Trumps National Gun Registry

[George Hayduke]

DM - you ask us to look it up.  I consider you a friend with a considerable amount of life experience in common so when I read your posts I feel like you are speaking directly to me whether or not you actually addressed it to 'George.'

 

I couldn't find a 'Trumps National Gun Registry'.  No doubt there is one if you say so but the closest thing I found relating to Trump and the 2nd Amendment or Trump and National Gun Registry is on Brietbart's page.  http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/07/donald-trump-lifetime-member-of-nra-concealed-permit-holder/

 

GOP presidential hopeful Donald Trump is a lifetime member of the NRA and a concealed carry permit holder who believes the advantages an armed citizenry provides to America are so evident as to be beyond “debate.”

 

In a recent interview with Ammoland, Trump said:

I am a Life Member of the NRA and am proud of their service in protecting our right to keep and bear arms. The NRA’s efforts to stop dangerous, gun-banning legislation and regulation is invaluable. The media focus on those efforts overshadows the great work the NRA does on behalf of safety and conservation.

 

He went on to talk about his “permit to carry” in New York and said, “I know firsthand the challenges law-abiding citizens have in exercising their Second Amendment rights.”

 

Trump cited figures showing how concealed carry impacts crime and focused on how states with less restrictions on carry—”right to carry states”—enjoy a lower “violent crime” and a “lower murder rate” than other parts of the country. He contrasted this with the fact that gun control “has consistently failed to stop violence” and said there really isn’t anything remaining to “debate” on these things.

 

Ammoland asked Trump about a statement he made 15 years ago regarding “assault weapons,” trying to ascertain where Trump stands on the ongoing opposition to AR-15s from people like Senator Dianna Feinstein (D-CA). Trump responded by saying he believes the left’s targeted assault on AR-15s is really just an extension of the left’s usual habit of going after whatever it is that Americans love at a given moment.

Because of this, he said they focus on things that are non-essential—like grips, magazines, etc.

 

Here are Trump’s exact words:

You mention that the media describes the AR-15 as an “assault rifle,” which is one example of the many distortions they use to sell their agenda. However, the AR-15 does not fall under this category. Gun-banners are unfortunately preoccupied with the AR-15, magazine capacity, grips, and other aesthetics, precisely because of its popularity.

 

Trump then spoke of the importance of the Second Amendment, describing the right to keep and bear arms as “a bedrock natural right of the individual to defend self, family, and property.”

 

DM, I am a firm believer in the simple reading of text ie. 'All means All and that's all All means'  So applying that understanding to the above, I find it near impossible to deduce that Trump has a plan for a National Firearm Registry.  That's not to say he doesn't but if he does, I'd have to consider that Trump is an evil duplicitous man speaking out of both sides of his mouth and I'd have to see a mirror opposite of the above record to come to that conclusion.

 

So DM and anyone else who has looked up Trumps National Gun Registry please post it here so we can take a look-C and attempt to understand Trump's position on a National Gun Registry.

[Muleslayer]

I would be very interested in this also.

[SnowGlobe7]

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Donald_Trump_Gun_Control.htm

the above is dated 2000

 

check this out

 

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/second-amendment-rights

[Muleslayer]

Thanks Snow!

[divemaster5734]

DM - you ask us to look it up.  I consider you a friend with a considerable amount of life experience in common so when I read your posts I feel like you are speaking directly to me whether or not you actually addressed it to 'George.'

 

DM, I am a firm believer in the simple reading of text ie. 'All means All and that's all All means'  So applying that understanding to the above, I find it near impossible to deduce that Trump has a plan for a National Firearm Registry.  That's not to say he doesn't but if he does, I'd have to consider that Trump is an evil duplicitous man speaking out of both sides of his mouth and I'd have to see a mirror opposite of the above record to come to that conclusion.

 

So DM and anyone else who has looked up Trumps National Gun Registry please post it here so we can take a look-C and attempt to understand Trump's position on a National Gun Registry.

 

First, thank you for asking. I have a tremendous amount of respect for you as well, and would never intentionally do anything to adversely impact that.

