Reply
Go Back   TexasBowhunter.com Community Discussion Forums > Topics > Current Events - Politics and Such
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-03-2019, 10:58 AM   #1
35remington
Pope & Young
 
35remington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Wilco
Hunt In: the dark
Default Tread harder, daddy! MAGA fanbois, come defend your 2A-trampling president

Whitehouse.gov Remarks by President Trump Before Marine One Departure
Issued on: June 2, 2019

"Q The suspect in the Virginia Beach shooting used a silencer on his weapon. Do you believe that silencers should be restricted?

THE PRESIDENT: I don’t like them at all."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings...-departure-46/

35remington is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 11:14 AM   #2
Clay C
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

No defending him here. I've always criticized him on 2A issues.

It boils down to support. The overall population and unfortunately most gun owners (you'll probably see it here in this thread) could care less about silencers and other NFA items. It's a pretty safe bet for him politically to say things like that. Just look at the bumpstock fiasco. The "Doesn't affect me" mentality is a bad one.

Funny thing is, you can like some things someone does and says and not like other things that person does and says. I like the job he's done with the economy and most things regarding defense, I do not like his other side of the mouth crap in regards to the 2A

There's maybe 2-3 people in Washington who ACTUALLY support the 2A. Just a sad reality of what we've become as a nation.
Clay C is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 11:21 AM   #3
JFISHER
Pope & Young
 
JFISHER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brownwood
Hunt In: BWD
Default

The question was bait... what he needs to do is learn how to spot it and answer accordingly.

Does anyone honestly believe if he hadn't had a suppressor on his .45 he would have killed less people or just skipped his mental rampage all together?
JFISHER is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 11:57 AM   #4
batmaninja
Ten Point
 
batmaninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Hunt In: Hill Country
Default

"Come defend your 2A-trampling president"

This is "trampling" on the 2A ?
Attached Images
 
batmaninja is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 12:00 PM   #5
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by batmaninja View Post
"Come defend your 2A-trampling president"

This is "trampling" on the 2A ?


No, banning bump stocks is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 12:10 PM   #6
RiverRat1
Pope & Young
 
RiverRat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Leander
Hunt In: San Saba
Default

So if the President has a different opinion on what he likes or dislikes he's trampling on the 2A?

Geez. Stretch things much?
And I thought silencers were already (and have been for a LONG time) restricted?
RiverRat1 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 12:14 PM   #7
batmaninja
Ten Point
 
batmaninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Hunt In: Hill Country
Default

Yep, every militia needs a good cache of bump stocks.

Do you believe that silencers should be restricted?

They are already "restricted". Jfish had it, it was bait. Donnie wasn't the only one that bit.
batmaninja is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 12:14 PM   #8
cashcropper
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Default

It doesn't matter if he likes them or not. He never said he was trying to restrict them.
cashcropper is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 01:17 PM   #9
Traildust
Pope & Young
 
Traildust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Alvin, Texas
Hunt In: Bee County
Default

Maybe Hillary is more inline with your views.....
Traildust is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 01:33 PM   #10
SaltwaterSlick
Pope & Young
 
SaltwaterSlick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Just another case of The Donald shooting off his mouth before he gets his facts... He's even better at that than he is at being president, and he's pretty darn good at being president! He's never been too good at listening (or consulting) his handlers before shooting off his mouth... That's just who he is... That's something that I DO NOT like about him... He has constipation of the brain while having diarrhea of the mouth way too often...
SaltwaterSlick is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 01:41 PM   #11
scotth89
Ten Point
 
scotth89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Conroe
Hunt In: Looking yet again...
Default

If Obama would have spouted off that comment everyone here would be losing their mind. I’m a Trump supporter. He has never been a 100% second amendment supporter. Although I do believe he answered the question as he thinks the people want it answered. He just needs to shut the hell up.
scotth89 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 01:44 PM   #12
RiverRat1
Pope & Young
 
RiverRat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Leander
Hunt In: San Saba
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scotth89 View Post
If Obama would have spouted off that comment everyone here would be losing their mind. I’m a Trump supporter. He has never been a 100% second amendment supporter. Although I do believe he answered the question as he thinks the people want it answered. He just needs to shut the hell up.
This is a lie and simply not true.

