nor should they be! Actually, I’d like to see the current background checks eliminated – they don’t prevent crime, they don’t prevent bad guys from getting guns, and are a major pain in the arse to people who legally want to buy a gun!

    • Actually there are laws that should be acceptable to everybody.

      There is a
      Proposal to replace NICs with a blind background check system that doesn’t record anybody’s info even at the store level. This would be a win for us and it could be applied to private sales without using an FFL. This would be a win as it would make less of a paper trial BUT could still be called “universal “ background checks

      This coupled with an expansion of CCW or updating the NFA could work.

      • CuteandFuzzy,

        There are problems even with your proposed system.

        First of all, government still gets to define what disqualifies us from exercising our rights. And government can quickly/easily expand disqualifiers to include almost everyone.

        Second, government can refuse to adequately staff your proposed system and no one will be able to get an answer when they contact the system, thus eliminating all future sales.

        Third, there is no provision for errors or disambiguation. What if government accidentally put me on the list? How do I get off of it? And what if my name is James T. Kirk and I live in Montana, and another person whose name is James T. Kirk lives in Montana who is a prohibited person?

        Fourth, in order to minimize false denials due to ambiguous situations, a buyer would have to give up his/her right to privacy and provide all sorts of information to the buyer. Do you like the idea of supplying some stranger (firearm seller) with your full name, date of birth, current address, social security number, and driver’s license number? I sure do not.

        Fifth, there is no way to ever confirm if a seller submitted the buyer to the background check system if the system is “blind”.

        Sixth, many/most of the recent spree-killers would have passed the background check!

        • That’s why we need to see the legislation before we run around like decapitated chickens.

          I can see a very easy way to run such a system. Just issue ticket numbers to the seller. The only thing kept in the database could, by statute, be limited to date of sale, firearm, seller info and approval number.

          I’ve actually spitballed a few ways to create such a system. Some are practical, others aren’t. I’d love to see what they come up with. A blanket federal preemption of state systems with an automated system with more protections than the current NICS could be a big win for us.

  4. “Acceptable to everyone?” There’s no such animal and never has been. The fact that Trump said such a thing shows that he’s not serious about protecting gun rights and the people who supported him believed in a false messiah. Trump is showing his true colors now, cutting deals with the Democrats. While he probably will win re-election, he’s not getting my vote. I’m voting Libertarian (again).

  5. Ooh no worries anyone once we expand background checks violence will cease, shootings will stop and a new era of peace will begin.

    Lol no seriously though. Why? Why do people need to justify and vote for the lesser of 2 evils. Im voting libertarian or another 3rd party. Maybe write in rand paul. If you vote trump youare voting overnment power and gun controll.

      • Love Trump or hate him – he’s far better than the Democrats who are climbing over each other to see who can be more anti-gun! The bottom line is that if you vote for a 3rd party candidate, you’ll literally be taking a vote away from Trump and giving it to the Left’s candidate!

        And if one of the buffoons that’s been debating in the Democratic primaries wins the election, you’ll WISH Trump was still president!!

        (In other words, as my mother would say: “Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face!!”) LOL

        • Trump is better than any of the Democrat hopefuls, true. Also, diabetes is better than cancer. That doesn’t mean that I want either of them.

    • “If you don’t vote Trump 2020 you are voting for government to control every aspect of your life.”
      Fixed it for you. 😉 After you vote your conscience, let me know how you feel about 4 years of democrat control. I feel you though, I wasn’t “there” yet during the last primaries and voted for Paul despite him just dropping out. I voted Trump during the general election.

      Otherwise I agree. The great thing about Universal background checks, is it will completely disarm gangs (not.)

        • Would you rather die today or 20 years from now? It’s happening no matter what. Might as well throw in the towel.

        • If everyone was choosing between being poisoned slowly or poisoned quickly but all they had to do was stop but everyone kept telling you to do it would you keep doing it?

          Analogies are better for clarifying points. I already understand your point. I don’t agree. People are choosing this.

          Death is inevitable. Voting for these people is a choice.

        • If the frog boils faster, it might jump and save its life. With Trump in the office, too many frogs think they are safe. Continuing to vote for Trump, IMHO, is enabling the decline rather than stalling it. The hotter the water gets before the frog notices, the more likely the frog will not notice and boil to death.

          Earlier in our history, I wouldn’t believe this to be the situation. But, I truly believe that the hour is that late and the frog is almost boiled to death. With the generations of public school indoctrination, continuing education indoctrination, mainstream and social media engineering, there is a tipping point at which a free nation can no longer regain its liberty while still remaining intact as a nation. Are we close? Are we already past that point? Could America heal her wounds and become one nation again? Has she let the wounds fester too long so that being whole again is impossible? The fact that these questions are viable ones today tells us that we are near the tipping point or beyond it. Anything that delays awakening the public to the truth of liberty and those who threaten it will be very damaging to the nation. IMHO, Trump delays that awakening and dampens the fighting spirit.

