Dems see Trump as potential ally on gun reform

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

Absolutely HUGE concern IMO!!  Trump will swing to whoever gives him the most kudos and praise. This is a problem. If 2A is a major issue for you (seems like that describes most of you on here) - I suggest you harness those activist skills and contact the White House regarding your firm support of the 2nd and your expectation that POTUS will meet his promises in that regard.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/dems-see-trump-as-potential-ally-on-gun-reform/ar-AAsUY66?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

[capt14k 2,052]

Trump is firmly Pro-2A. He had a transformation lead by his sons. Both of whom are big game hunters and competitive shooters. The Dems and Fake News are grasping at straws. He will not disappoint and alienate his heirs for anyone.

 

There was nearly as many people killed and injured by firearms in Chicago last month as there was during the Vegas Shooting. Chicago has strict gun laws. Nothing will change.

 

 

 

[jackandjill 683]

Thanks @Mrs. Peel. I am putting together a personal note to my local, state and WH poli-critters.

There is far more sinister strategy behind some stuff in that article, but discussing that is for 1A. 

 

[Spawne32 37]

Trump is unpredictable and unstable, and does whatever makes him look good with his base. I doubt an assault rifle ban like the one in the 90's would get proposed, but they could potentially get legislation passed on banning bump stocks and gat-triggers which could include other limitations like restrictions on capacities, mail order ammunition and other modifications or accessories. All depends on how he perceives his support by the public. Since directly after a tragedy the loudest voices are always the anti-gun advocates, its hard to tell which way he will sway. Good news is the house, senate and white house are in republican control during this, and its likely they could get full support to pass something. Feinstein already is pushing legislation banning the bump stock outright.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

6 hours ago, capt14k said:

He will not disappoint and alienate his heirs for anyone.

And the people who voted him in.  Loyalty is everything to him.

[bhunted 887]

The NRA dumped big bux into him for his election. I doubt he’ll go to the dark side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[NJGF 375]

I am MUCH more afraid of Murphy!

[BobA 1,235]

25 minutes ago, bhunted said:

The NRA dumped big bux into him for his election. I doubt he’ll go to the dark side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

52 million to be exact. 

[GRIZ 3,369]

This is another example of taking advantage of any tragedy.

I see this more of a ploy by the Democrats to further polarize Americans.  I'm sure Trump would support any reasonable legislation designed to prevent firearms from being acquired by the wrong people and punish those that use them in crimes. Trump will not support  legislation that would impact on American's rights.  This is one of the issues that got him elected.

Democrat's ultimate idea of "reasonable" is no private ownership of firearms. When Trump makes no concession to the Democrats on this issue, they will whine, "we reached across the aisle to the President".

This is an old tactic in the Democrat's playbook.

[voyager9 3,434]

More immediately, even suggesting he might talk to them about it drives Trumps base insane. Sowing further chaos and allows Dem to maintain an upper hand politically. 

[SmittyMHS 603]

I agree with whats been said. Although I can't see him restricting any gun rights I do see the bump stock as going away. I was surprised it was allowed in the 1st place.  

[voyager9 3,434]

1 hour ago, SmittyMHS said:

I agree with whats been said. Although I can't see him restricting any gun rights I do see the bump stock as going away. I was surprised it was allowed in the 1st place.  

It was allowed because the ATF actually looked at the law and recognized that the device complied.  The law could be changed but that opens some interesting doors. How would the law change so that these types of things are forbidden without running afoul of the existing precedent?  Too specific and there will be new devices that are just different enough. Too general and it gets struck down. 

[1LtCAP 4,262]

11 hours ago, Mrs. Peel said:

Absolutely HUGE concern IMO!!  Trump will swing to whoever gives him the most kudos and praise. This is a problem. If 2A is a major issue for you (seems like that describes most of you on here) - I suggest you harness those activist skills and contact the White House regarding your firm support of the 2nd and your expectation that POTUS will meet his promises in that regard.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/dems-see-trump-as-potential-ally-on-gun-reform/ar-AAsUY66?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

most of us except for the likes of avb

[RichP 115]

2 hours ago, SmittyMHS said:

I agree with whats been said. Although I can't see him restricting any gun rights I do see the bump stock as going away. I was surprised it was allowed in the 1st place.  