If either said they plan to restrict something gun related that was already NOT restricted then you may be correct.

But who gives a crap if anyone simple does not like a silencer?
RiverRat1 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 01:58 PM   #13
Man
Pope & Young
 
Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Casper,Tx
Hunt In: Nacogdoches,Tx
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scotth89 View Post
If Obama would have spouted off that comment everyone here would be losing their mind.
If losing their minds means typing a couple extra exclamation marks...then yes.
Man is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 02:54 PM   #14
100%TtId
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Default

News flash: Trump isn't perfect.
100%TtId is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 03:38 PM   #15
Clay C
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%TtId View Post
News flash: Trump isn't perfect.
Yeah. I don't understand why this is such a hard concept. We have never had a President that makes everyone happy, that 100% aligns with his party, or that does everything he says he will. We never will have one either.
Clay C is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 03:45 PM   #16
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

He says he doesn’t like them. He didn’t say “I don’t like them but whether or not he had one changes nothing”.

When the bumpstock issue came about, he basically said I don’t like them. Now we have a ban on them. When we allow politicians to legislate against something they don’t like, and yes Trump is a politician, bad things happen. He’s done a lot of good so far, but his legislation around the 2A gets an F from me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 03:53 PM   #17
Mexico
Pope & Young
 
Mexico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Clear Lake Tx
Hunt In: Old Mexico, Centerville Tx
Default

Lol... so you would have Hillary win and not have a gun to even put a silencer on? Gotcha....
Mexico is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 04:27 PM   #18
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mexico View Post
Lol... so you would have Hillary win and not have a gun to even put a silencer on? Gotcha....


Nobody is saying that! Just want someone like Dan Crenshaw in there. Universal Basic Income in the form of everyone gets an FAL-308 with a suppressor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 04:29 PM   #19
Mexico
Pope & Young
 
Mexico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Clear Lake Tx
Hunt In: Old Mexico, Centerville Tx
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighwayHunter View Post
Nobody is saying that! Just want someone like Dan Crenshaw in there. Universal Basic Income in the form of everyone gets an FAL-308 with a suppressor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lmao... where do I sign up?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Mexico is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 04:39 PM   #20
MassMan
Ten Point
 
MassMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cypress
Hunt In: Fisher, Erath
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighwayHunter View Post
Nobody is saying that! Just want someone like Dan Crenshaw in there. Universal Basic Income in the form of everyone gets an FAL-308 with a suppressor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dan Crenshaw is currently taking a big dump on the Constitution with his support of the TAPS Act.
MassMan is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 04:48 PM   #21
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MassMan View Post
Dan Crenshaw is currently taking a big dump on the Constitution with his support of the TAPS Act.


What is the TAPS act. Sounds like listening in on people


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 04:53 PM   #22
batmaninja
Ten Point
 
batmaninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Hunt In: Hill Country
Default

But the TAPS Act, first introduced in January, would take law enforcement screenings to a whole new level. It would create a national threat assessment of children and adults.

In the course of six months the Threat Assessment, Prevention and Safety (TAPS) Act (H.R. 838) has seen support of the bill grow to nearly 80 Congress members.


