MovieChat Forums > Donald Trump Discussion > Trump's anti-gun agenda.

Trump's anti-gun agenda.

posted 4 years ago by Ranb (11364)
63 replies | jump to latest

It is sad how many people still think Trump is pro-gun after his gun grab and his desire to enact red-flag laws without due process.

Despite the fact that Trump boasted he would ban bump stocks and then proceeded to do so by classifying them as contraband machine guns, people keep on claiming Trump supports the 2nd Amendment.

27 CFR was amended to say in part. ‘‘bump fire’’ stocks, slide-fire devices, and devices with certain similar characteristics—are ‘‘machineguns’’

Trump apologists keep on claiming that bump stocks are not guns when the law clearly says they are. They go on and on about how if they remove the bump stock from the rifle, it is no longer a machine gun. The problem is, the law says it is the bump stock all by itself that is the machine gun.

The ATF says it cost the economy $312 million to ban bump stocks; that is without compensating the victims of the gun grab. Trump could have waited for Congress to ban the bump stocks, maybe even veto the bill if he decided not to screw over law abiding American gun owners.

But instead he wanted his own gun grab, so he used the authority as head of the executive branch to required their surrender or destruction without compensation. So did Trump fold like a lawn chair as soon as a few people complained or was he pandering to his anti-gun constituents?

I see complains about Biden's push for red flag laws. Why is it that hardly any Republicans objected to Pence's desire to pass red-flag legislation with due process or Trump's insistence that the law require that guns be seized prior to any due process.

Of course some of the replies to this post will be;
Bump stocks are not guns!!!
Trump is pro-gun!!!

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-12-26/pdf/2018-27763.pdf
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4716589/user-clip-trump-take-guns-first-due-process-second

[–] McQualude (4231) 4 years ago

Shrub was the biggest gun grabber in our lifetime, not a peep about it from the NRA, Rush Dimbaugh, or red tribe. Shrub sent stormtroops through people's doors in the middle of the night to seize their guns, chirp, chirp. Did the same to seize personal property, no warrants. No surprise, Faux News didn't report any of it. The only reason we knew were 2A groups sharing local news articles. Shrub's daddy famously tore up his NRA membership card. Oh, but obummer is the one coming for your guns, lol.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Shrub is W. Bush? Can you be more specific with links?

[–] McQualude (4231) 4 years ago

No, I wasn't expecting a quiz. Look for all the middle of the night raids to seize private property, including guns, on the order of little bush. Most without a warrant. But MASKS ARE TYRANNY! LOL, red tribe are a bunch of cartoons.

[–] Gd5150 (11966) 4 years ago

Wow that’s some hard hitting evidence.

[–] JoWilli (21649) 4 years ago

a bump stock is not a gun, he did that because of the outcry from the left after the vegas incident...

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Federal law says a bump stock is a gun. Trump says a bump stock is a gun. Is Trump wrong? Is Trump lying?

Tell me you are not one of those clowns who say that they alone define what a gun is, and not the federal government.

Anyone who folds like a lawn chair on our civil rights over the "outcry from the left" is not worthy of being president. This applies to Trump and all of the other bitches who don't give a damn about our rights.

[–] JoWilli (21649) 4 years ago

Trump never said that, and there is no federal law that says that. nice try dementia Joe lover.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

The regulation is here; https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-12-26/pdf/2018-27763.pdf

Do you actually believe there was no bump stock ban? The regulation says in part, "bump fire’’ stocks, slide-fire devices, and devices with certain similar characteristics—are ‘‘machineguns’’ What part of "bumps stocks are machine guns" do you not understand?

As head of the executive branch, the president is the one who has the final say in the rule making process such as in the Code of Federal Regulations. If Trump opposed the bump stock ban, then he would not have allowed the CFR to be amended to classify bump stocks as machine guns.

I'm not a Biden supporter and I'm much more pro-gun than Trump ever was. The universe is going to own you if you don't learn something about how the government works.

