I really wish someone would press Trump on mass shootings and how he would deal with them.

One person can't win against Checks and Balances in regards to installing themselves as ongoing leader when their term is done.

 

Does he? Where has she been? He was brazen enough to attack an opponent a few months back about his wife's absence, but no one seemed to find Melania's absence noteworthy.

If he has billions, why did he need a bond to settle the E. Jean Carroll judgement? Why does he constantly ask for your donations? Why is he insisting that all funds raised by the RNC go to pay his legal bills?

Why don't his believers see through this?

 

The Abraham Accords were the culmination of talks that began years before Trump. He just happened to be in office when the various middle east nations finally sat down and signed. It was great PR for him, and to his credit (or a grownup in the WH urging him), he left the process alone and managed to not screw it up. That's why so few Americans have ever heard of the Abraham Accords.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Accords#Background

"A rapprochement between Israel and Sunni Arab states took place in the 2010s due to their shared fear of Shiite Iran and its nuclear program. By 2017, unofficial cooperation with Saudi Arabia had been ongoing for at least 5 years, with intelligence services from both countries assisting each other and officials regularly sharing intelligence.[15] By 2016, summits and conferences between high-ranking Israeli—Palestinian and Israeli—Arab politicians and direct contacts between their security and intelligence services had not only become routine but were openly discussed in major Arab media."

 

A Democrat Congress will never side with Trump on anything, not even gun control. So, they won't send him a gun control bill to sign.

A Republican Congress won't send him a gun control bill to sign, anyway.

 

Which of those parts is "silly"? That he will never become a dictator, or that he's the only President in our history who attempted to extend his term limit using violence?

They both would have sounded VERY silly before January 6.

 

Still blurting out falsehoods you CANNOT prove?
not only is that sad but its SUPER OBVIOUS
you will need FACTS to contend with me, not your FEELINGS about false left wing talking points
ready............GO!!!

 

He is a crowd appeaser, so he'd say whatever they want to hear to get their votes. Once in WH, he won't have to worry about what people want, so gun grabbing is a good possibility.

 

Weird post. I'm still not sure what "talking point" you are referring to, but facts are available on videos related January 6.

You're in such state of denial that you don't even say WHAT the "falsehood" is supposed to be?

 

Nope, sorry.

 

This isn't even a Jan 6th thread so the need to bring that up in the 1st place in a non-related thread is what I find to be "weird".
I'm not in denial of anything. He may have incited people but his words were not those of INCITEMENT. Also its funny you people want us to give a crap about ONE riot and ignore ALL the others. Now back to the gun topic, thank you!

 

That’s not even a valid point to discredit mine. How are we even supposed to debate a “Nope, sorry”?

Tell me. How would you defend yourself against someone with a gun? You will never get all the guns off the streets. So you must be capable of defending yourself. If you’re not I would argue it’s your own fault.

 

Last time he didn’t need congress to enact gun control. I fail to see the point here.

 

Irrelevant, I don't have a gun and don't live in fear.

 

Then I suppose you aren’t advocating for gun control either.

 

Nope, I advocate for gun confiscation.

 

Why? If you’re not scared of them then why advocate for that?

 

The point is, the only way any kind of gun ban is inacted is through an act of Congress. The Republicans aren't going to do it and the Democrats aren't going to team up with Trump on that, or anything else.

 

By the definition change Trump enacted the Bump Stock is a gun and it was confiscated. This isn’t a semantic argument. Under law it is a gun.

 

So you don't understand that guns kill people. Got it.

 

Many things kill people. What’s your point.

 

Trump pretty well kept his word to protect the 2nd amendment. If you try to put yourself in the job- it's easy to see how many issues where the divided sentiment places great pressure on the person in office, and anyone who actually cares about the people and democracy has to walk a careful line- supporting what he believes, without demonizing those who don't agree. No matter what a president says, someone will attack him for it, so I look at what they do. What they say is for public image; what they do reflects what they believe. I didn't see Trump undermining the Constitution, something I think Biden does every day.