Hmmmm, sure sounds a lot more damaging to the 2A than some goofy bump stocks.
batmaninja is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 05:07 PM   #23
Man
Pope & Young
 
Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Casper,Tx
Hunt In: Nacogdoches,Tx
Default

The TAPS Act:

• Will identify a behavioral threat assessment and management process that can be adapted and used across the nation while recognizing the unique needs of different communities

• Will provide States the training, resources, and support needed to stand up community-based, multidisciplinary behavioral threat assessment and management units

• Recognizes that the behavioral threat assessment and management concept should become part of the culture and fabric of contemporary law enforcement

• Urges that this is a matter of national security – if we act now and work together, we can save lives
Man is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 05:08 PM   #24
Man
Pope & Young
 
Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Casper,Tx
Hunt In: Nacogdoches,Tx
Default

How is Crenshaw for this?
Man is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 06:00 PM   #25
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Welp this is a first for me. I do not approve of cops deciding who should or shouldn’t have guns. *goes back to drawing board of retard politicians*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 06:07 PM   #26
Phillip Fields
Pope & Young
 
Phillip Fields's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Hunt In: NC,TX, and anywhere else I can
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Man View Post
How is Crenshaw for this?
Crenshaw is one of the sponsors.

https://trackbill.com/bill/us-congre...-2019/1660232/
Phillip Fields is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 06:08 PM   #27
Artos
Pope & Young
 
Artos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Deep South TX
Hunt In: Deep South TX
Default

yawn...so Trump Jr was quoted that dad was all for the Hearing Protection Act, but now doesn't like them?? Hmmmm???

I don't think he really heard the question...willing to wager this will become a non-issue for Trump, the whitehouse & gun owners. Your hearing is obviously WAY better than mine, but I did shoot a lot of shotguns with no ear plugs as a youngster.


https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump...e-them-at-all/

Relax, your cans are going to be just fine.

Your hatred for Trump will however continue until 2024...sorry.

Last edited by Artos; 06-03-2019 at 06:51 PM.
Artos is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 07:22 PM   #28
SaltwaterSlick
Pope & Young
 
SaltwaterSlick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artos View Post
yawn...so Trump Jr was quoted that dad was all for the Hearing Protection Act, but now doesn't like them?? Hmmmm???

I don't think he really heard the question...willing to wager this will become a non-issue for Trump, the whitehouse & gun owners. Your hearing is obviously WAY better than mine, but I did shoot a lot of shotguns with no ear plugs as a youngster.


https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump...e-them-at-all/

Relax, your cans are going to be just fine.

Your hatred for Trump will however continue until 2024...sorry.
Paul,
Can you post the actual article in the link? I use ad blocker and it won't let me see it without disabling adblocker, and I don't do that for any site...
thx.
SaltwaterSlick is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:02 PM   #29
Artos
Pope & Young
 
Artos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Deep South TX
Hunt In: Deep South TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaltwaterSlick View Post
Paul,
Can you post the actual article in the link? I use ad blocker and it won't let me see it without disabling adblocker, and I don't do that for any site...
thx.
It's not the article Charlie...it's all about the video. Doesn't seem to be on youtube yet & the reason the msm hasn't ran with this yet is because it cannot be substantiated.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Trump Condemns Gun Silencers After Virginia Beach Shooting: ‘I Don’t Like Them At All’


As investigations continue into the massacre that left 12 people dead on Friday, authorities have told the media that the perpetrator had a silencer on the gun he used to carry out his attack.

Before leaving the White House Sunday for his state visit to the United Kingdom, Trump was asked how he felt about silencers, and he responded “I don’t like them at all.”

Trump’s remarks were hard to hear since he was about to board the helicopter waiting to take him to Air Force One, so here’s the White House’s transcript on the brief exchange.

Reporter: “The suspect in the Virginia Beach shooting used a silencer on his weapon. Do you believe that silencers should be restricted?”

Trump: “I don’t like them at all.”


~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The question itself cannot even be heard in the vid.

You nailed it on your post...trump may have been shooting from the hip & the fact he was going to support the hearing protection act??

This is simply a never trumper who actually liked John Kasich's gun control views without ANY sort of research, yet claims this crap gospel. It will end up a non issue once the dust settles.
Artos is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:02 PM   #30
rocky
Pope & Young
 
rocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lake Fork
Default

Y’all are gonna have to educate me on the 2nd amendment. How do bumpstocks and silencers fall under the 2nd amendment. Does not seem to infringe one “ the right to bear arms”, to me.
rocky is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:02 PM   #31
Horn chaser
Ten Point
 
Horn chaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Colbert,Ok/ Bryan and atoka co, sometimes grayson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaltwaterSlick View Post
Paul,
Can you post the actual article in the link? I use ad blocker and it won't let me see it without disabling adblocker, and I don't do that for any site...
thx.
Here ya go.

