Ohio shooting

[Bailey Guns]

...takes credit for banning bump stocks.

Well see? The bump-stock ban worked. Since the ban was enacted no one has used one to commit a mass shooting. It's like having an "EASY" button.

[sniper7]

Wonder what these CongressCritters will try and come up with during their month long recess.
But during that time I’m sure there will be plenty more things the president does or says that will infuriate the democrats.

I do agree with Martinjmpr, I see any proposal that Trump would be willing to sign or not sign a huge failure for the Democratic Party. Either he gets full funding for a border wall, deporting illegals, revamping the immigration process and curtailing illegals voting and use of our welfare/Medicare/social security, or they will do nothing to stop future mentally ill folks from the senseless attacks. Either way the democrats have their back against the wall.

[Gman]

So we want information, but once we have it, then the news can move on and let us mull over it privately at our leisure.

The MSM doesn't even need to be involved, but you knew that already.

[Gman]

Well see? The bump-stock ban worked. Since the ban was enacted no one has used one to commit a mass shooting. It's like having an "EASY" button.

Yep. The ban of bayonet lugs during the Clinton ban also eliminated bayonet crime.

That should work with essentially everything deemed undesirable. Just ban it. Something must be done!

[FoxtArt]

Ahh, nothing like the circular logic of fans, convincing themselves that Trump is some super genius who, despite being a NY Democrat, has their best interests in mind regarding firearms even as he says the opposite, and everything is a big scheme to piss the democrats off.

Pretty sure Trump could say he outright thinks maybe it's time to "ban all guns" and some fans would still be trying to convince themselves its just a big scheme to "piss of the democrats", which I'm not sure what that accomplishes in the first place.

SMDH

[Martinjmpr]

Ahh, nothing like the circular logic of fans, convincing themselves that Trump is some super genius who, despite being a NY Democrat, has their best interests in mind regarding firearms even as he says the opposite, and everything is a big scheme to piss the democrats off.

Pretty sure Trump could say he outright thinks maybe it's time to "ban all guns" and some fans would still be trying to convince themselves its just a big scheme to "piss of the democrats", which I'm not sure what that accomplishes in the first place.

SMDH

If you are referring to my post then you lose points for reading comprehension.

I DON'T believe Trump is a friend to the 2nd amendment. In fact, I don't think Trump is a friend to anybody except Trump. Trump is about Trump, first, last and always.

Guns are not a winning issue for anybody in this electoral scheme. Those that are anti-gun aren't going to win more votes by being more anti-gun and those who are pro gun aren't going to win votes by being more pro-gun. There simply is no room for movement on the gun issue. Another million votes in California, Illinois or New York (or Colorado, for that matter) don't matter in our electoral setup because those states go blue no matter what the people think about guns.

Immigration, by contrast, IS an issue that can win or lose an election. In order to win, Trump needs to get mid-west voters to vote for him. He was able to do this in 2016 largely on the basis of immigration. If he holds firm he is likely to win re-election.

That's why linking gun control to immigration is a shrewd move. Dems desperately WANT gun control, and they desperately DO NOT WANT any kind of immigration enforcement. Trump linking gun control to immigration puts Dems in a bind: Do they give in on immigration to get their gun control bill? If they do then millions of their hard-lefty supporters will desert them because being pro-immigration is pretty much all they have.

But if they don't then Trump can tell the mid-west voters (for whom immigration is still a deciding issue) "I'm fighting for you and the democrats not only want to keep flooding the country with illegals, they also want to take away your guns." That's win-win for Trump and lose-lose for the dems.

Even on the slight chance that the Dems might actually support an immigration reform bill in order to get their gun control, Trump STILL gets to call it a win because he can say "I got this immigration reform bill for YOU, Mid-west Americans."

As I said, I don't think Trump cares one whit about guns. But he's happy to use the gun control issue to drive a wedge between the "mad moms" and the crazy left wing open borders types on the Dem side.

[Martinjmpr]

Continuing my thought from above...it seems to me that gun control is a nullity as a political issue.

With so many of our political contests running neck-and-neck, nobody on either side can afford to alienate any part of their base. We see it on the Democrat side with the socialists and the open-borders crowd basically driving the Dem party into the dirt. But the dems can't let them go because so many elections are now decided by single-digit percentages. You can't afford to piss off part of your coalition when the difference between winning and losing is 2 or 3 percent. All they have to do is fold their arms and do nothing and you lose to the other side.

For Republicans it's the same thing. Switching sides on gun control buys them nothing. It's not like someone who is pro choice and pro immigration and pro-socialism is all of a sudden going to cross the aisle and vote for a Republican simply because that Republican supports gun control. So for Republicans to support gun control would (a) anger a big portion of their base and at the same time (b) gain them nothing valuable in terms of voters.

Going from the Republican party down to Trump himself it's the same thing: People who hate Trump aren't going to start voting for him if he supports gun control. And on the flip side, those who are Trump supporters because of things like illegal immigration and jobs aren't going to suddenly switch to the Dem side just because Trump DOESN'T support gun control.

That's why in political terms, gun control is a non-starter. Politicians love to bloviate and talking heads love to wag their fingers and 'demand' that something be done. But in the end, it's politically "safer" for Republicans in particular to just stand pat and wither the criticism, because the people who vote them into office are the only ones that matter - not the talking heads on TV or on the other side of the aisle.

[FoxtArt]

By the same logic, by combining gun control with a minor immigration bill, it might convince enough republicans to break party and vote for gun control (esp in areas where their constituents aren't terribly pro-gun) so they can claim they did it for immigration.

Maybe it's not that brilliant eh? There's no chance of much passing without it. But by combining the two, you might guarantee bi-partisan passage. As much as Democrats pretend to love "undocumented" they don't care, it's just buying votes. But they REALLY HATE GUNS. Don't think for a second that a ton of liberals won't vote for a comprehensive "border bill" if it got them, say, an AW ban. Then all you need is a couple pubs' that REALLY want that immigration bill.

Yeah, it's not super-genius, it's stupid.

[Gman]

First disarm them. Then do whatever you want to them.

[Eric P]

I've seen it mention a few times now. Rifle caliber pistols being banned. Including the pistol brace buttstocks.