Agreed. I think new legislation will allow the ATF more leniency in categorizing what constitutes full auto. In the case of "bump-fire" stocks, its pretty clear that the spirit of the NFA is circumvented. And yes, I do realize that the same effect can be had with a rubber-band/sling/dowel/etc.; however, it was only a matter of time until inventors came up with easily-purchased attachments that would be more reliable/faster/etc..

[matty 810]

Arg, msn as a source? Yeah, no i don't even need to click on that to know its false fake news.

[SmittyMHS 603]

58 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

It was allowed because the ATF actually looked at the law and recognized that the device complied.  The law could be changed but that opens some interesting doors. How would the law change so that these types of things are forbidden without running afoul of the existing precedent?  Too specific and there will be new devices that are just different enough. Too general and it gets struck down. 

Is the bump stock really any different then a silencer? Its not a fire arm and the ATF really shouldn't have a say in its use. You can't even have parts that could be used to make one. So soon rubber bands will be made illegal since they could be used to make a semi into autofire. 

 Personally if they did make the bump stock illegal and it helped shut the dems up it wouldn't bother me too much. I know...I know..Give 'em an inch, but at least they couldn't say nothing was done. 

[Smokin .50 1,907]

2 minutes ago, SmittyMHS said:

Is the bump stock really any different then a silencer? Its not a fire arm and the ATF really shouldn't have a say in its use. You can't even have parts that could be used to make one. So soon rubber bands will be made illegal since they could be used to make a semi into autofire. 

 Personally if they did make the bump stock illegal and it helped shut the dems up it wouldn't bother me too much. I know...I know..Give 'em an inch, but at least they couldn't say nothing was done. 

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

You do a great job of outlining the slippery slope of "Constructive Possession" and the misuse / abuse of rubber bands.  In NJ, right now a person w/o any AR lowers can buy all the slide-fire stocks they want, cause it ain't illegal UNTIL you have the means to assemble a shooting platform WITH that slide-fire stock.  Like buying a wrench at the hardware store.  So do we need a law preventing someone that doesn't own any AR's from having a piece of plastic?  Some NJ legislators already think so!

Yes, the bump-fire stock was always a gray area on the federal level.  And yes, crafting the wording so as to enable the elimination of any device so designed will get convoluted to give us 12 pound triggers on semi-autos if we're not vigilant during the process!

At NJSAFE, NJSP Firearms Bureau's Det. Sgt. Bloom spoke a lot about different things but that stock never was discussed.  We posted a link to Nappen's article about it as soon as it hit the media.  Det. Sgt. Bloom responded on our CNJFO Facebook page within moments & confirmed that the stocks are verboten in NJ RIGHT NOW!

I have some friends that own these stocks & enjoy using them.  I've tried them myself from time-to-time.  YES, it's a waste of ammo & YES it's a real BLAST  .  Personally I'd be saddened to have to give up more freedom.  Every time there's an incident, no one blames the Shooter.  It's always the GUN.  Now the left has their cross-hairs set on a piece of plastic pipe with a butt-stock attached to it...

One thing's for sure, we aren't going to hear too much on this forum OR social media for months how "the NRA sucks & all they want is my money", cause all of those complainers are hiding in their mamma's basements right now wishing they were NRA members so they could be COUNTED!  Guess what, you can JOIN TODAY!  And while you're at it, consider joining the busiest Second Amendment group in NJ too!

Rosey

http://www.cnjfo.com/join-us 

[ChrisJM981 924]

Slide fire is illegal in NJ? 

[FishNJ 2]

Slide fire is illegal in NJ? 