President Donald Trump expressed a unfavorable opinion about firearm suppressors on Monday following the Virginia Beach shooting.
As investigations continue into the massacre that left 12 people dead on Friday, authorities have told the media that the perpetrator had a silencer on the gun he used to carry out his attack.
Before leaving the White House Sunday for his state visit to the United Kingdom, Trump was asked how he felt about silencers, and he responded “I don’t like them at all.”
Trump’s remarks were hard to hear since he was about to board the helicopter waiting to take him to Air Force One, so here’s the White House’s transcript on the brief exchange.
Reporter: “The suspect in the Virginia Beach shooting used a silencer on his weapon. Do you believe that silencers should be restricted?”
Trump: “I don’t like them at all.”
Horn chaser is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:03 PM   #32
Horn chaser
Ten Point
 
Horn chaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Colbert,Ok/ Bryan and atoka co, sometimes grayson
Default

looks like Artos beat me to it and described the video spot on.
Horn chaser is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:06 PM   #33
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky View Post
Y’all are gonna have to educate me on the 2nd amendment. How do bumpstocks and silencers fall under the 2nd amendment. Does not seem to infringe one “ the right to bear arms”, to me.


You’re gonna have to finish the sentence and you’ll understand “shall not be infringed”. Bump stocks, then high capacity magazines, then suppressors, then pistol grips, then no semi-autos...you get the picture.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:09 PM   #34
Clay C
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky View Post
Y’all are gonna have to educate me on the 2nd amendment. How do bumpstocks and silencers fall under the 2nd amendment. Does not seem to infringe one “ the right to bear arms”, to me.


Are you okay with them banning a pistol grip on an AR15? A flash hider? What about a fore grip? Magazines over a certain round count? detachable magazines all together?

None of those things are guns.



Let's say that silencers and bump stocks are not protected by the 2nd A. Does it make it any better that the government can just ban pieces of plastic and metal because they deem it scary?
Clay C is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:20 PM   #35
Artos
Pope & Young
 
Artos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Deep South TX
Hunt In: Deep South TX
Default

How do we even know what question was asked?? I'm not trusting the crap in the link I posted, much less the OP's. Nothing can be verified at this point.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Rocky, munitions are not firearms...you OK with them being banned?? You can throw your firearm at the bad guy once you run out of ammo. How can banning ammo infringe your rights?? Not a firearm!!

Last edited by Artos; 06-03-2019 at 08:22 PM.
Artos is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:39 PM   #36
Hooverfb
Ten Point
 
Hooverfb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Default

I've found that so far from reading this I'm a little disappointed in Crenshaw (even though I get where hes coming from) and Trump talks to much too quick.
Hooverfb is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:40 PM   #37
Coup de Grace
Pope & Young
 
Coup de Grace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Willis Texas
Hunt In: Looking for a lease.
Default

Go Trump.
Coup de Grace is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:46 PM   #38
rocky
Pope & Young
 
rocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lake Fork
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artos View Post
How do we even know what question was asked?? I'm not trusting the crap in the link I posted, much less the OP's. Nothing can be verified at this point.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Rocky, munitions are not firearms...you OK with them being banned?? You can throw your firearm at the bad guy once you run out of ammo. How can banning ammo infringe your rights?? Not a firearm!!
Ammo is a necessary ingredient in a firearm. Bumpstocks and silencers aren’t. Don’t silencers require a special license to own,? Beyond the scope of the 2nd amendment?
rocky is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:49 PM   #39
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky View Post
Ammo is a necessary ingredient in a firearm. Bumpstocks and silencers aren’t. Don’t silencers require a special license to own,? Beyond the scope of the 2nd amendment?