          What about once Trump is on his second term and doesn’t need votes? He’s willing to compromise with the left when it won’t gain him diddly in regards to votes even though he needs those votes. When he no longer has to worry about re-election, what is to keep him from compromising “bigly”? If he does, his long term supporters will be eager to repress dissension and slow to call him out. The result will be a delay in backlash. There is so much damage that can be done in four years with that sort of dynamic going on.

    • Biatec,


      That is the ONLY reason that I will be voting for Trump: to strengthen the majority on the U.S. Supreme Court which will uphold our inalienable right to keep and bear arms. The implications of that are immense and far-reaching — too immense and far reaching to throw away for principle. After all, what sort of principle are you really advocating if your action undermines your very principle?

      • You talk of principals but none of those people support my principles. In fact the people he appointed are unprincipled. I’m voting for tyranny either way. There is no direction with either. It’s not better it’s less. They are still anti gun, anti privacy, anti property rights and anti freedom.

        If Trump had been an improvement in one of those areas I could have supported him. he dropped the ball and does not align with any of my views anymore on the Constitution. Why is he better?

        Well maybe the court will be against assault weapons bans. Maybe. if they support red flag laws though? If they support the bumpstock ban?

        If the courts uphold any of those things will you still call it a win? We always lose more than we gain. It is because we vote for it.

        • So you see no difference between more Antonin Scalias or more Ruth Bader Ginsburgs? Do you really believe it would be the same? If Trump wins again, there’s a good chance he fills two more vacancies on the Supreme Court. That would be a solid conservative majority for a generation despite congress and the executive branch alternating between democrat and republican control.

        • Of course there is a difference. They disagree on how privileged we are. One wants more gun control and one wants more but not as much or at best thinks what we have now is the line of where it should be.

          If they end the nfa, 86 machine gun ban, 1968 gun control act, get rid of background check system or any of those at all. I will say I was wrong. I have no doubt they support some expansions like Trump.

          Repeating the same things over and over at me won’t make me agree. Scallia was so wrong on heller. It was blatantly wrong and it was poison pilled.

          How is common use acceptable in any way? That right there is a loss.

        • Yeah I realized Scalia was a bad example after I submitted it, but when comparing him with Ginsburg, it’s night and day. I’m not a single issue voter. The current crop of democrats controlling the Supreme Court is downright terrifying.

        • I am a directionalist. If Trump had not added to gun control I would have been supportive. If he opposed re authorization of the patriot act or what ever it’s called now. There are lots of things he could have done to keep my support. It’s never ever in that direction unless it’s something small that does not outweigh the federal infringements.

          Even pulling all troops and military out of the middle east would have kept me.

          It doesn’t have to be everything or a lot. Just one of those things listed in the bill of rights. if he had just not added to gun control or went against some of the other stuff he would be worth it to me.

          I get the courts. The problem is we are telling politicians they can infringe more on our rights. Then the next generation will have grown up with red flag laws, or other government expansions and it will just be normal to them.

          It’s a cycle that if we don’t break it things will keep circling the drain.

        • Biatec,

          I agree that the Heller decision has some serious flaws.

          And do you know why the Heller decision has some serious flaws? Because Justice Kennedy demanded them and otherwise promised to side with the Progressive Democrat Justices and uphold Washington D.C.’s handgun ban.

          I do not believe for one second that the Heller decision would have those flaws if we had two solid conservative Justices in place of Kennedy and Ginsburg (or one of the other Progressive Democrat Justices).

          That’s right. Justice Scalia opted for a pro-Second Amendment ruling with flaws rather than open Pandora’s box and allow bans of entire classes of firearms to stand. That is why we need more conservative judges on the U.S. Supreme Court — so that we do not have to accept weak/flawed pro-Second Amendment rulings.

      • Uncommon_sense: you have it correctly. No politician is going to be reliable, but if we can get a Supreme Court that is solidly Constitution-based, we improve our chances. Even the Supreme Court will not be perfectly for us. Bottom line, we can never stop fighting but we have to elect somebody, even if it is the lesser of two weevils (name that movie!).

        • Biatec,

          Right…it ain’t perfect, not even close. But we gots to gets as close as we can.
          That, and because everything changes, we are standing on shifting sand.

        • Voting is like taking the Bar exam. You don’t choose the correct answer, you choose the best available answer. Single issue voters and perfectionists will always be disappointed.

    • Except for about six that I know of the commenters here aren’t pro-gun, in any way that matters outside of their own heads. Some of them know it, most don’t. They’ll whine about politics and think they’re talking tough. Or try to threaten you, like they’re in a position. That’s about it. Typical spoiled-child-tantrum stuff. It’s sad how many people have apparently reached chronological adulthood with that frame of mind.

      • Really? You are rating us? Quick everybody!! Put on your makeup and don your most revealing swimsuits! We are in a beauty contest!!

        My apology!
        Just seemed too good an opportunity to pass on.

  6. Nothing they come up with will be “acceptable to everyone”. It’s a foolish and stupid statement. Somebody always gets their rice bowl kicked over.

    • You’re right. Let’s wait until he instructs his BATFE to change the classification of piece of plastic to a machinegun or something. Wait…what? “Take guns first and due process later”?