[–] JoWilli (21649) 4 years ago

a bump stock turns a gun into a "machinegun" which the word is in quotes, you are somehow thinking they are saying that a bump stock is a actually gun that can fire bullets, they are saying machine guns are banned in which a bump stock turns a regular gun into a machine gun. again a bump stock is not a gun anymore than a tire is a car.

you can still buy AR's and any other type of weapon that is legal. if you really need a machine gun then get a license from the government that says you can legally build a machinegun or join the military or move to Russia.

bump stocks are a new invention and is not infringing on your 2nd amendment, its not like they were using them back in the Civil War.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

So you're just ignoring the law then? You need to understand how the law works. Bump stocks are not the only things classified as firearms that do not actually shoot projectiles. Auto sears, silencers and silencer parts are also classified as firearms by federal law.

So why is bump stock possession illegal if they are not firearms? Can you explain that?

[–] JoWilli (21649) 4 years ago

anything gun related is under the umbrella of the ATF, it doesnt mean a scope is a machinegun or a handle is one too. bump stocks are illegal cause one rtard decided to kill a bunch of people with one. Trump was pressured by the left and right to ban them. your gun is still fully functional without one.

its illegal because it turns a regular gun into a fully automatic one and automatic weapons are illegal in the US.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

You still don't understand. The law says it is only the bump stock that is banned, not the rifle it is attached to. How was this ban accomplished? It was done by classifying the polymer bump stock, all by itself, as a contraband machine gun. Did you read the link to the CFR I posted?

Automatic weapons are entirely legal in the USA. You just need the routine ATF authorization to own them. However unlicensed civilians were banned from registering new ones by Reagan back in May 1986. This has greatly limited supply to those that were registered prior to that date.

Simply classifying a bump stock (just the bump stock) as a machine gun means no one can register it and this makes it illegal to possess. Trump did this so he did not have to go through Congress and so he could have them confiscated without compensation.

You can find them for sale to unlicensed people here; https://gunspot.com/test/sections/class_three/transferable_machine_guns/

Your ignorance of NFA gun control law is simply appalling.

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 4 years ago

What the hell are you two arguing about?
You seem to be both saying the same thing.

You both agree a bumpstock turns a gun into a machinegun.
You both acknowledge they are banned.

so whats all the back and forth for?

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

I say that the bump stock by itself is a machine gun; as does federal law. Trump directed that 27 CFR be amended to do so, making him a gun grabber.

JoWilli says "a bump stock is not a gun".

Notice the difference?

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 4 years ago

so you're quibbling over terms and technicalities

when you say "the bump stock by itself is a machine gun"
You mean in that that it is regulated by the same laws right?

same as when you said
" silencer parts are also classified as firearms by federal law."

those two things are true , legally , but at the end of the day , in my opinion , a silencer on its own is not a gun

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

We are arguing over whether or not Trump is a gun grabber. I say he is because he classified bump stocks as guns (machine guns) and because no one is allowed to register them after 1986, they are contraband and must be destroyed or surrendered.

JoWilli, like some other people, denies that bump stocks are guns so that they can deny that Trump is a gun grabber. He even denies that there is a law/regulation that says bump stocks are machine guns. He wants the law to say that bump stocks turn rifles into machine guns, but the regulation does not say that at all.

So would you say that Trump is not a gun grabber?

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 4 years ago

well no i wouldnt say that.

Machine guns were already illegal
he just closed the loophole.

if a bump stock turn a gun into a machine gun , and machine guns are illegal
They shouldnt have been available

He just help up the previously existing law that machine guns are illeGAL.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Machine guns have never been illegal in the USA. Why do people think they can just make up laws they have no rational reason exist and then expect that the people listening to them are stupid enough to believe them?

The feds do not ban any type of firearm. While rifles, shotguns and handguns have fewer restrictions, NFA firearms such as short barreled shotguns, short barreled rifles, silencers, destructive devices, gadget guns and machine guns require BATFE authorization to possess. When an unlicensed person makes or transfers one, there is a $200 tax.

Back in 1986 while Congress was debating the Firearm Owners Protection Act, the Hughes Amendment was attached to the bill in an attempt to get Congress to vote against it. The bill passed anyway and Reagan signed it into law.

The Hughes Amendment prohibited the registration, by civilians, of new machine guns. The law went into effect in May 1986. This fixed the number of machine guns available to unlicensed civilians. Licensees are still allow to make machine guns for the government and as samples for other FFL/SOT's.