Pistol grips aren’t necessary. Semi auto isn’t necessary. You have to have a background check to buy a rifle. Shoulder slings aren’t necessary. Red dot sights only make it easier to kill people with fast sight acquisition. See how this works? You can try and justify neoconservative actions all you’d like, but in reality you’ll just look like a fool. Incremental knocks on our second amendment will kill it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 08:56 PM   #40
rocky
Pope & Young
 
rocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lake Fork
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighwayHunter View Post
Pistol grips aren’t necessary. Semi auto isn’t necessary. You have to have a background check to buy a rifle. Shoulder slings aren’t necessary. Red dot sights only make it easier to kill people with fast sight acquisition. See how this works? You can try and justify neoconservative actions all you’d like, but in reality you’ll just look like a fool. Incremental knocks on our second amendment will kill it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
First, I’m no fool. I own guns, lots and lots of guns. Y’all are very willing to pay a fee or tax if you will, to own a piece of equipment that definitely falls outside the scope of the 2nd amendment. These pieces have been regulated seperatly for years. Now that you are able to pay this “tax”, and own one of these accessories, that were previously illegal, you’re gonna vilify our POTUS for rethinking these extended liberties.
rocky is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 09:00 PM   #41
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky View Post
First, I’m no fool. I own guns, lots and lots of guns. Y’all are very willing to pay a fee or tax if you will, to own a piece of equipment that definitely falls outside the scope of the 2nd amendment. These pieces have been regulated seperatly for years. Now that you are able to pay this “tax”, and own one of these accessories, that were previously illegal, you’re gonna vilify our POTUS for rethinking these extended liberties.


No, I’m vilifying every politician that has limited our freedoms. Trump just so happens to be going along with the rest of them. I think suppressors and bump stocks should be legal and come stock with an AR. However you would make the argument that they don’t fall under the second amendment. Using your logic, any accessory that isn’t iron sights or a trigger shouldn’t be on a gun and we shouldn’t be allowed to have semi automatic guns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 09:08 PM   #42
armadillophil
Ten Point
 
armadillophil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Keller
Default

I could care less about bumpstocks and silencers but I understand the slippery slope that comes with giving in on laws that restrict our 2nd amendment rights
armadillophil is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 09:12 PM   #43
rocky
Pope & Young
 
rocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lake Fork
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighwayHunter View Post
No, I’m vilifying every politician that has limited our freedoms. Trump just so happens to be going along with the rest of them. I think suppressors and bump stocks should be legal and come stock with an AR. However you would make the argument that they don’t fall under the second amendment. Using your logic, any accessory that isn’t iron sights or a trigger shouldn’t be on a gun and we shouldn’t be allowed to have semi automatic guns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wrong. Aside from bumpstocks that almost turns a semiauto into a full auto, name the other accessories that have to be licensed to own. Scopes don’t have to be licensed. As far as I know, night vision scopes don’t have to be licensed. Pistol grips don’t have to be licensed. Extended mags are either banned in some States, or don’t have to be licensed. In other words, you are willing to pay a “special tax” to own an accessory that falls outside the scope of the 2nd amendment.
rocky is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 09:22 PM   #44
Artos
Pope & Young
 
Artos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Deep South TX
Hunt In: Deep South TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky View Post
Ammo is a necessary ingredient in a firearm. Bumpstocks and silencers aren’t. Don’t silencers require a special license to own,? Beyond the scope of the 2nd amendment?
What is your objective?? The anti's are targeting ammo full force as an angle to limit your 2nd, much more so than suppressors or bump stocks. So you are going to fight for ammo but **** off suppressors?? You now have a graduating scale on what you perceive to be protected under the 2nd?? I can promise you the anti's are not.

Suppressors are regulated on the same basis as full autos yet are not a firearm...they were classified to fall under NFA back in the day because some game agencies thought they would be used for poaching, yet state after state has approved them as a valuable tool for hearing preservation. Now because of recent shooting and it's unverified use, you seem to be condemning them not worthy of being protected under the 2nd because they are not a necessary ingredient??

