View Full Version : Trump on 2nd Amendment
Haven't seen this on here yet and thought it was interesting.
http://reagancoalition.com/articles/2016/trump-releases-his-plan-for-2nd-amendment-leaves-millions-furious.html
Badger52
11-10-2016, 00:53
Haven't seen this on here yet and thought it was interesting.
http://reagancoalition.com/articles/2016/trump-releases-his-plan-for-2nd-amendment-leaves-millions-furious.htmlThe more direct link might be the actual position as depicted on his website (https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/constitution-and-second-amendment/?/positions/second-amendment-rights).
:)
Donald J. Trump on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms:
The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.
The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right that belongs to all law-abiding Americans. The Constitution doesn’t create that right – it ensures that the government can’t take it away. Our Founding Fathers knew, and our Supreme Court has upheld, that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to guarantee our right to defend ourselves and our families. This is about self-defense, plain and simple.
It’s been said that the Second Amendment is America’s first freedom. That’s because the Right to Keep and Bear Arms protects all our other rights. We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment. Protecting that freedom is imperative. Here’s how we will do that... (see link below)
https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Second_Amendment_Rights.pdf
I would like to see the Hughes amendment repealed, of course I'm not really sure what the point of full auto for civilians (myself) is other than to make money turn into noise. Opinions?
Peregrino
11-13-2016, 11:11
I would like to see the Hughes amendment repealed, of course I'm not really sure what the point of full auto for civilians (myself) is other than to make money turn into noise. Opinions?
Nothing wrong with turning money into noise if that's your thing. What it will definitely do is change the economics of owning FA firearms. A lot of current owners won't be happy to see their holdings depreciate an average of 80% overnight. The good news is it will put new firearms in pristine mechanical condition on the market and encourage the retirement of some that have gotten a bit "long in the tooth". That in itself would be a win-win.
Oldrotorhead
11-13-2016, 13:36
Nothing wrong with turning money into noise if that's your thing. What it will definitely do is change the economics of owning FA firearms. A lot of current owners won't be happy to see their holdings depreciate an average of 80% overnight. The good news is it will put new firearms in pristine mechanical condition on the market and encourage the retirement of some that have gotten a bit "long in the tooth". That in itself would be a win-win.
Truth right here. Repealing the GCA of 1968 would let a lot of old but useful things into the country. I do know someone that owns a rebuild H&K MP-5 with a can. A few years ago he est, value at $20k and purchased for $5K, but he'll got over the shock...............eventually. :D
frostfire
11-13-2016, 14:59
I'm sure I'm not alone in this. The ridiculous, money-churning SBR and suppressor laws need to go. Immediately afterward I alone will contribute $$$ to the US economy by buying 9mm SBR and cans.
Since it's an easy cash cow, I don't see Trump removing it though :(
I would like to see the Hughes amendment repealed, of course I'm not really sure what the point of full auto for civilians (myself) is other than to make money turn into noise. Opinions?
Civilian technology development of weapons will make for better military weapons on this front when the bigger hoops to jump through go away.
I've felt for quite some time that the reason we haven't built a better AR (and by better I mean better by an order of magnitude, not incrmental bumps) is because we haven't had civilian forces drive that development the way an unregulated industry could.
Civilian technology development of weapons will make for better military weapons on this front when the bigger hoops to jump through go away.
I've felt for quite some time that the reason we haven't built a better AR (and by better I mean better by an order of magnitude, not incrmental bumps) is because we haven't had civilian forces drive that development the way an unregulated industry could.
Agree. I would love to maintain type 07. Just for inventing. But BATFE and now DDTC, have made it exceptionally burdensome financially and time wise in maintaining compliance. Just CAD files for me until at least the DDTC portion goes away.
If suppressors fall off the NFA and become title 1, we will see incredible growth in innovation. The first UZI suppressor that the government said was impossible after investing two million into the problem was solved by a guy tinkering in his garage in 1989. The secret service adopted it for a long while for PSD.