The machine guns that were already registered are still around. The are normally very durable as any part can be replaced without controls except the auto-sear and the receiver.

Anyone in any sate who can own a gun can buy a machine gun. In some states you need an FFL/SOT which is routinely issued to anyone who applies properly. Every state that "bans" machine guns, makes an exception for FFL/SOT as well as the police and military.

You can legally buy machine guns here; https://gunspot.com/machineguncentral/
You can learn more about gun control law here; https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/guide/federal-firearms-regulations-reference-guide-2014-edition-atf-p-53004/download

So, knowing what you know now, is Trump a gun grabber or not?

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 4 years ago

So am i right in thinking its legal to buy existing machine guns , but no new ones?

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Exactly. There are no federal laws banning any type of firearm. But the feds prohibited registration of new machine guns for unlicensed civilians after May 19, 1986. Everything registered prior to that date is legal, everything after is contraband.

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 4 years ago

A strange situation.
It like they managed to put some sort of gun control in for the more zany weapons , but with the "existing" clause to keep the "pry it out of my cold dead hands" brigade happy !

So...
A bump stock , will turn a shiny new 2021 assault rifle into a "machine gun" ?
Sound like they should be banned according to the 86 rule.
And donald is just upholding the 86 rule , not making new ones - which is what would make him a "gun snatcher"

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Trump actually said he would ban bump stocks. He did it by classifying them as contraband machine guns even though a bump stock only facilitates rapid semi-automatic fire. A machine gun used to be only those guns that fired two or more rounds with a single pull of the trigger. Thanks to that SOB Trump, that it no longer true.

Previously the Obama administration clarified that bump stocks were not machine guns. Obama is far more pro-gun than Trump ever tried to be.

While Obama tried (and failed) to have his own assault weapons ban, he did loosen restrictions on buying machine guns, silencers and other NFA firearms by eliminating the requirement that a person obtain permission from their local sheriff prior to doing so.

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 4 years ago

Splitting hairs.
A bump stock effectively turns a semi into an auto
thats what it does
thats the only thing it does
thats what it was designed for
there is no other use for it
ergo "its a machine gun"
Obama was wrong
and, I cant believe I'm saying this, but:
Trump was correct, and did a good thing.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

No, a bump stock facilitates rapid semi-auto fire. The actual law (NFA of 1934) says a gun has to fire two or more rounds per trigger pull to be a machine gun. Bush managed to classify the Atkins Accelerator as a machine gun by amending the Code of Federal Regulations to say that the spring in the bump stock made it a machine gun. Trump managed to do the same thing by amending 27CFR.

Why was classifying bump stocks as machine guns a good thing? If Obama had done so it likely would have not saved a single life. When Paddock murdered dozens of people in Vegas, he could have use aimed semi-auto fire, bump fired his ar-15 without a bump stock, illegally modified his ar-15 to full auto or just simply legally bought machine guns online from licensed dealers as authorized by the ATF.

Seeing as how the other half million Americans who owned bump stocks did not feel like using them to murder people, why does a ban accomplish anything at all other than rob the economy of $312 million as claimed by the ATF?

Why are machine guns bad? There has only been one documented case of a person using their legally owned/registered machine gun to commit murder in the USA. That is a good safety record.

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 4 years ago

a gun has to fire two or more rounds per trigger pull to be a machine gun.
Semantics. A bump stop sidesteps that via the loophole of waggling your finger for you automatically.

Why was classifying bump stocks as machine guns a good thing becasue , as mentioned before that is in essense what they are , it is also all that they are. you cant use one for anything else exept making a semi full auto.

why does a ban accomplish anything at all
As i said before it is just completeing the "machine guns are banned ( exept existing)" LAW

Why are machine guns bad?
Well thats a different discussion , you have to draw the line somewhere , in in non crazy countries we draw it a long long way before the machine gun.
We not just let citizens have air burst chemical weapons?
After all - its your 2a right!

[–] JoWilli (21649) 4 years ago

I dont know, but there is nothing he can say or do to prove a bump stock is a gun, it would be like saying air bags is a car.

banning an accessory to a gun does not infringe upon anyone's 2nd amendment rights. I could complain that biden is a gun grabber cause it wont let me have a rocket launcher or a tank.

