Trump's Second Amendment Rhetoric Again Veers Into Threatening Territory

[Desperado]

Trump gets to say whatever the fuck enters that tiny angry thinned skinned sensitive
brain...

Really it is not Trump who is "thin skinned"! More like the whinny liberals that lets every little thing Trump says that gets their feelings hurt.

 

[FA_Q2]

Trump's correct again and displays both the glaring idiocy of the left and exposes the Dem base as useful idiots.

Hillary and her unarmed security detail should only appear in gunew free zones.

But some animals are more equal than others

Gun free zones don't prohibit armed security.

yeah....like at the Orlando Night club where the son of a hilary clinton supporter, a muslim terrorist, murdered 49 people and injured another 50 while the armed security ran to call police...leaving 300 unarmed people to face an armed attacker.....in a gun free zone.....

Is your father responsible if you kill someone?

No. He is responsible for his own rhetoric that was very well known at that point:

What has the Orlando gunman's father said?
"The Orland gay club gunman's father has well-known anti-American views and is an ideological supporter of the Afghan Taliban."

He is a hate monger.

 

[2aguy]

gun registration is a violation of our 5th Amendment protection against self incrimination....how do we know.....in Haynes v. United States the Supreme Court said felons did not have to register illegal weapons because to force them to would violate their Right against self incrimination......so therefore gun registration is a violation of the 5th Amendment for all citizens....

 

[toomuchtime_]

The man is insane. Encouraging the assination of his competitor ( Hillary ) is just a stutter step short of Stalins tactics.


Trump's Second Amendment Rhetoric Again Veers Into Threatening Territory



Donald Trump hit Hillary Clinton on Second Amendment rights during a Miami rally Friday night, but made a controversial statement while doing so — suggesting her Secret Service detail should stop carrying guns and "see what happens to her."

"Now, you know she's very much against the Second Amendment, she wants to destroy your Second Amendment — guns, guns, guns, right? I think what we should do is, she goes around with armed bodyguards like you have never seen before," the GOP nominee said, deviating from his prepared remarks on the teleprompter. "I think that her bodyguards should drop all weapons, they should disarm, right? I think they should disarm. Immediately, what do you think? Yeah, take their guns away. She doesn't want guns. Take their – let's see what happens to her. Take their guns away, OK? It'll be very dangerous."

You are insane if you believe this. His comments were made in the context of talking about how important owning a gun can be for self protection, and as an example he asked how safe Clinton would be if her bodyguards didn't carry guns.

 

[2aguy]

The man is insane. Encouraging the assination of his competitor ( Hillary ) is just a stutter step short of Stalins tactics.


Trump's Second Amendment Rhetoric Again Veers Into Threatening Territory



Donald Trump hit Hillary Clinton on Second Amendment rights during a Miami rally Friday night, but made a controversial statement while doing so — suggesting her Secret Service detail should stop carrying guns and "see what happens to her."

"Now, you know she's very much against the Second Amendment, she wants to destroy your Second Amendment — guns, guns, guns, right? I think what we should do is, she goes around with armed bodyguards like you have never seen before," the GOP nominee said, deviating from his prepared remarks on the teleprompter. "I think that her bodyguards should drop all weapons, they should disarm, right? I think they should disarm. Immediately, what do you think? Yeah, take their guns away. She doesn't want guns. Take their – let's see what happens to her. Take their guns away, OK? It'll be very dangerous."

You are insane if you believe this. His comments were made in the context of talking about how important owning a gun can be for self protection, and as an example he asked how safe Clinton would be if her bodyguards didn't carry guns.

They know this too....they need to smear Trump because hilary is such a fool and a weak, sick candidate....and besides...lying and smearing other people is part of a left wingers DNA....

 

[kaz]

Hillary believes in the 2nd amendment but as with ALL of the bill of rights, she believes the govt can regulate them, as the 2nd amendment states....

you have freedom of religion but if your religion says it's okay to have 10 wives, or required to marry 11 year old girls when you are 30 etc, or to kill a dog or cat as sacrifice, you don't have that freedom....

