Trump to NRA: I wont let you down. You use guns to protect from violent crime 1 million times a year

Because if he does that I'm going to take him out. I will be an ex-supporter. For all the good he has done he can screw all that up by going far left on this.

As I said --- a golden opportunity to turn those historically low numbers around.

Meanwhile, good to know that "far left" can be defined as "having the cojones to stand up to a powerhungry special interest group instead of obediently rolling over for them".
I think you meant to say far left means undermining the Constitution.

Nnnnnope. I made no mention of a Constitution. Actually I made no mention of any kind of policy. I simply wondered what if a POTUS could actually stand up for himself and his people and tell SIGs like the NRA to go sit on a tack?

Notice how "I won't let you down" sounds just like "yes Master, I hear and obey..."?

What a fuckin' wimp. Even George Bush had enough stones to disassociate.
Give me a good reason to disassociate with the NRA. Just one.

Bush disassociated because of their attitude. Seems the NRA dissed law enforcement and Bush didn't care for that.

But that was quitting the organization. What I'm talking about with Rump is is wimpishly gay weak-kneed emasculated no-stones wallowing in "I won't let you down, yes Master". It's one thing to pander to authoritarian assholes for votes if you have no scruples. Rump however is past that now He no longer needs the NRA even as a pander bear. He can tell them to fuck off and do whatever he likes.

Yet he won't. He's whipped. Owned. Nothing but a pawn. A kept woman.
So the NRA dissed law enforcement? So what? Did they deserve it like the FBI and Broward county people do now?

Throw all the homosexual bullshit you want out there.

I asked for one good reason to run away from the NRA. Just one.
 
As I said --- a golden opportunity to turn those historically low numbers around.

Meanwhile, good to know that "far left" can be defined as "having the cojones to stand up to a powerhungry special interest group instead of obediently rolling over for them".
I think you meant to say far left means undermining the Constitution.

Nnnnnope. I made no mention of a Constitution. Actually I made no mention of any kind of policy. I simply wondered what if a POTUS could actually stand up for himself and his people and tell SIGs like the NRA to go sit on a tack?

Notice how "I won't let you down" sounds just like "yes Master, I hear and obey..."?

What a fuckin' wimp. Even George Bush had enough stones to disassociate.
Give me a good reason to disassociate with the NRA. Just one.

Bush disassociated because of their attitude. Seems the NRA dissed law enforcement and Bush didn't care for that.

But that was quitting the organization. What I'm talking about with Rump is is wimpishly gay weak-kneed emasculated no-stones wallowing in "I won't let you down, yes Master". It's one thing to pander to authoritarian assholes for votes if you have no scruples. Rump however is past that now He no longer needs the NRA even as a pander bear. He can tell them to fuck off and do whatever he likes.

Yet he won't. He's whipped. Owned. Nothing but a pawn. A kept woman.
So the NRA dissed law enforcement? So what? Did they deserve it like the FBI and Broward county people do now?

Throw all the homosexual bullshit you want out there.

I asked for one good reason to run away from the NRA. Just one.

In Bush's case that was his issue. I can't speak for it, ask him.

In Rump's case he's in a position to disassociate because --- as I noted in my first post here --- he's in a position to. He doesn't need them; they need him. He no longer needs to slobber on their shoes. There's nothing they can give him.

On the other hand should he take the whim he can zip off disparaging tweets at four in the morning and they'll have to bend over for it. Where are they gonna go?

That's why I call it a golden opportunity. And he'll blow it.
 
As I said --- a golden opportunity to turn those historically low numbers around.

Meanwhile, good to know that "far left" can be defined as "having the cojones to stand up to a powerhungry special interest group instead of obediently rolling over for them".
I think you meant to say far left means undermining the Constitution.

Nnnnnope. I made no mention of a Constitution. Actually I made no mention of any kind of policy. I simply wondered what if a POTUS could actually stand up for himself and his people and tell SIGs like the NRA to go sit on a tack?

Notice how "I won't let you down" sounds just like "yes Master, I hear and obey..."?

What a fuckin' wimp. Even George Bush had enough stones to disassociate.
Give me a good reason to disassociate with the NRA. Just one.

Bush disassociated because of their attitude. Seems the NRA dissed law enforcement and Bush didn't care for that.

But that was quitting the organization. What I'm talking about with Rump is is wimpishly gay weak-kneed emasculated no-stones wallowing in "I won't let you down, yes Master". It's one thing to pander to authoritarian assholes for votes if you have no scruples. Rump however is past that now He no longer needs the NRA even as a pander bear. He can tell them to fuck off and do whatever he likes.

Yet he won't. He's whipped. Owned. Nothing but a pawn. A kept woman.
So the NRA dissed law enforcement? So what? Did they deserve it like the FBI and Broward county people do now?

Throw all the homosexual bullshit you want out there.

I asked for one good reason to run away from the NRA. Just one.



The sane side of the Democratic Party support the NRA, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and many are members, the alt lefty nut cases are losing votes for Democrats. It's much better in the long run if he can't.

diversitysquare.jpg
 


Mr President, these mass shootings reflect the collective death wish of a community and country incapable of and unwilling to care for its young.

(Trump's speech is from 2016.)