Stop picking the fly **** out of the pepper...your ammo is at much a larger risk than suppressors. I'm not sure what you are supporting or not or trying to gain from the **** poor argument in front of me.
Artos is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 09:41 PM   #45
rocky
Pope & Young
 
rocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lake Fork
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artos View Post
What is your objective?? The anti's are targeting ammo full force as an angle to limit your 2nd, much more so than suppressors or bump stocks. So you are going to fight for ammo but **** off suppressors?? You now have a graduating scale on what you perceive to be protected under the 2nd?? I can promise you the anti's are not.

Suppressors are regulated on the same basis as full autos yet are not a firearm...they were classified to fall under NFA back in the day because some game agencies thought they would be used for poaching, yet state after state has approved them as a valuable tool for hearing preservation. Now because of recent shooting and it's unverified use, you seem to be condemning them not worthy of being protected under the 2nd because they are not a necessary ingredient??

Stop picking the fly **** out of the pepper...your ammo is at much a larger risk than suppressors. I'm not sure what you are supporting or not or trying to gain from the **** poor argument in front of me.
There’s an old saying. “ Lose the battle, win the war”. The harder We keep fighting for accessories that fall outside the scope of the 2nd amendment, the harder the anti’s will fight to tax, ban, or overprice our ammo. There is hearing protection available other than suppressors. Had them for years. Personally, I think that using the hearing protection argument is B.S. I’d rather give up my suppressors than give up my ammo.
rocky is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 10:52 PM   #46
Stuck
Ten Point
 
Stuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Katy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky View Post
There’s an old saying. “ Lose the battle, win the war”. The harder We keep fighting for accessories that fall outside the scope of the 2nd amendment, the harder the anti’s will fight to tax, ban, or overprice our ammo. There is hearing protection available other than suppressors. Had them for years. Personally, I think that using the hearing protection argument is B.S. I’d rather give up my suppressors than give up my ammo.
Yes! Absolutely! Clear line of thought here. . Everytime a liberal has been conceded a concession they are extremely happy with the deal and never to be heard from again. They never come back for more. The anti’s will come after your modifications and your ammo. They will take what they can get now and continue to come after it all. How bout we try to win all the battles, hate to keep losing a bunch of little battles to wake up one day and find out the war is over.
Stuck is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-03-2019, 11:07 PM   #47
Black Ice
Pope & Young
 
Black Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baton Rouge
Hunt In: Jefferson & Brooks County
Default Tread harder, daddy! MAGA fanbois, come defend your 2A-trampling president

Has anyone verified that he went through the proper paperwork to get a suppressor or did he buy a solvent trap?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Black Ice is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-04-2019, 12:57 AM   #48
NaClH2O_therapy
Ten Point
 
NaClH2O_therapy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Matagorda county
Hunt In: Sutton County, Matagorda County
Default

Donald Trump really makes me sick sometimes.
Ted Cruz should be our president.
NaClH2O_therapy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-04-2019, 04:54 AM   #49
HighwayHunter
Ten Point
 
HighwayHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky View Post
Wrong. Aside from bumpstocks that almost turns a semiauto into a full auto, name the other accessories that have to be licensed to own. Scopes don’t have to be licensed. As far as I know, night vision scopes don’t have to be licensed. Pistol grips don’t have to be licensed. Extended mags are either banned in some States, or don’t have to be licensed. In other words, you are willing to pay a “special tax” to own an accessory that falls outside the scope of the 2nd amendment.


That’s exactly my point. It technically doesn’t fall out of the scope of the second amendment. The ATF and boot kickers decided we should pay a tax for it to fund pride parades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HighwayHunter is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 06-04-2019, 06:28 AM   #50
Clay C
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NaClH2O_therapy View Post
Donald Trump really makes me sick sometimes.
Ted Cruz should be our president.
According to who? He didn't get the votes.
Clay C is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1999-2012, TexasBowhunter.com