[–] Burk48917 (11536) 4 years ago

This guy argues fallacy's and is bad at it. I've destroyed him with reason, but clings to nonsense to try to have a point.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Trump says bump stocks are machine guns. Trump thinks JoWilli is stupid.

[–] Abed303 (282) 4 years ago

You should demonstrate JoWilli's stupidity with a machine gun duel. You can have just the bump stock while your opponent has an AK-47.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

JoWilli has already demonstrated his stupidity by proclaiming that he decides what a gun is and not the president or the federal government. Debating these people is like clubbing baby seals; they don't even know they are being foolish with their claims.

I think a bump stock degrades a rifle's performance. It requires a loose hold with the supporting arm pushing forward instead of holding it back into the shoulder.

[–] Abed303 (282) 4 years ago

No, you've demonstrated your stupidity by arguing semantics, which you think is clever. You're analytical skills are severely lacking.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

So if bump stocks are not machine guns, then tell us how Trump managed to have them banned?

Congress did not pass a law banning them. The CFR does not ban them. Bump stocks are banned per the National Firearms Act of 1934 as amended, It was Trump's revision of the CFR that defined them as machine guns that enabled then NFA of 1934 and the FOPA to ban them for unlicensed civilian possession.

[–] Abed303 (282) 4 years ago

"Debating these people is like clubbing baby seals"

Exactly. You're engaging in a strange and unsettling activity for your own enjoyment, that accomplishes nothing besides leaving all of your peers wondering what the hell is wrong with you.

I'll refer you to my previous two statements.
If you read them again, VERY SLOWLY, maybe it'll sink in.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

If I see an untruth, I engage the person spreading it. Integrity means something to me.

So you tell me what the truth is Abed303. Does it mean nothing to you?

[–] Abed303 (282) 4 years ago

The truth is you're either incredibly stupid or trolling. I genuinely hope for the latter.

If you're being sincere, I wish you the best of luck in life. You will certainly need it.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

You are a coward who is unwilling to give a direct answer to a question.

[–] Abed303 (282) 4 years ago

It's not cowardly to walk away from a rambling idiot. I wouldn't attempt to debate a flat-earther either.

Have fun daydreaming about clubbing baby seals.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Why are you backing the idea that Trump is not a gun grabber?

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Rocket launchers and tanks are entirely legal. The last time the rules were changed was back during the Obama administration when 41F was written to relax controls on transfer.

They are both classified as destructive devices. Go to the ATF homepage and download the ATF form 1. Fill it out then make your own tank or rocket after it is approved. The ATF routinely approves all NFA firearm applications it receives that are filled out correctly.

If you can find one for sale, fill out and send in the ATF form 4 instead. Both applications require a $200 tax.

[–] JoWilli (21649) 4 years ago

I understand, you are trying to convince me that a bumpstock separate from anything else is a gun, its not a gun, its an accessory to a gun. it turns a regular gun into a machine gun and machine guns are banned unless you have a license, again its not infringing on your 2nd amendment rights.

The NRA backs Trump, so Trump is not gun grabbing freak.

I watch gun TV shows, read books and also have access to the same internet as you.

If some rtard hadnt killed a bunch of people it would still be legal.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

Are you trying to say that 27CFR does not classify bump stocks as machine guns? Here is a link so you can read it. While it is a federal regulation, it has the force of law.

https://ecfr.federalregister.gov/current/title-27/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-478/subpart-B/section-478.11

It says in part; "The term “machine gun” includes a bump-stock-type device," So legally a bump stock is a machine gun, all by itself. A person who possesses a bump stock has possession of a contraband machine gun as it was never registered. Even if he or she does not have it attached to a rifle. Just the stupid piece of polymer is the machine gun.

A license is not required to own a machine gun. Where are you digging up these lies anyway?

The NRA is backing a gun grabber. NRA backing does not mean a politician is pro-gun.

If you have access to the same internet I do, then how is it you don't know the first thing about gun control laws?

[–] Burk48917 (11536) 4 years ago

This is moviechat. You can safely call that numbnuts a retard here. moderators are practically non existent, much like the common sense of the person you are replying to.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

So you never read 27 CFR either? Why not?

