Biden vs Gun Owners

So he asks me why I think the senate is more dangerous for 2A legislation than the house, I explain that there are more Democrat house members that won’t blindly follow Pelosi than there are Democrat senate members that won’t follow Schumer, and then name Republican senators that have gone against their own party on major issues, you call it “pigeon-holing”. If I call a Republican a liberal, it’s because they have supported a lot of liberal things, liberal things that are opposed to planks of the Republican platform.
No need to explain; I get it. It's my problem presently. One tires of the constant ad nauseum "the sky is falling" fears regarding 2A ... especially here in Montana when the sky is full of legislation about to become law which most agree adversely impacts wildlife, DIY hunters, and Montana's rich hunting legacy!:mad:
 
Last edited:
Now explain how being anti-McConnel should legitimately cause a person to lose credibility.
If you didn't trust him in 2014 then I stand corrected in your specific instance. But 95% of the people I hear calling him an a**/coward today loved him for four years as he did the bidding of Trump but turned when he finally called BS on Jan 6th. There is a long pattern of Trump and Trumpists loving people when they say yes and vilifying them when they step out of line. Just look at the comings and goings of his advisors and cabinet for the last 4 years and see how they were treated. It's like a guy with 8 ex-wives but somehow they all were the problem. Like a buddy of mine says, "If you tell me you ran into an a**hole today, then you have my condolences; but if you tell me everyone you ran into today was an a**shole, then I think we all know who the real a**hole is." (just to be clear, I am NOT calling ImBillT and asshole)
 
We need to look toward 2024

Big Fin for president as long as he promises to make Vikingsguy his Attorney General !!!

V.P. ??? maybe someone from Texas would work, ;)

just a thought
 
I suppose your definition of “Trumpist” can be whatever you want it to be, but A) the name implies that it’s anyone who supported Trump, and B) your definition of it does not describe the majority of Trump voters.
You will note I said conservatives and Trumpists. I know they are different and I know that many conservatives voted for him in 2016 and 2020. But Trumpists to me are the race-baiting legacy of the Dixiecrats, the Proud Boys, the "he is 110% right on very topic and anyone that disagrees is a communist scumbag" folks, the QAnon believers, and the folks who believe he is the greatest president of all time eclipsing Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Kennedy and Reagan. If you are not one of those folks then you are not a Trumpist in my book.
 
If you didn't trust him in 2014 then I stand corrected in your specific instance. But 95% of the people I hear calling him an a**/coward today loved him for four years as he did the bidding of Trump but turned when he finally called BS on Jan 6th. There is a long pattern of Trump and Trumpists loving people when they say yes and vilifying them when they step out of line. Just look at the comings and goings of his advisors and cabinet for the last 4 years and see how they were treated. It's like a guy with 8 ex-wives but somehow they all were the problem. Like a buddy of mine says, "If you tell me you ran into an a**hole today, then you have my condolences; but if you tell me everyone you ran into today was an a**shole, then I think we all know who the real a**hole is." (just to be clear, I am NOT calling ImBillT and asshole)
I don’t remember the very moment I decided that McConnel was not doing anything positive for conservative voters but it would have been between 2008 and 2011. His “long game” is nothing but a means by which to lose as slowly as possible while avoiding all opportunities to win. He towed Trump’s line a few times when I expected him to fold, and it was likely because Trump was too popular with McConnel’s constituents back home.

I was anti-Rubio while GW was still president.

I was anti-McCain while Bush was still president and was going to vote for Fred Thompson, but McCain shored up the nomination(I believe with help from Romney), so I instead voted for Hillary in the primary because I feared her less than Obama. I did so before “Operation Chaos” was ever proposed, and I did so for a slightly different reason than the reasoning behind “Operation Chaos”. I held my nose and voted for McCain. You know...Obama may not have been any worse.

The idea that people think they are conservatives or Republicans because a celebrity named Donald Trump hoodwinked them into it is highly flawed. Trump did well because he started saying all the things a lot Republican voters had been asking for for decades.
 
