Trump calls for raising minimum age to buy all guns to 21

My guess would be not very.
I think Trump says whatever he thinks people want to hear without any convictions on the matter in the hopes that people will only remember the times he says something they like.
Leads to a whole lot of talking and not a lot of doing.

 

Sounds like a prominent Dem who lost her bid to be president, and most everyone in congress, the previous admin, the admin before that, the admin before that, .........

 

Tell that to a hundred million dead Russians, Germans, Chinese, Cambodians,..........

 

It didn't go anywhere because there is too much opposition to Trump's gun control agenda. But the fact remains: Trump supports gun control. He is not a conservative.

 

Trump wants to revoke it as well. He wants to use a secret government watchlist to summarily revoke second amendment rights without due process. Trump is an east coast liberal. A huckster. The only reason conservatives like Trump is because he doesn't openly disdain them the way the rest of the political class does. That is how desperate conservatives have become. They're willing to support a coastal liberal for president just because he's nice to them.

 

He may. However his sons are pretty staunch 2Aers. Supposing he does want to ban guns (which Im not convinced just because he's an east coaster), I see them influencing him, for better or worse, against it.

 

If Trump's watchlist proposal were put into place, that would be a total overturn of the second amendment. So it's a pretty scary thought knowing that Trump's crazy gun control agenda is determined largely by who is able to influence him on a given day.

 

Funny how today's libs can call a big government guy a "conservative".

 

Absence of guns had nothing to do with the rise of Totalitarianism.

Number of victims in Russia and China was vastly exaggerated by Cold War Propaganda. Communists had excesses, but they were much less brutal then Nazis.

 

Mao's death toll is about ten times the Holocaust.

 

To you find a level of brutality acceptable?

 

Liberals should love Trump. He agrees with them on so much.

 

I do not know. I know that American Cold War Propaganda exaggerated the number of people who died in Stalin's Penal System by a factor of 10.

 

if they can change the age of being an adult to 21 for alcohol and e-cigs, then they could do it for guns too

either we have one age for being an adult, or multiple, people have to make up their minds

though it is funny, had a dem proposed this, the right would be going nuts

 

No. Many people have died from Joseph Stalin's Penal System:

-- 800 thousand executed
-- 1.4 million died in camps
-- 1.0 million died in exile

The loss of the 3.2 million lives is a tragedy.

Yet Joseph Stalin played the greatest role of any mortal in saving the World from Nazism. Nazis killed 6 million Jews and 15 million other civilians/POWs.

USA also had many civilian victims during Cold War -- about 2.5 million civilians killed by US firepower in Korea and SouthEast Asia.

 

the good guys write the history, and while both killed many people, we will never know exact numbers, both are probably exaggerated as who is gonna argue it at the time, no one, but we all know the bad happened

 

I am neither Liberal nor Conservative. I like Trump. Now he saves lives by abandoning Conservative pro-gun orthodoxy.

 

You make a strong case for armed citizens.

 

Stalin's Repressions were almost a necessary evil. USSR was in emergency situation -- preparing for war. Nazi Victory would have been the end of Humankind.

 

We have to kill you, for your own good

 

Sad as it is, fast industrialization was needed to save Humankind from Nazi victory. Many people died, but otherwise, hundreds of millions would have died.

 

Another strong case for our second amendment.

 

Thank you for bringing up the example of how bad the Nazis were….

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.” Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426.

But they were far from the only ones who realized that gun control and the denial of the RKBA was a necessary prequel to tyrannical population control. Indeed, when Mao coined his famous phrase:

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun"

he was merely paraphrasing a universal truth known to man for centuries:

"For those who can possess and wield arms are in a position to decide whether the constitution is to continue or not." Aristotle, Politics, T. Sinclair Trans. 1962, p. 274

Aristotle himself relates some of the history of how tyrants disarmed their subjects to control them:

“Winning the battle of Pallenis, he seized the government and disarmed the people; and now he held the tyranny firmly, and he took Naxos and appointed Lygdamis ruler. The way in which he disarmed the people was this: he held an armed muster at the Temple of Theseus, and began to hold an Assembly, but he lowered his voice a little, and when they said they could not hear him, he told them to come up to the forecourt of the Acropolis, in order that his voice might carry better; and while he used up time making a speech, the men told off for this purpose gathered up the arms, locked them up in the neighboring buildings of the Temple of Theseus, and came and informed Peisistratus.” Aristotle, Athenian Constitution. (Emphasis added).

There are many other examples we could cite, but suffice to say that gun control has a more that 2,000 year history of being an essential tool of oppression. And lest you think that I am a smug American who views my own nation to be a continual paragon of protecting civil liberty, I have a confession to make...

Not once, not twice, but three separate times has my nation engaged in the denial of the RKBA as a means of population control—and each time it has been a tool of racial oppression.

Once was the denial of the RKBA to African American slaves—both before, during, and after the Civil War.

Another time was the denial of the RKBA to Native Americans—a practice that did not end until 1979.

Finally, while Hitler was denying the RKBA to his “subjects,” my nation rounded up American citizens of Japanese ancestry and forcibly interned them in our own concentration camps—where we also absolutely denied them their RKBA.

There are many of us here who recognize the lesson from this history and simply do not wish to see any of this past revisited upon us or our children. Here are two excellent summations of our position:

Editor Loyal Georgian: Have colored persons a right to own and carry firearms?--A Colored Citizen
Almost every day we are asked questions similar to the above. We answer certainly you have the same right to own and carry arms that other citizens have. You are not only free but citizens of the United States and as such entitled to the same privileges granted to other citizens by the Constitution. . . . Article II, of the amendments to the Constitution of the United States, gives the people the right to bear arms, and states that this right shall not be infringed. Any person, white or black, may be disarmed if convicted of making an improper or dangerous use of weapons, but no military or civil officer has the right or authority to disarm any class of people, thereby placing them at the mercy of others. All men, without distinction of color, have the right to keep and bear arms to defend their homes, families or themselves." From issues of the Loyal Georgian, January 20, 27 and February 3, 1866.

“And I cannot see, why arms should be denied to any man who is not a slave, since they are the only true badges of liberty. . . .The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He who has nothing, and belongs to another, must be defended by him, and needs no arms: but he who thinks he is his own master, and has anything he may call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself and what he possesses, or else he lives precariously and at discretion. And though for a while those who have the sword in their power abstain from doing him injury; yet, by degrees, he will be awed into submission to every arbitrary command. Our ancestors, by being always armed, and frequently in action, defended themselves against the Romans, Danes, and English; and maintained their liberty against encroachments of their own princes.” Andrew Fletcher, Political Works, pp. 35 and 221 (1749).

 

Yes, die with valor for your fellow humans.

 

You're a statist who supports big government, just like Trump.