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

A belt loop, string, and your own hands' can turn a semiautomatic into a fast fire firearm using the same principles as a bump stock. This is all pretty funny.

[–] triplea (3577) 4 years ago

You must be a FUCKING terrible shot if you need a bump stock to hunt ...

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

I've never seen anyone hunt with a bump or claim they do so. I've never owned a bump stock either.

So is Trump anti-gun for grabbing guns or not?

[–] triplea (3577) 4 years ago

Well you can only be anti gun if you ban all guns tho?

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

In my opinion supporting any gun grab or gun ban makes a person anti-gun.

Where do you draw the line?

[–] e3e34ifj (1912) 4 years ago

trump was not even a conservative. he was a soft-handed leftist who lived in literal ivory towers in the middle of the nation's largest city his whole life. never worked on a single construction site or never changed his own tire. he knew absolutely nothing about being "the common man" yet rednecks voted for him.

meanwhile bernie sanders was the outdoorsman who went fishing and hunting and the right wing media painted him as some commie libtard. sanders could at least fire and clean a rifle.

[–] Corbell (11005) 4 years ago

Neither conservatives nor red necks voted for Trump because we thought he was either an ideological conservative or a red neck.

Seriously, this has been EXTENSIVELY discussed. If you are still ignorant at this point, it is because you are actively ignoring all information on the subject.

Why are you doing that?

[–] e3e34ifj (1912) 4 years ago

you are right. yall voted for him solely because he was republican. there.

[–] Corbell (11005) 4 years ago

Nope. You're being silly. Why are you working to look ignorant?

I mean, AT BEST, you are revealing that you are so wedded to Identity Politics, that you cannot imagine someone who is not.

That's the BEST case scenario, and that makes you look, like a brain washed lemming.

[–] e3e34ifj (1912) 4 years ago

you call me a brainwashed lemming yet you people are one who refused to vote for him in 2000, 2008, 2012, etc because he was not billed as a republican (LOOK IT UP!!!) and then suddenly he runs as a republican in 2016, starts saying shit about building walls and sending brown people back to their home countries and that's when you fucks vote for him. but i imagine i couldn't penetrate a thick skull like yours with a .50 caliber bullet.

[–] Corbell (11005) 4 years ago

I'm a republican that believes in securing the border, and deporting people that are here in violation of our laws.

That you think that is shocking, is about something being wrong with YOU, not me.

[–] Gd5150 (11966) 4 years ago

Lmao!!!!! Bernie is a lifelong politician. Never created a job in his life. Worse he’s an ignorant communist of the highest order.

[–] e3e34ifj (1912) 4 years ago

you are free to keep beliving your q anon conspiracies while i actually gain intellect through real facts and logic

[–] liscarkat (19427) 4 years ago

Would the modifications Lucas McCain made to his Winchester .44-40 carbine so he can fire twelve shots in about four seconds be banned now?

[–] TexasJack (12516) 4 years ago

I would say no. The definition of a "machinegun" from the National Firearms Act of 1934 includes this language (emphasis added):

The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun.

The legal debate about the applicability of this law to bump stocks centers on the interpretation of the phrase "single function of the trigger". The ATF and some courts have interpreted it to mean "single pull of the trigger".

However, in the case of McCain's Winchester, the trigger is being pulled once for each discharge. The modification allows him to do it more quickly, but it still requires independent physical action each time.

https://youtu.be/5Rl-FGETfS4?t=7

[–] TimMC (9143) 4 years ago

Dear OP, (hands you a doll) show me on this doll where the Orange Man touched you.

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

So you were happy with Trump's anti-gun agenda?

[–] Adam60z (3781) 4 years ago

Well you gun nuts have something in common with us antigun normal folks: we both hate Conald Chump. But his supporters are dropping like flies: Rush, and now Dick Farel. Who's next?

[–] Ranb (11364) 4 years ago

So what do you "antigun normal folks" have to say about the amended CFR? Is it real? Does it actually say that bump stocks are machine guns?

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 4 years ago

It's sad people think he was pro-gun.

It's sad people think he is religious.

It's sad people think he is conservative.

It's sad people think he was a good president.

It's sad the passes you get just for lowering taxes for corporations and having an R next to your name.