• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Donald Trump's Stance on Gun Laws / 2nd Amendment

Status
Not open for further replies.
If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

Sooo free health care isn't a right, but owning a gun to shoot an imaginary threat is a right.

Folk if you vote this guy as your president the whole world is going to go back at laughing at you.

GUN AND MAGAZINE BANS. Gun and magazine bans are a total failure.

I dunno, UK has a strict gun law and we seem to be doing okay.
 
Owning a gun is a right?

No, defending your home from a government invasion is a right.

Do people honestly believe that the founding fathers just one day said "We like guns, so owning a gun should be a right"?
 
A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

I just can't.
 
A lot of stuff Donald says is basically "Fuck States' Rights, let the fed control it." I'm for more gun control, and if this guy gets in office I just hope he ups the requirements for background checks.
 
I hope one day we get a stacked 9 liberal Supreme Court and they hear a case regarding the Second Amendment and rule a reinterpretation that gun ownership is limited to members of state regulated and authorized militias, namely the National Guard.
 
I should probably learn to shoot one of these days. Guns scare the crap out of me though.

Just go take a shooter class. There is nothing wrong with being afraid of firearms, but once you know how to use and handle them properly that fear turns more into respect than anything else.

I hope one day we get a stacked 9 liberal Supreme Court and they hear a case regarding the Second Amendment and rule a reinterpretation that gun ownership is limited to members of state regulated and authorized militias, namely the National Guard.

Every person between the ages of 18 and I think 42 is part of the national militia. SO even that wont work. Nice try though!
 
The firearm of my choice?

SHI-GDLH-AT4_1_mark.jpg


Come at me.
Nothing stopping you. It's a class III device. Legal to own. Just a couple extra steps, though. And they're just expensive in general. But a lot of full auto or destructive devices are.
 
Pretty smart play here by Trump. He's catching flak for the Muslim inaction and decides to completely change the narrative.

Taking this position is idiotic if he actually wanted to win more than the nomination, which now I'm not so sure he did. It's too simple of a mistake for anyone who has a bare minimum of common sense about what it would take for him to defy the odds and actually win. He would have had to stay much more in the middle on this issue. It's over now, if it wasn't already.
 
I'm just going to kind of flip things around and say he's right.

He's right that if we interpret the 2nd Amendment in that (really stupid) way, then he's right. In my opinion if we really literally think guns are a right, then why should the government pick and choose which ones? Same thing I've said in other threads, too, that if we think owning a gun is a right, then we can't have background checks and not allow them to people with mental problems, too.

That's why owning a gun isn't a fucking right. It's a privilege.
 
Just go take a shooter class. There is nothing wrong with being afraid of firearms, but once you know how to use and handle them properly that fear turns more into respect than anything else.



Every person between the ages of 18 and I think 42 is part of the national militia. SO even that wont work. Nice try though!
The Second Amendment only provides for a "well regulated militia" which could be interpreted as only the Organized Militia (National Guard) defined under the Militia Act of 1903 and not Reserve Militia.
 
Repel the NFA and I'll vote Trump, then again I don't trust him. I think he would be the first person to push gun control based on his background
 
Taking this position is idiotic if he actually wanted to win more than the nomination, which now I'm not so sure he did. It's too simple of a mistake for anyone who has a bare minimum of common sense about what it would take for him to defy the odds and actually win. He would have had to stay much more in the middle on this issue. It's over now, if it wasn't already.

I think he leaves himself enough room around the background check aspect that he'll be able to pivot closer to the middle ground for the general. He really needed a kick for his campaign right now though, and due to the decisiveness around gun control in both parties I think this will quickly become the focus of debate and distract from his horrible performance lately. He can definitely recover from this. He can't recover from the "Obama is a Muslim" issue continuing to be at forefront.
 
Fuck it. Lets all get guns? I mean..


Fuck it.

"Fuck it"
- Trump, moments before the page went live

I think he leaves himself enough room around the background check aspect that he'll be able to pivot closer to the middle ground for the general. He really needed a kick for his campaign right now though, and due to the decisiveness around gun control in both parties I think this will quickly become the focus of debate and distract from his horrible performance lately. He can definitely recover from this. He can't recover from the "Obama is a Muslim" issue continuing to be at forefront.

The country is not on board with aggressive takes promoting more gun ownership right now, if ever again. He doesn't need to pander to the base anymore, they're borderline insane. The country will resoundingly reject a candidate with this position, not to mention that he doesn't need the added burden of having to defend such a difficult position. It's the death knell.
 
I see nothing wrong with him saying concealed carry license should be a nation wide license like a drivers license. It should be.
 
Study after study has shown that very few criminals are stupid enough to try and pass a background check – they get their guns from friends/family members or by stealing them.

This is exactly why background checks aren't enough. We need to start ridding our country of guns, not flooding it with more of them.
 
This is exactly why background checks aren't enough. We need to start ridding our country of guns, not flooding it with more of them.

You're missing the point. The problem is obviously mental health. Let's stop criminals from becoming criminals in the first place. I can't tell you how we'll do that, probably more jail and the death penalty but in the mean time, here's a gun so you feel safe.
 
That is not how a reasonable person reads the phrase "bear arms". That sounds like he's reaching in order to justify why the line that already exists is allowed and can never move.

Obviously Scalia's a fucking moron. Remember people, he was the majority opinion on the case that gave us gun rights as they exist right now.
 
The Second Amendment only provides for a "well regulated militia" which could be interpreted as only the Organized Militia (National Guard) defined under the Militia Act of 1903 and not Reserve Militia.

You need to read it a few more times. The right belongs to the people, to enable the possibility of raising of a well-regulated militia. The current existence of that militia is not a pre-condition to the people having the right. Even if the government purports to negate the need for militias by supplying its own, the people still own the right, exclusive of the government's actions.

Do you think the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, as provided in the 1st amendment, disappears because nobody uses the word 'redress' anymore? Does the internet negate the right of the people to peaceably assemble, since you can just chat online instead?


.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom