Trump on Clinton and the 2nd amendment

[Grand Mal]

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment," Trump said to the crowd of supporters gathered in the Trask Coliseum at North Carolina University in Wilmington. "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.

"Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don't know."

Trump Says Maybe '2nd Amendment People' Can Stop Clinton's Supreme Court Picks - ABC News

He keeps qualifying these innuendos with, "I don't know." and "You tell me."
Time for the Trumpster Legion to explain what he really meant.

 

[Captain Adverse]

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment," Trump said to the crowd of supporters gathered in the Trask Coliseum at North Carolina University in Wilmington. "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.

"Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don't know."

Trump Says Maybe '2nd Amendment People' Can Stop Clinton's Supreme Court Picks - ABC News

He keeps qualifying these innuendos with, "I don't know." and "You tell me."
Time for the Trumpster Legion to explain what he really meant.

If you want to know what Trump meant you need only look to your own citation:

"[Second] Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power. And this year, they will be voting in record numbers, and it won't be for Hillary Clinton, it will be for Donald Trump," said Jason Miller, senior communications adviser for Trump.

and...

When an interviewer from WNCN, a North Carolina CBS affiliate, asked if the comments were condoning violence, Trump said, "Oh no, no. This was political power."

Now I have already stated that one of my reasons, in fact a primary one, for voting against Hillary is her stance on gun control and the Second Amendment. I am absolutely certain she will appoint as many gun control leaning Justices as she is able during her term of office. In response to his statement I will vote against her come election time.

I will not speak for Trump on this point, or for any other Second Amendment supporter opposed to the Democratic stance on "progressive" (pun intended) gun control measures intended to effectively disarm the common citizen.

As for myself, I consider this right both an essential and an individual one subject to extremely minimal regulations in the name of public safety; that I am willing to defend this right with my last breath if need be.

Feel free to decide what you think THAT could mean if in some future dystopia the SCOTUS should ever decide to reinterpret this right in order to disarm my fellow citizens. :coffeepap:

 

[beefheart]

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment," Trump said to the crowd of supporters gathered in the Trask Coliseum at North Carolina University in Wilmington. "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.

"Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don't know."

Trump Says Maybe '2nd Amendment People' Can Stop Clinton's Supreme Court Picks - ABC News

He keeps qualifying these innuendos with, "I don't know." and "You tell me."
Time for the Trumpster Legion to explain what he really meant.

Trump is a lying SOS, and like all conspiracy theorists, he uses the same BS vague language.

But the rabble are just too ignorant to see how they are being played. They always are...that is why there are con artists.

 

[Casper]

If you want to know what Trump meant you need only look to your own citation:



and...



Now I have already stated that one of my reasons, in fact a primary one, for voting against Hillary is her stance on gun control and the Second Amendment. I am absolutely certain she will appoint as many gun control leaning Justices as she is able during her term of office. In response to his statement I will vote against her come election time.

I will not speak for Trump on this point, or for any other Second Amendment supporter opposed to the Democratic stance on "progressive" (pun intended) gun control measures intended to effectively disarm the common citizen.

As for myself, I consider this right both an essential and an individual one subject to extremely minimal regulations in the name of public safety; that I am willing to defend this right with my last breath if need be.

Feel free to decide what you think THAT could mean if in some future dystopia the SCOTUS should ever decide to reinterpret this right in order to disarm my fellow citizens. :coffeepap:

So maybe that means that the Senate should approve one of the more moderate Obama sections, or we can wait or Hillary to appoint some people and the Senate may belong to the Dems after the election. Cut your loses comes to mind.

 

[Kobie]

I might put more stock in Republican assholes claiming the next Democratic asshole in line wants to "abolish the second amendment" if I hadn't been hearing it for 30 years.

 

[beefheart]

I might put more stock in Republican assholes claiming the next Democratic asshole in line wants to "abolish the second amendment" if I hadn't been hearing it for 30 years.

Yup, the same old baloney.

Speaking of which, why hasn't the biggest gun lover on the site chimed in, over and over?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I might put more stock in Republican assholes claiming the next Democratic asshole in line wants to "abolish the second amendment" if I hadn't been hearing it for 30 years.

You must be willfully blind or playing a huge semantic game to justify this position.

You don't think Obama would abolish the second amendment (or at least sign laws to regulate guns so heavily it leads to a de facto repeal) if he could get the congressional votes for it?

 

[Kobie]

You must be willfully blind or playing a huge semantic game to justify this position.

You don't think Obama would abolish the second amendment (or at least sign laws to regulate guns so heavily it leads to a de facto repeal) if he could get the congressional votes for it?

1. You do realize that the repeal of a Constitutional amendment requires another Constitutional amendment, which takes more than "Congressional votes" to pass, don't you?
2. I try not to argue in hypotheticals.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

1. You do realize that the repeal of a Constitutional amendment requires another Constitutional amendment, which takes more than "Congressional votes" to pass, don't you?
2. I try not to argue in hypotheticals.

The gun control crowd doesn't even believe the second amendment protects an individual right to own firearms. they don't need to repeal it, they'll sit here and claim it protects the right of the state to own the military, and they've never let second amendment considerations in the way of passing laws. your constitutional amendment counter point is crud. they won't amend the constitution, hell half of these people sit here saying the words "Well regulated" means the second amendment gives the government the right to regulate guns!

Hillary and Obama have both endorsed the Australian model of mandatory buy backs after banning guns they don't like. it's confiscation by another method. I'm not going to endorse your denial when the people I'm worried about have outright said what they want. that's silly.

some dude named Kobie on the internet : no one is coming for the guns, they won't take away your rights
Hillary Clinton: I will appoint pro gun control judges, and I believe we should follow Australia's reaction to mass shootings

who should I believe here?

 

[TurtleDude]

Trump is a lying SOS, and like all conspiracy theorists, he uses the same BS vague language.

But the rabble are just too ignorant to see how they are being played. They always are...that is why there are con artists.

Yeah the Hillary fan boys are so much smarter than those voting against the Lying Bitch.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

You must be willfully blind or playing a huge semantic game to justify this position.

You don't think Obama would abolish the second amendment (or at least sign laws to regulate guns so heavily it leads to a de facto repeal) if he could get the congressional votes for it?

No, and there's zero evidence to indicate that he would, to say nothing of the fact it doesn't work that way.

 

[beefheart]

Yeah the Hillary fan boys are so much smarter than those voting against the Lying Bitch.

Gee, what a burn....:roll:

 

[TurtleDude]

Gee, what a burn....:roll:

it appears your main interest is insulting those who will vote for Trump. which is not the issue on this thread. Trump's comments are being called "threats" by Canklers when such a claim is dubious, at best

 

[beefheart]

it appears your main interest is insulting those who will vote for Trump. which is not the issue on this thread. Trump's comments are being called "threats" by Canklers when such a claim is dubious, at best

More of your withering attacks...yawn.

Keep pumping up your cult leader.

 

[TurtleDude]

More of your withering attacks...yawn.

Keep pumping up your cult leader.

I have no leaders. I am not a left-winger

 

[Winchester]

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment," Trump said to the crowd of supporters gathered in the Trask Coliseum at North Carolina University in Wilmington. "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.

"Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don't know."

Trump Says Maybe '2nd Amendment People' Can Stop Clinton's Supreme Court Picks - ABC News

He keeps qualifying these innuendos with, "I don't know." and "You tell me."
Time for the Trumpster Legion to explain what he really meant.

It means whatever one wants it to mean as long as the Donald can maintain some sort of deniability that he really didn't mean maybe someone can assassinate HRC. I mean who would do that, you tell me.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

No, and there's zero evidence to indicate that he would, to say nothing of the fact it doesn't work that way.

Then you are either lying or in denial. He wants the assault weapons ban even though all studies related to it have shown it did not reduce crime, he wanted legislation banning pistols as a state legislator in Illinois, he made no effort as a state legislator in Illinois to help repeal Chicagos total handgun ban, his only gun rights related actions as president were to sign two extremely minor changes that were packed in a massive bill regulating credit card issuers. his justice department has charged exactly zero people with civil rights violations regarding second amendment issues. no judge he has appointed has struck down any gun control law. should I go on?

as we speak he is trying to use executive orders to ban social security recipients from purchasing firearms by declaring them "adjudicated mentally unfit"

Don't try to pull the wool over my eyes, that will be a short discussion.