We have the right to free speech, but we can not yell FIRE in a theater when there is one....

we have the right to not incriminate ourselves, but if the gvt gives the suspect their Miranda rights, what is said by the suspect can and will be used against them by our gvt....

We have a right to privacy, but the govt dictates what that privacy is....

We have the right to bear arms, but you can NOT own a Nuke...you can't go in to a court room armed...you can't be armed in prison...etc...

ALL of these cases are constitutional rights...yet they are all regulated by our gvt...

Another sad product of government schools. Yeah, they put in the second amendment that government can regulate a right they can't infringe on.

But even more basic, what grade is your reading level?

2nd amendment: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

If you could read your native language, you would realize that "well regulated militia" is an explanation, not a condition.

It says BECAUSE a well regulated militia is necessary to a free State, we have the uninfringable right to keep and bear arms. It does not say IF it's a regulated militia.

It's really sad having to point that out to an adult

registering the sale of guns is not infringing on your right to own one....doing a back ground check is not infringing on your right to own one....

yes...it is, because they will lead to confiscation and banning...just like they did in Britain, Australia and Germany....you post more intelligently if you understood history....things that actually happened after they registered guns....

That's the one thing she got right, it's her ultimate objective too

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Nobody is threatening anyone. Calm down you bunch of pussies.

 

[2aguy]

Nobody is threatening anyone. Calm down you bunch of pussies.

That's not true....Trump is threatening their control of the government...so they will do anything to keep that from happening....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Mr. Obama in the wake of another mass shooting suggested that the clinically insane and people on the terrorist watch list should not be able to buy guns and you people go apeshit. It's all so overblown and stupid that it's almost like you are unaware that it would take a new amendment to the constitution to totally ban your guns.

Nope. As I pointed out, a simple supreme court ruling stating the Constitution does not protect our gun rights, and then all hell breaks loose.

Wrong again.

Even if Heller/McDonald were overturned – which isn’t going to happen with Clinton appointees on the Supreme Court – the Second Amendment landscape would be little changed.

Indeed, prior to Heller, only two cities had comprehensive ‘bans’ on the possession of firearms – no states ‘banned’ firearms, nor were any states planning to do so.

As already correctly noted: your paranoid, delusional fears are completely unfounded, the product of stupidity and willful ignorance, or intentional lies and partisan fear-mongering and demagoguery.

 

[FA_Q2]

To interpret Trump's statement as a threat is more than an asinine stretch - it is an outright lie. He was making the same statement that many have before and correctly pointing out that those politicians that advocate against gun ownership surround themselves with armed people to keep themselves safe. It is a clear case of true doublethink.

 

[2aguy]

Mr. Obama in the wake of another mass shooting suggested that the clinically insane and people on the terrorist watch list should not be able to buy guns and you people go apeshit. It's all so overblown and stupid that it's almost like you are unaware that it would take a new amendment to the constitution to totally ban your guns.

Nope. As I pointed out, a simple supreme court ruling stating the Constitution does not protect our gun rights, and then all hell breaks loose.

Wrong again.

Even if Heller/McDonald were overturned – which isn’t going to happen with Clinton appointees on the Supreme Court – the Second Amendment landscape would be little changed.

Indeed, prior to Heller, only two cities had comprehensive ‘bans’ on the possession of firearms – no states ‘banned’ firearms, nor were any states planning to do so.

As already correctly noted: your paranoid, delusional fears are completely unfounded, the product of stupidity and willful ignorance, or intentional lies and partisan fear-mongering and demagoguery.

You say so much that is just wrong and stupid...and then you keep doing it....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The man is insane. Encouraging the assination of his competitor ( Hillary ) is just a stutter step short of Stalins tactics.


Trump's Second Amendment Rhetoric Again Veers Into Threatening Territory



Donald Trump hit Hillary Clinton on Second Amendment rights during a Miami rally Friday night, but made a controversial statement while doing so — suggesting her Secret Service detail should stop carrying guns and "see what happens to her."

