Trump to NRA: ‘Eight-Year Assault’ on Gun Rights Is Over

[Amp]

He is the first sitting president since Ronald Reagan to speak to the NRA.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-nra-eight-year-assault-gun-rights-over-n752446

[Totem Polar]

indeed.

[NH Shooter]

I voted for The Donald twice - once in the NH primary and then on Nov. 8. I remain optimistic I made the right choice.

[ssb]

Awesome. HPA/NFA reform when?

[NETim]

Awesome. HPA/NFA reform when?

Unfortunately, the Repubs are all hat and no cattle. I won't hold my breath. There should at least, be much less NRA bashing from the bully pulpit when the next nutjob wants his 15 minutes of fame. Should be none frankly.

[breakingtime91]

I just want national ccw recognition. I move with my wife all the time because of her .mil job, being able to carry my gun in each would be great.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

It was good to hear support for the 2nd Amend. but the speech (cynical me) was very light on actual actions. Hunting ammo - that's nice but the 2nd Amend. is not about hunting. Better SCOTUS - great - but will they do anything proactive? Will they actually take and undo the state weapons bans which are the most virulent threat in the near future?

Trump and this SCOTUS stops Federal infringement but the state ones are very bad. He could have pushed reciprocity (which is controversial in some RKBA quarters for various reasons).

HPA - that's nice but it's not a real core threat not to have such. The state bans are core threats as they can increase. I want to see either SCOTUS or Federal legislative action to undo and forbid them.

All the talk about the wall - irrelevant to the issues of the 2nd Amend. It's not enough to say nothing else will occur, I would like to see a roll back. Get rid of the Post office ban for instance.

The Washington Post said the HPA is a big deal for the NRA. Sorry, it's not a big deal. It's a nice appetizer. So if they get HPA and the state weapons ban stand, I don't give a crap about the HPA as a fundamental threat of such bans across the country still exists. Changes in state demographics or panic legislation can take a menu of weapons out of use.

Sorry to be a downer but I deal with results and not speeches. I'm waiting.

[Gray222]

+1 for let's see something happen.

Of course the HPA would be fantastic, and possibly has a better chance of passing than some other bills may, but he has to start doing something....like yesterday.

[spinmove_]

I think the HPA is a great step in the right direction. At this stage in the game we're not going to see the NFA repealed. Too many evil/bad/scary things covered in that to get people kilt in da streetz. There's no good reason why suppressors shouldn't be more accessible.

I envision one day we'll see a Baby Roland. G26, RMR, stippled, SCD, micro can that makes the barrel length equivalent to G17/G34, pinky extensions or magazine extensions. Quiet, concealable, and useful.

National Reciprocity would be nice, but HPA has a better shot IMHO.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[Suvorov]

While it may very well mean good things in a national scale it will have little affect for a long time for the proletariat second class in Kalifornia where the US Constitution is null and void.

[octagon]

I agree that the HPA has a better chance of passing than a national reciprocity(NR) bill but NR is so much more important and fitting with the nature of the second amendment. The second amendment is about protection from tyrannical government and self defense more than anything. What good is it to have hearing protection when people cannot even leave their home with a firearm available for protection. Too many states and jurisdictions restrict or basically ban self defense with a firearm outside the home property. NR will do the most to correct this. Silencer/suppressors are nice but still an accessory to the firearm and less to do with bearing arms. Don't get me wrong I hope the HPA passes and NFA repeal too as a long shot. But NR seems so much more important to focus money and efforts on.

I am speaking from a retired LEO position where I have NR already so I am not being selfish as I already have the benefits I think all American deserve that LEOSA provides.

[ssb]

The state issue will ultimately have to be worked out by the SCOTUS. Much like with the First Amendment, there's an entire body of law waiting to be developed. Trump's laid part of the ground work for that, which is great -- though another good Justice or two won't hurt. Apart from ordering DOJ to not fight against lawsuits vs. the Feds (which isn't where the fight is), his job on the court front is over.

What he has direct control over is the Federal regulatory apparatus. Good, but not permanent. What he can also do is push legislatively for the sorts of reforms we need. And, at least right now, he's shown no movement on that front. Realistically, he's only got another two years to do it (and, if midterms don't go well, possibly even less time). I get that he's got bigger fish to fry -- he was elected on a lot of big promises -- but there's no time like the present. This time next year, Congress will have other, more selfish priorities.

[spinmove_]

I'm not saying NR isn't more important. I'm just saying HPA has a better chance of passing.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[Glenn E. Meyer]

It is my opinion and not being a constitutional lawyer, that the state bans could be wiped out legislatively. Just as the Voting rights acts wiped out state laws that infringed on voting, the Federal level could legislatively ban infringement on unreasonable restrictions on firearms that are clearly protected by the 2nd Amendment. Waiting for SCOTUS to take them down - that is never going to happen.

In fact, a legislative solution would be challenged by the evil states of NY, MA, CA, NJ, CO, CT, etc. that have state bans. That would force SCOTUS to get off their duffs and decide whether an AR-15 with a 30 round mag or a Glock 17 with 17 rounds qualify for reasonable restrictions. Such a negative decision would negate the idea that the 2nd is anything more than you can have a ducky-wucky gun and maybe a Model 10 to wave at a burglar.

However, such a ploy is contrary to the deep political strategy of keeping bans a possible in order to garner votes in elections and increase fund raising for progun organizations with big budgets. Membership high numbers depends on protecting the 2nd Amend. and not ducky-wucky issues.

How many folks who just bought a Shield, Glock 19 or AR care about lead ammo and birds?

[Wendell]

Gun control organizations accused Mr. Trump of supporting what they call the “extremist” agenda of the N.R.A. In a statement on Thursday, two of those groups — Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action — vowed to oppose efforts by the gun group to “allow more guns for anyone, anywhere, no questions asked.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/28/us/politics/donald-trump-nra.html?_r=1 (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/28/us/politics/donald-trump-nra.html?_r=1)

[jc000]

Donald Trump can suck it.