 

[Goshin]

Trump is a lying SOS, and like all conspiracy theorists, he uses the same BS vague language.

But the rabble are just too ignorant to see how they are being played. They always are...that is why there are con artists.

There is no question Hillary will be a relatively anti-2A president... many here are in fact crowing about it. Chelsea, for another.


The Donald is a dick, yes, but at least he isn't Hillary.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Then you are either lying or in denial.

Neither one. Please spare yourself the embarrassment of false dichotomies.

He wants the assault weapons ban even though all studies related to it have shown it did not reduce crime, he wanted legislation banning pistols as a state legislator in Illinois, he made no effort as a state legislator in Illinois to help repeal Chicagos total handgun ban, his only gun rights related actions as president were to sign two extremely minor changes that were packed in a massive bill regulating credit card issuers. his justice department has charged exactly zero people with civil rights violations regarding second amendment issues. no judge he has appointed has struck down any gun control law. should I go on?

None of which backs up your absurd claim.

as we speak he is trying to use executive orders to ban social security recipients from purchasing firearms by declaring them "adjudicated mentally unfit"

Don't try to pull the wool over my eyes, that will be a short discussion.

I'm not. You're blind by your own doing.

Since you're unable to rationally back up your claim, there really isn't anything to discuss.

 

[beefheart]

There is no question Hillary will be a relatively anti-2A president... many here are in fact crowing about it. Chelsea, for another.


The Donald is a dick, yes, but at least he isn't Hillary.

Yeah, and you all bought the fear when they said the same thing about Obama, the 2 A is still there, but fear sells....

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Neither one. Please spare yourself the embarrassment of false dichotomies.

None of which backs up your absurd claim.

I'm not. You're blind by your own doing.

Since you're unable to rationally back up your claim, there really isn't anything to discuss.

I think you misunderstand the fundementals of rationality, you're saying "Obama doesn't want to because he doesn't want to"

I've provided multiple factual examples as to why he does. your response to is to attack me.

That simply proves my point.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

I think you misunderstand the fundementals of rationality, you're saying "Obama doesn't want to because he doesn't want to"

I've provided multiple factual examples as to why he does. your response to is to attack me.

That simply proves my point.

There is no credible evidence that he wants to.

What you supplied doesn't support your histrionic and absurd claim; nothing you cited indicates any desire to do away with the 2nd Amendment, no matter how much you wish it were the case.

The only thing I've attacked are your logical fallacies and inability to support your contention.

Sorry that you think you actually had a point to make. If you had, you'd have made it by now.

 

[Grand Mal]

It means whatever one wants it to mean as long as the Donald can maintain some sort of deniability that he really didn't mean maybe someone can assassinate HRC. I mean who would do that, you tell me.

Well, if a politician had no substance and wanted to rally the Jerry Springer nation behind him, he might, I don't know.

 

[MrPeanut]

Obviously Trump speaks like he does to get anti-PC points while still retaining the option of going back on his statements due to them being sort of vague. This second amendment thing is the same as every other controversial thing he has said.

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Above is one of the first things he said after announcing his candidacy. The section in bold is the only reason he has any defense against being a full blown racist. You can find the same layout in just about everything he says.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

There is no credible evidence that he wants to.

What you supplied doesn't support your histrionic and absurd claim; nothing you cited indicates any desire to do away with the 2nd Amendment, no matter how much you wish it were the case.

The only thing I've attacked are your logical fallacies and inability to support your contention.

Sorry that you think you actually had a point to make. If you had, you'd have made it by now.

See now you're using a pathetic strawman argument that I've already addressed.

he doesn't need to "repeal the second amendment" their side of the argument claims the second amendment doesn't even protect an individual right and hence they're not violating it.

I don't care if he doesn't "repeal" the second amendment from the constitution, those far leftist types will pass every law they want anyway and stack courts with judges who will uphold it. can you name one gun rights vote of Kagan or Sotomayor?