You will note I said conservatives and Trumpists. I know they are different and I know that many conservatives voted for him in 2016 and 2020. But Trumpists to me are the race-baiting legacy of the Dixiecrats, the Proud Boys, the "he is 110% right on very topic and anyone that disagrees is a communist scumbag" folks, the QAnon believers, and the folks who believe he is the greatest president of all time eclipsing Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Kennedy and Reagan. If you are not one of those folks then you are not a Trumpist in my book.
Well...in terms of presidents in my lifetime, I obviously wouldn’t say that a Democrat is better than any Republicans because obviously their beliefs run almost 180 degrees counter to mine. That leaves me with Reagan, two Bushes, and Trump. I would put Trump near Reagan in many categories. I’m not convinced that Reagan could have been any more successful in today’s political climate. Both did some things to the left of my likings. In neither case was there someone else on the table that I would have rather had. I voted for Cruz in the primary, but if I had it to do over, I’d have voted Trump. I think Cruz would have been even less effective than Trump...although perhaps he would have picked someone better than Kavanaugh.

Proud Boys, I’m out, Dixiecrat, out, racist, I’m out, Q-anon, out, right on everything, out. If thinking that Trump was the best option on the table at the time makes me a “Trumpist” in your book, then whatever.

Again, Republican voters have been voting for candidates who ran on A and gave them B since George H W Bush said “read my lips, no new taxes”, and Trump didn’t do that. That puts him above the two lame Bush presidents.

Ever listen to a Kennedy speech? He was well right of today’s center on a lot of issues.
 
Last edited:
How many bad guys actually buy guns legally? Anyone have any statistics on that....
ATF is not allowed to have a database so the answer to your question is a little difficult. See attached. In Illinois you need to apply for a FOID card, which is issued by the state police after a background check. This allows some ability to trace not available in other states. Page through the report and you will see how the system is gamed. It is similar to others I have seen for previous years. To summarize, someone with a FOID goes into a IL sporting good store and buys 5 guns, then drives back into the city and sells them to gangs, which then look like "straw" sales. Are they legal sales? Yes. Indiana has different rules. Are they legal? Hard to say. Mississippi? Hmmm, interesting.
The same sporting goods stores are on the list every year.

Screen Shot 2021-02-18 at 12.36.44 PM.png

https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam... Room/Press Releases/2017/October/GTR2017.pdf
 
ATF is not allowed to have a database so the answer to your question is a little difficult. See attached. In Illinois you need to apply for a FOID card, which is issued by the state police after a background check. This allows some ability to trace not available in other states. Page through the report and you will see how the system is gamed. It is similar to others I have seen for previous years. To summarize, someone with a FOID goes into a IL sporting good store and buys 5 guns, then drives back into the city and sells them to gangs, which then look like "straw" sales. Are they legal sales? Yes. Indiana has different rules. Are they legal? Hard to say. Mississippi? Hmmm, interesting.
The same sporting goods stores are on the list every year.

View attachment 174521

https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts/mayor/Press Room/Press Releases/2017/October/GTR2017.pdf

Looks like some people in illinois and indiana need better parents.
 
You have totally lost me. You started a number of posts back by saying armed citizens won't actually use their arms, but they are like nuclear weapons - a deterrent for tyrants but not to be used. Then later they were a deterrent for LEO and mil asked to support tyrant, but then the armed citizens wouldn't actually shoot them, now you say armed citizens can't fight back against mil, but they could fight back against tyrant who orders round-up of religious groups, but then in the last sentence, the tyrant comes later. And you also said the people do the tyrant's bidding, but I thought the people were armed citizens protecting us from the tyrant. I am sure there is something here that I am missing, but I am done responding to this string of thoughts. I stand by my original point. In no real-world scenario has a modern armed civilian population held back a tyrant, this is a rhetorical gimmick that distracts folks from a real discussion about how to address gun violence. I would rather address it through economic and mental health reform, Pelosi would prefer to do by gun grabbing. On the brightside she doesn't have the votes, on the downside the GOP apparently has no ability to actually propose constructive legislation to address the root cause - and that leaves us right where we are. Arguing hypothetical scenarios and in fact doing nothing to improve the nation.