As with many political policies, the old saying of "Give them an inch and they will take a mile" is true. If we honored the Second as it is written, there would be no gun registration, no rules about things like magazine size, suppressors and such. Some of those things have been allowed despite being unconstitutional, to both have some control over criminal elements and appease some of those who fear guns more than criminals. This is "Latitude", a degree of stretch, or even overlooking aspects of law for cause. But we know that much of the pressures of such issue are not based on logic, but on emotion.

I try to remember this when I listen to positions and try to decide if it is a reasonable compromise- or pursuit of greater or lesser controls. Personally, I would apply control with the consequences, meaning the criminal use of guns would bring fast and very powerful consequences. We would not have people being arrested for murder multiple times, not spending 20 years waiting for their sentence to actually happen.
We would blame gun violence on the criminal instead of the gun, where it has always belonged. That would indeed bring crime down.

I do think that mass shootings are not the same as typical criminal shootings, but are much more the result of mental states. They must be addressed before the event can occur, and these typically provide substantial signs in advance.... that get ignored, even when supplied to the FBI, as was the case in the Parkland incident. We protect the identities of seriously troubled people, as medical records. Needs to be a point where that is given latitude and we can monitor those people, and intercede before they go over the edge. Schools too could be more proactive and put troubled people on that list- but so far, that's not getting attention.

We are in desperate need of leadership that is strong and committed to the Constitution, instead of one that bends to every special interest.

 

You keep speaking of compromise and the constitution as if the constitution permits compromise as justification for trumps behavior.

given he was the first president to confiscate firearms and the first to demand destruction of a firearm and his comments on how parts of the constitution should be ignored. I would have to ask for some time to calm down before I irrationally respond.

 

You are making up your own news now? Or buying LW propaganda? What?

 

Did he not tell people they either had to destroy or turn in the bump stock?

The answer is yes.

then look up the definition of a full auto, which after Trump now includes the bump stock as a firearm.

he did by all legal purposes ban a legally defined firearm. Whether you agree with that definition or not the bump stock by definition is a firearm. Which makes him the first president in history to demand a confiscation or destruction order on a government defined firearm.

and as for me following a liberal news link find me one single *******n liber link that demonizes Trump for that order. Are you really even asking me that? I’m more right leaning than anyone on this forum when it comes to the 2nd for calling this out for what it is. Anyone making excuses for this are playing into liberal hands!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Fake news. This disinformation campaign by Bribed Joe and the other Democrats is a desperate attempt to direct attention away from Bribed Joe's plans to give away the US auto industry to Mexico and the Chinese Communists.

Trump Reveals Plan To Impose 100 Percent Tariffs On Chinese Cars Made In Mexico

"Those big monster car manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now. You think you're going to get that, not hire Americans."

The bloodbath that will be headed off by Trump's election is the bloodbath that Biden plans for the auto industry by turning over the rest of the auto industry to China and Mexico. Mexico has already walked off with a third of the Auto industry, and Bribed Joe plans to turn over the rest to them and their Chinese partners.

Not with Trump in charge.

Bribed Joe has accepted $Millions in Chinese bribes, that's why he has announced NO TARIFFS to protect US Auto Workers from the Chinese/Mexican alliance that is working to take the US Auto Industry from US Auto Workers.

Trump is working to prevent the Bloodbath in the Auto Industry, that Bribed Joe has planned.

'A Feb. 20 report by the Alliance for American Manufacturing warned that China posed an “existential threat” to the American auto industry if it uses the Mexico route to sell vehicles. Manufacturing in Mexico will grant Chinese automakers “more favorable tariffs” under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).'

Not if Trump is president. Auto Workers are part of the Working and Middle Class that the Rich Privileged Gentry loath and disdain, they can't wait to see them laid off so they can tell them to "learn to code".

'This essentially hands over Chinese auto companies “backdoor access” to American consumers, allowing them to circumvent current U.S. policies that are keeping them away from the American market. “This is an auto industry backed by the Chinese state. It has invested heavily in foreign markets in order to access more of them,” the report stated.'

Not on Trump's watch, they won't.