"Now, you know she's very much against the Second Amendment, she wants to destroy your Second Amendment — guns, guns, guns, right? I think what we should do is, she goes around with armed bodyguards like you have never seen before," the GOP nominee said, deviating from his prepared remarks on the teleprompter. "I think that her bodyguards should drop all weapons, they should disarm, right? I think they should disarm. Immediately, what do you think? Yeah, take their guns away. She doesn't want guns. Take their – let's see what happens to her. Take their guns away, OK? It'll be very dangerous."

Actually he made a solid point that some on the progressive left believe removing firearms from the general society will make this country safer but what if you took the firearms away from Hillary Clinton Secret Service Detail?

She would be less safe and no Donald Trump was not making any threat against her but pointing out the reality that her Security Detail are carrying guns and make her life safer.

Actually, it fails as a false comparison fallacy, as idiotic as it is ridiculous and wrong.

And any conservative who agrees with Trump’s ‘argument’ is as much an ignorant idiot as Trump.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What trump said was clearly a threat to Clintons life. And he knows it. That's why he said it.

 

[nat4900]

And yet they don't........

8 million rifles with detachable magazines........and how many have been murdered with them....157...in 34 years.....1982-2016

knives murder 1,500 people every single year......

Excellent retort....Place that editorial on the next issue of ISIS Times....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

To interpret Trump's statement as a threat is more than an asinine stretch - it is an outright lie. He was making the same statement that many have before and correctly pointing out that those politicians that advocate against gun ownership surround themselves with armed people to keep themselves safe. It is a clear case of true doublethink.

If I remember correctly, they did the same to Rosie O'Donnell. They shamed her into shutting up about guns. Let's see if Hillary is the same.

 

[nat4900]

France has made military weapons completely illegal....and terrorists on government terrorist watch lists used them to murder 149 people in France....and military, fully automatic weapons are easy to get for both criminals and terrorists in France........so you are wrong...again..

No, actually I'm not wrong 'again" ...France unfortunately has about 5 borders with countries that don't have the same ban...... and virtually all the illegal guns that have been brought into France came from Belgium across a border where cars are seldom checked as for their passengers and baggage.

 

[nat4900]

That bitch really hates this country.

Its MADAM PRESIDENT to you, low life......LOL

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong again.

Even if Heller/McDonald were overturned – which isn’t going to happen with Clinton appointees on the Supreme Court – the Second Amendment landscape would be little changed.

Indeed, prior to Heller, only two cities had comprehensive ‘bans’ on the possession of firearms – no states ‘banned’ firearms, nor were any states planning to do so.

As already correctly noted: your paranoid, delusional fears are completely unfounded, the product of stupidity and willful ignorance, or intentional lies and partisan fear-mongering and demagoguery.

Oh, it "isn't" going to happen? Based on what, your assumption?

The truth of the matter is it "can" happen, and that's the problem. With such a serious issue at hand, we can't "assume" anything. We have to be prepared for the worst just as we did with Commie Care.

 

[nat4900]

To interpret Trump's statement as a threat is more than an asinine stretch - it is an outright lie. He was making the same statement that many have before and correctly pointing out that those politicians that advocate against gun ownership surround themselves with armed people to keep themselves safe. It is a clear case of true doublethink.

Same fucked up 'argument" made by nitwits.....

Clinton is NOT calling for the ban on ALL guns....that is something you got out of your rectum.......Her stance is military-style guns manufactured for the SOLE purpose of killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time..

get a brain and think for yourself....

 

[Campbell]

Trump's correct again and displays both the glaring idiocy of the left and exposes the Dem base as useful idiots.

Hillary and her unarmed security detail should only appear in gunew free zones.

But some animals are more equal than others

Gun free zones don't prohibit armed security.

Why would you need armed security in a gun free Zone?

DUUUHH!!! You just don't get the idea of law enforcement do you?

You just don't get the idea of America, do You?

It's not that at all. You damned right wing folks have been hopelessly brainwashed by the NRA, whose interest is manufacturing endless numbers of guns, into thinking any small change in laws to prevent the criminals and mentally unstable from walking into any gun shop and buying a semi-automatic weapon, is an effort by good citizens to take away your guns. I can understand your concern. If you didn't have your AR-15 you'd have to get by with that little three inch pecker!