By definition law abiding citizens aren't committing crimes. Stephen Paddock was a law abiding citizen right up until the first shot. I don't own an AR but intend to at some point, so I'm not for gun grabbing, but you're setting an impossible standard for evidence.

There are 20 million AR’s in this country by the weakest guess and tens of millions of owners but we will restrict the right of lawful ownership to all for the reprehensible act of so very few. Paddock could have just as easily have bought these guns illegally and committed the same heinous act. However you want evidence , here you go ! AR’s are the most popular selling rifles and have been for years in the country but they are only responsible for 2% of the homicides in this country ! This comes from FBI numbers that are available to all. All this proves is AR-15’s are not a real problem and it’s only the press and liberals that make a nothing issue an issue at all. Why is that , I will tell you why because condemning a gun or the NRA is a lot easier than cleaning up the social deterioration of the cities in this country where most of the homicide happens. Drugs and systemic poverty ( yes not racism ) causes more murder than anything else . Banning AR’s or high capacity magazines won’t stop murder , mass murder or crime. It’s a folly to believe otherwise. Lawful gun ownership is not the problem but why pass laws against those who don’t cause the problem? That’s what this is all about getting back to the thread.
My point is easy to understand ...... why should I not be able to buy a firearm lawfully and the magazine and ammo ? In my hands it will not murder, in my home it will not murder or be used in violence ! Why should I not believe my fellow man would act the same way ? Banning the AR -15 and black guns , high capacity mags from the lawful owners isn’t going to solve one damn thing , except take away another liberty !
 
Looks like some people in illinois and indiana need better parents.
The problems are complex and the answers are difficult, but if you read the report it helps understand some of the additional gun regulations that get floated around - like only purchasing 1 gun per month. It doesn't affect 99% of purchases, but the attempt is to reduce the gun flow in the pipeline to criminals. While most rational people can agree to that, the not-one-more-law people will not. The middle eventually crumbles and we end up where we are now.
 
You will note I said conservatives and Trumpists. I know they are different and I know that many conservatives voted for him in 2016 and 2020. But Trumpists to me are the race-baiting legacy of the Dixiecrats, the Proud Boys, the "he is 110% right on very topic and anyone that disagrees is a communist scumbag" folks, the QAnon believers, and the folks who believe he is the greatest president of all time eclipsing Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Kennedy and Reagan. If you are not one of those folks then you are not a Trumpist in my book.
Can you support Trump policies and not be a "race baiter?
I was very much in favor of making Nato (Germany in particular) pay its fair share and not talk about us abandoning Europe to Russia when they are buying their natural gas from them.
I look to it as prudent to recognize that China is the greatest external threat that this country faces, and to consider policy which favors the country and not just Wall Street.
I was delighted with the Abraham Accords, they may have been symbolic but they were moving in the right direction. It was the first time that an different approach was used to gain some traction as opposed to tying everything to the Palestinian question that we have pursued throughout my lifetime and gotten nowhere. It was in my opinion a clever way to surround the Iranians.
I favor a more hardline approach to immigration, not because I am a race baiter but because the law of supply and demand and unfettered illegal immigration has killed (or reduced the wages attainable) of many skilled blue collar jobs in this country.
I was very much in favor of the trade deal that were promoted by the previous administration, even President Biden admitted that USMCA is a better deal than NAFTA.
I supported the goal that 20+ years in Afghanistan is long enough, if he had not been fought by the neocons we might have everybody home now.
Finally I am tired of my support for these policies of putting America First being labeled racist nativist or whatever. There are racist in both parties.
 