  7. Nothing they come up with will satisfy me.
    Work within all the crappy laws that already make life for the honest law abbiding when it comes to the 2nd. BS.

  8. How are we all feeling about the NYSRPA v NYC Supreme Court case? I believe they are supposed to rule on the mootness of the case in early October.

    • Im holding my breath for a change.
      If the court does what it should. What it must according to law. Strict scrutiny.
      The Libitards will all have heart attacks and die.
      But theres still Roberts the unknown chicken shit.
      The majority of all this none discussion will go away.

  9. Article says,”Check out the video below,” but there is no link to any video.
    It’s just a photo, with nothing to click on.

    By the way, do you know why, in this photo and every other photo, you see Trump sitting on every chair like he’s sitting on a toilet?
    It’s because he’s wearing three-inch vanity lifts in his shoes. That’s also why he leans whenever he’s standing; he’s wearing three-inch high heels, three-inch vanity lifts in his shoes.
    That’s also why when he’s on a golf course he’s three inches shorter, because when golfing he wears regular golf shoes instead of high heels (vanity lifts).

    He lies about his height by three inches, just like he lies about everything else. He’s just a short, fat man in high heels.

  10. Even the corrupt prostitutes of the NRA, the Republicans, know they do not stand a chance in hell of being re-elected in 2020 if they do nothing about “the gun problem” in the U.S. Universal Back Ground checks look like a certainty and the Republican know if they do not do it and take credit for it the Democrats are going to do it after 2020 elections because their will then be no Republicans left to stop them.

    • We have a criminal problem. Firearms do not cause crime.

      People with your beliefs are directly aiding the criminal element.

    • None of this has anything to do with Republicans. Its all CS Libitards waving bloody shirts and yelling at everyone while no one is listening. There are more laws already useless on the books that no one prosecutes anyone for.
      Use the laws we already have and then just go away please.

    • I like to talk big and sound confident but even I know Donald Trump will be reelected in 2020 and the extremist socialist nut cases in the House of Representatives are going to throw away the Democrat majority in that chamber.

      I am going to be really sad about missing out on all of the free stuff the Hairy Kameltow has promised me.

      – The Real True Original Vlad Tepes

  11. I have 2 main interests in voting in 2020-pro-2A and anti-baby murder. Since I KNOW abortion will never be abolished it leaves gun right’s as numero uno. Drumph is effing up. Even the so-called conservative judges are not a reliable indicator of voting tendencies. Except Thomas. My vote counts for nada in ILL so I’ll just go back to not voting except n local elections…lock n loads patriots.

    • Even the Liberals will be on your side once hypocrites like you start adopting all these unwanted children, many of which are minorities. Reality check. You never will so stay out of other peoples lives, its none of your damn business if a woman decides to end a pregnancy.

      • I learned all about how to impress feminists with my emasculated woke-speak when I took some college classes but they still wont have anything to do with me. I dont understand why other boys get to touch girls and the girls like it but every time I try it I get arrested.

        – The Real True Original Vlad Tepes

      • I’m all for keeping abortion legal. It’s mostly leftist women who are aborting anyway. Let them continue to exterminate the little future communists before they can grow up and vote. It’s a preemptive strike that works in our favor.

  12. We could use those new RealID driver’s licenses with the QC code and a phone app for sellers to directly background check buyers in NICS and get a confirmation number for your standardized private bill of sale.

    TaDa! Universal background checks!

    No government record of the firearm(s) transferred.

    Background check system available for other checks not related to firearms.

  13. Trump is no friend of gun owners or the Second Amendment. Never has been, never will be. He scammed the NRA out of millions of dollars in campaign support, that’s all he was ever about so far as gun owners are concerned..

  14. Theres absolutely nothing we can do about it. It will happen. Just like there will be a lot more psychopathic mass shootings.and politicians will always focus on the wrong issues. Pure stupidity.

  15. As others have said, here is Trumps chance to alienate tens of thousands of his supporters.
    Without getting a single leftist or independent vote in return.
    Better to have a Democrat president and a Republican House and Senate so that the presidents gun control measures can be opposed by the Republican Party.
    Even the rhinos are for gun control, they would not give a Democrat president such a political victory.

  16. I echo the one reader’s comment. That is, why in the hell are WE the ones always doing the compromising? I do not see the Demon-Rats and gun haters giving one damned inch. They never have. Why should we? The scary thing is, if this is how Trump is acting (and these are his views) towards the Second Amendment NOW, while he is actively campaigning for a second, Presidential term, how will Trump be if he is elected, and then has nothing to lose once he is elected for a second term? He will not have to bother with satisfying gun owners or Second Amendment supporters then. He will be free to sh** all over the Second Amendment-with Demon-Rat’s and RINO’s full support. Trump may be playing 3-D chess to lure unsuspecting Democrats, I do not know, to show Americans just how evil they are. Perhaps that is all he is doing. But, on the surface, he appears unstable with gun rights. And it is enough to make me leery about how he would act in a second term.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here