According to Nappen, Yes.
Qualifies as telescoping because of the way it slides. If I remember the explanation right...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Smokin .50 1,907]

1 hour ago, ChrisJM981 said:

Slide fire is illegal in NJ? 

No & YES!  If you don't own a lower it works on you have a plastic tube & no harm, no foul.  If you have a lower somewhere, ANYWHERE you have access to within NJ, then you're guilty of "Constructive Possession".  Your slide-fire device could be in an unopened shipping box & you're still guilty because in mere seconds it can be assembled.

FWIW Nappen doesn't even count in THIS circumstance!  Nappen won't be your arresting officer  .  NJSP Det. Sgt. Bloom from the Firearms Bureau said that the NJAG wrote a letter of determination on these stocks & said letter was distributed to FFL's in NJ.  Confirmation of this can be found on the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners Facebook page.  Det. Sgt. Bloom reads our page & commented directly!

[1LtCAP 4,262]

hhmm....what happens if one were to grind off the pistol grip? besides making it uglier?

[NJGF 375]

How about making the bump stock illegal as part of the SHARE Act.

[NJGF 375]

So it looks like the NRA is now on board at considering banning the Bump Stock along with a list of Republicans.

https://home.nra.org/joint-statement/

(FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement: 

"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented.  Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control.  Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks.  This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world.  In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law.  The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.  In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities.  To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence."

[SmittyMHS 603]

This is a win-win for the NRA. They can say " see! We are for common sense gun safety." Shuts the dems right down. 

[Darrenf 422]

This is a win-win for the NRA. They can say " see! We are for common sense gun safety." Shuts the dems right down. 

It MiGHT, and that’s a big MIGHT, help us get national reciprocity, but it will not appease the dems in any way, as anything shy of full disarmament is unacceptable to them.

[Spawne32 37]

1 minute ago, SmittyMHS said:

This is a win-win for the NRA. They can say " see! We are for common sense gun safety." Shuts the dems right down. 

Let's face it, we all knew the bump stock was going to be the fall guy here. They need to pass a legislation for this as a feel good law even though it will do nothing, it will please the sheep out there. Republicans need to be able to show that they can do something in this administration.

1 minute ago, Darrenf said:

 

It MiGHT, and that’s a big MIGHT, help us get national reciprocity, but it will not appease the dems in any way, as anything shy of full disarmament is unacceptable to them.

 

Not true of all dems, otherwise feinstein would have gotten it passed during the obama administration. Full disarmament is a fringe section of the democratic party, feinstein being on that fringe.

[Darrenf 422]

Not true of all dems, otherwise feinstein would have gotten it passed during the obama administration. Full disarmament is a fringe section of the democratic party, feinstein being on that fringe.

I didn’t say it is all dems, but it’s not so fringe either. Cripes, their presidential candidate last year wanted us to institute what Australia has.

[Smokin .50 1,907]

5 minutes ago, SmittyMHS said:

This is a win-win for the NRA. They can say " see! We are for common sense gun safety." Shuts the dems right down. 

It's also a Win-Win for Trump!  He gets to be the Deal-maker, bringing both sides together at a Bill Signing Photo-Op  

It would be a historic occasion:  Dems & the NRA all smiles, together in the Oval shaking hands  

[Spawne32 37]

10 minutes ago, Darrenf said:

 

I didn’t say it is all dems, but it’s not so fringe either. Cripes, their presidential candidate last year wanted us to institute what Australia has.

 

I dunno, personally I feel like clinton was pretty on the fringe myself. Also corrupt as hell. Regardless of my support for the 2nd amendment I always typically lean liberal in my views.

[Darrenf 422]

I dunno, personally I feel like clinton was pretty on the fringe myself. Also corrupt as hell. Regardless of my support for the 2nd amendment I always typically lean liberal in my views.

I don’t know how you can consider the party’s candidate for president to be fringe. Despite the claims that the fix was in against Sanders, it was the leadership I.e. those in control of the party that nominated her.