Can you support Trump policies and not be a "race baiter?
I was very much in favor of making Nato (Germany in particular) pay its fair share and not talk about us abandoning Europe to Russia when they are buying their natural gas from them.
I look to it as prudent to recognize that China is the greatest external threat that this country faces, and to consider policy which favors the country and not just Wall Street.
I was delighted with the Abraham Accords, they may have been symbolic but they were moving in the right direction. It was the first time that an different approach was used to gain some traction as opposed to tying everything to the Palestinian question that we have pursued throughout my lifetime and gotten nowhere. It was in my opinion a clever way to surround the Iranians.
I favor a more hardline approach to immigration, not because I am a race baiter but because the law of supply and demand and unfettered illegal immigration has killed (or reduced the wages attainable) of many skilled blue collar jobs in this country.
I was very much in favor of the trade deal that were promoted by the previous administration, even President Biden admitted that USMCA is a better deal than NAFTA.
I supported the goal that 20+ years in Afghanistan is long enough, if he had not been fought by the neocons we might have everybody home now.
Finally I am tired of my support for these policies of putting America First being labeled racist nativist or whatever. There are racist in both parties.
I already acknowledged many (probably most) conservatives voted for Trump but aren't Trumpists. I like conservative judges, tax reform, regulation reduction - but those are not Trump issues - they are issues the GOP has been pushing since Reagan. And I don't see most Trumpists (as I define that) as being issue-driven voters. I see them as voters who like the veiled racism and "burn the house down" combative nature of his personality. A group of people who have embraced their own toxic cancel culture by tweet. They have started viewing politics as a team sport to root for, have forgotten anything resembling real history, buy into QAnon silliness, etc. I don't believe Trump himself gives a damn about any policy issue. He cares about maintaining his ego-driven cult of personality. And those who buy into that are who I call Trumpists. It is ironic that on these threads there is a lot of hand-wringing about tyrants. Trumpy is as close as we have ever come to a classic tyrant yet where were all the armed citizens protecting Congress on Jan 6th? So, left, right and center, I can hear you out and will agree with some parts and disagree with others and buy you a beer at the end. But I have no time for the personality cult of Trump and QAnon, and it is time that thoughtful conservatives stand up and say so.

As for the racist question. Of course, we can have intentional immigration policies without being racists. Of course, we can have secure borders without being racists. That is not the racist part. Go back and read the immigration tweets of the last 5 years and honestly tell yourself that he isn't calling for the old race-based view of immigration our country had tried in the past. It was not sound immigration policy he was trying to convey - it was race-baiting plain and simple.
 
Last edited:
I already acknowledged many (probably most) conservatives voted for Trump but aren't Trumpists. I like conservative judges, tax reform, regulation reduction - but those are not Trump issues - they are issues the GOP has been pushing since Reagan. And I don't see most Trumpists (as I define that) as being issue-driven voters. I see them as voters who like the veiled racism and "burn the house down" combative nature of his personality. A group of people who have embraced their own toxic cancel culture by tweet. They have started viewing politics as a team sport to root for, have forgotten anything resembling real history, buy into QAnon silliness, etc. I don't believe Trump himself gives a damn about any policy issue. He cares about maintaining his ego-driven cult of personality. And those who buy into that are who I call Trumpists. It is ironic that on these threads there is a lot of hand-wringing about tyrants. Trumpy is as close as we have ever come to a classic tyrant yet where were all the armed citizens protecting Congress on Jan 6th? So, left, right and center, I can hear you out and will agree with some parts and disagree with others and buy you a beer at the end. But I have no time for the personality cult of Trump and QAnon, and it is time that thoughtful conservatives stand up and say so.

As for the racist question. Of course, we can have intentional immigration policies without being racists. Of course, we can have secure borders without being racists. That is not the racist part. Go back and read the immigration tweets of the last 5 years and honestly tell yourself that he isn't calling for the old race-based view of immigration our country had tried in the past. It was not sound immigration policy - it was race-baiting plain and simple.
I would gladly buy you a beer as well.