No...moron....more kids are killed by cars than by guns......and drowning...yet you don't want cars and pools banned...
 
Here's the question about Rump and the NRA.

It's a golden, no pun intended, opportunity for Rump to turn his historically negative numbers around. All he has to do is say to the NRA, "no, you shut up and listen. I'm in office now --- I don't need you; you need me. I'll be calling the shots (again no pun intended) and you can take what I do and like it or go find somebody to take me out".

But Rump won't do that. He doesn't have the balls.

Again, no pun intended. I don't mean cannon balls.


You mean his 50% approval rating?
 
Here's the question about Rump and the NRA.

It's a golden, no pun intended, opportunity for Rump to turn his historically negative numbers around. All he has to do is say to the NRA, "no, you shut up and listen. I'm in office now --- I don't need you; you need me. I'll be calling the shots (again no pun intended) and you can take what I do and like it or go find somebody to take me out".

But Rump won't do that. He doesn't have the balls.

Again, no pun intended. I don't mean cannon balls.


You mean his 50% approval rating?

I mean he could get within smelling distance of that number if he manned up and stopped crawling like a damn twinkie whenever the NRA says "boo".
 
According to bill clinton....Trump is wrong.....the actual number is closer to 1.5 million times a year, Americans use their guns to stop violent criminal attack..........and obama agrees with that number....

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
 
Here's the question about Rump and the NRA.

It's a golden, no pun intended, opportunity for Rump to turn his historically negative numbers around. All he has to do is say to the NRA, "no, you shut up and listen. I'm in office now --- I don't need you; you need me. I'll be calling the shots (again no pun intended) and you can take what I do and like it or go find somebody to take me out".

But Rump won't do that. He doesn't have the balls.

Again, no pun intended. I don't mean cannon balls.


You mean his 50% approval rating?

I mean he could get within smelling distance of that number if he manned up and stopped crawling like a damn twinkie whenever the NRA says "boo".


He already hit that number.....
 
"I think we should thank God every day for whatever made him change his mind," the police chief said.
 


Mr President, these mass shootings reflect the collective death wish of a community and country incapable of and unwilling to care for its young.

(Trump's speech is from 2016.)


Yes, guns are used to protect people, but also used to attack people. The overall effect is much worse than no guns at all.

But evidence for the blind Trump supporters that Trump will say ANYTHING that he thinks will work.
 
Here's the question about Rump and the NRA.

It's a golden, no pun intended, opportunity for Rump to turn his historically negative numbers around. All he has to do is say to the NRA, "no, you shut up and listen. I'm in office now --- I don't need you; you need me. I'll be calling the shots (again no pun intended) and you can take what I do and like it or go find somebody to take me out".

But Rump won't do that. He doesn't have the balls.

Again, no pun intended. I don't mean cannon balls.
I loved when the skinny marxist negro did that.....oooops.


Fucking hypocrite.

You may be wishing you had President Obama back before long.
 
"if guns kill people, why do we send people with guns when they go to war? why not just send the guns?" - President Trump
 
Trump just tweeted simply: "Good (Great) meeting in the Oval Office tonight with the NRA!"
 
Here's the question about Rump and the NRA.

It's a golden, no pun intended, opportunity for Rump to turn his historically negative numbers around. All he has to do is say to the NRA, "no, you shut up and listen. I'm in office now --- I don't need you; you need me. I'll be calling the shots (again no pun intended) and you can take what I do and like it or go find somebody to take me out".

But Rump won't do that. He doesn't have the balls.

Again, no pun intended. I don't mean cannon balls.
Because if he does that I'm going to take him out. I will be an ex-supporter. For all the good he has done he can screw all that up by going far left on this.

As I said --- a golden opportunity to turn those historically low numbers around.

Meanwhile, good to know that "far left" can be defined as "having the cojones to stand up to a powerhungry special interest group instead of obediently rolling over for them".
I think you meant to say far left means undermining the Constitution.

how, by taking your guns first and due process later ?
 
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” the president added.

Yes, in EXTREME CASES. Sheesh, go look at the clip. The context was cases involving mentally ill people who pose a threat. Trump's point was eminently logical: In such cases as these, get the guns out of the person's hands first and foremost, and then investigate to either confirm or not confirm that he is in fact a threat.
 
Gun Control is NOT the answer. Fix the broken homes, put prayer back in schools, teach our children to respect others & bust their ass if they don’t. We need to be raising future leaders in America & not spoiled brats.
 
Gun Control is NOT the answer. Fix the broken homes, put prayer back in schools, teach our children to respect others & bust their ass if they don’t. We need to be raising future leaders in America & not spoiled brats.

"Put prayer back in schools"?

What country are you in again? Gullibilistan?

I guess since there's no reference to gunshots in the holey babble, we'd have to substitute the other smiting tecnhiques like dashing babies' heads against the rocks....
 
Last edited:
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” the president added.

Yes, in EXTREME CASES. Sheesh, go look at the clip. The context was cases involving mentally ill people who pose a threat. Trump's point was eminently logical: In such cases as these, get the guns out of the person's hands first and foremost, and then investigate to either confirm or not confirm that he is in fact a threat.

sure, i mean, who needs due process?
 

Forum List

Back
Top