You said that you favor conservative judges, tax reform and regulation reduction. I fairly certain that those issues were addressed by Trump perhaps not to the level that I would have liked, but given the strong opposition towards any proposal from the democrats and the secret back bench machinations by some republicans, I am astonished that any thing occurred.
We will have to disagree on whether it was race baiting or not. I don't think it was and I am not going to convince you otherwise and vice versa.
But to label "Trumpist" as a monolithic group that espouses Q theories and racism seems to me as thinking that is similar to the way a racist would describe a member of a minority group.

The folks that I know who were vehement Trump supporters see a system (the swamp) that is out to protect and preserve the status quo. For example regardless if it is Chamber of Commerce republicans that want access to cheap labor or Progressive democrats who see a untapped source of voters the effect on everyday folks has not been beneficial. Take this in spirit that it is intended with no malice, but lawyers and graduate educated range ecologist don't lose our jobs with a massive influx of illegal immigrants or see our income diminished. But skilled tradesman do, they are the ones whose kids join the service so they can go to college, only to do two tours in the ME/Afghan during a four year hitch. So that Cheney and their ilk get fat off defense contracts, or for some democrat to have some street cred as a center right politician. You would have a very difficult time convincing me that the opposition to Trump did not stem from the establishment over real policy but rather loss of income or power or both.
I still struggle when people describe Trump as a tryant or wannabe dictator . I just don't see the evidence. We have seen in the first few weeks of the new administration a demonstration of executive power.
 
I would gladly buy you a beer as well.

You said that you favor conservative judges, tax reform and regulation reduction. I fairly certain that those issues were addressed by Trump perhaps not to the level that I would have liked, but given the strong opposition towards any proposal from the democrats and the secret back bench machinations by some republicans, I am astonished that any thing occurred.
We will have to disagree on whether it was race baiting or not. I don't think it was and I am not going to convince you otherwise and vice versa.
But to label "Trumpist" as a monolithic group that espouses Q theories and racism seems to me as thinking that is similar to the way a racist would describe a member of a minority group.

The folks that I know who were vehement Trump supporters see a system (the swamp) that is out to protect and preserve the status quo. For example regardless if it is Chamber of Commerce republicans that want access to cheap labor or Progressive democrats who see a untapped source of voters the effect on everyday folks has not been beneficial. Take this in spirit that it is intended with no malice, but lawyers and graduate educated range ecologist don't lose our jobs with a massive influx of illegal immigrants or see our income diminished. But skilled tradesman do, they are the ones whose kids join the service so they can go to college, only to do two tours in the ME/Afghan during a four year hitch. So that Cheney and their ilk get fat off defense contracts, or for some democrat to have some street cred as a center right politician. You would have a very difficult time convincing me that the opposition to Trump did not stem from the establishment over real policy but rather loss of income or power or both.
I still struggle when people describe Trump as a tryant or wannabe dictator . I just don't see the evidence. We have seen in the first few weeks of the new administration a demonstration of executive power.
I'd be really interested to see data backing up the loss of skilled tradesmen jobs to illegal immigrants. I think below-minimum wage unskilled labor are the jobs they're taking. I believe the loss of skilled labor and manufacturing jobs is mostly due to large companies outsourcing those jobs overseas where labor is cheaper, but that's capitalism baby! I agree with you on the neverending warmongering coming from the Washington establishment and that was one area where I agreed with Trump, but unfortunately it wasn't a topic that riled up his base enough to get real attention.
 
I still struggle when people describe Trump as a tryant or wannabe dictator . I just don't see the evidence. We have seen in the first few weeks of the new administration a demonstration of executive power.

Trump was on Fox News yesterday proclaiming he won the election and it was stolen from him.

I'm sorry, but the man cannot face facts. He is on tape leaning on the Georgia Sect. of State for an exact number of votes to be found for him.
 
Trump was on Fox News yesterday proclaiming he won the election and it was stolen from him.

I'm sorry, but the man cannot face facts. He is on tape leaning on the Georgia Sect. of State for an exact number of votes to be found for him.
He is just mad that LBJ could "call his shot" in texas senate races in the 60's but didn't work in presidential in 2021 ;)
 
Back
Top