 

 

Here's a quote:

 

Here’s another important way to fight crime – empower law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves. Law enforcement is great… but they can’t be everywhere all of the time. Our personal protection is ultimately up to us. That’s why I’m a gun owner, that’s why I have a concealed carry permit, and that’s why tens of millions of Americans have concealed carry permits as well. It’s just common sense. To make America great again, we’re going to go after criminals and put the law back on the side of the law-abiding.

 

 

 

I have a couple issues with that statement, the bottom line is with the entire judicial system based on judges and prosecutors who are legally allowed to lie, withhold evidence, ignore individual rights, and not just that, but they also have a massive financial incentive to convict at any costs.

We hear about some guy getting out of prison after 20, 30 years of hard time, convicted of a crime they never did. But evidence was suppressed by the DA, or the "judge" wither refused to allow evidence that would have cast strong doubt, or, denied legal proceedings that would have altered the outcome.

 

For every one of those guys that got out, there are hundreds of others that will never get their day in court because there just are not enough people that are trying to unravel the web of deception.

There are tens of thousands of people who have been caught up in over ambitious prosecutors, aided by greedy judges, who will never be able to own a gun, and have no chance of ever getting their "rights" back.

 

Any restriction on ownership is unconstitutional.

I personally knew one guy that was railroaded, haven't talked to him in several years, but listening to his story was eye opening.

 

Who exactly is a criminal?

The guy who was busted for a joint, spent 10 years in prison, and is now a second class citizen, or the judge that insisted on a 10 year sentence, because that would be a $2000 bonus, instead of the lousy $50 he gets for probation?

 

The guy that wounded a deer in an open zone, tracked it for two days, then killed it, but the dame thing had made it to a reserve, or the park ranger who busted the guy because he gets to keep the fresh kill for himself?

 

Contrary to myth, America does in fact have political prisoners. I left my job as a firefighter because I supported the chief instead of the more popular newcomer. The chief was let go after he turned the entire FPD around, and helped turn us into one of the more respected departments in the area.

Once he was gone, every single one of us were harassed. The new chief was a deputy sheriff, the harassment was cross jurisdictional, and when I got a ticket for doing 50mph in a 50mph zone, but the deputy claimed I accelerated 100' early, I understood.

Not sure if you've ever had the chance, but far too many civil employees and low level authorities do nothing else but abuse their authority every single day.

Until the justice system is fixed, I seriously doubt even half of the guys in prison are even guilty.

 

That underlined text says it all, and so everyone unfairly and illegally convicted is now expected to scream like a little girl and hope the smell of them crapping their pants is enough to scare off the criminals, because between the crooked judicial system and overreaching federal government, they are no longer allowed to protect themselves.

 

That is heinous all by itself.

 

I have no trust in a national register, or any gun registry at all.

 

They did the same thing in countries all over the world, which was only a prelude to confiscating everything.

 

My whole point in the other topic was either Trump accepts rights are determined by the bill of rights, understands governments limitations as determined by the constitution, or he doesn't.

 

Right now, he doesn't.

[George Hayduke]

"My whole point in the other topic was either Trump accepts rights are determined by the bill of rights, understands governments limitations as determined by the constitution, or he doesn't.

 

Right now, he doesn't."

 

I believe you sincerely believe that DM but I don't see how you come to that conclusion other than to say the whole system is corrupt and because he is running for president of the system, he is corrupt too.

 

Trump made a supportive comment 15/16 years ago regarding the existing Assault Weapon ban.  However, he has since changed his position.  Is not a man's character determined by what he once was and what he is now?  Do we hold the error of a mans thinking from 15/16 years ago over his head like a scarlet letter?  If so, you and me would be in a lot of trouble brother, we both grew up in a similar time in the same neighborhood and thank goodness the Pacific Coast Highway can only see and not talk because we would be fried meat if our shenanigans were known.

 

And besides, we both love Jesus now but there was a day when we tried our damndest to deny Him.  I'd rather look at the current Trump than the past Trump (all within historical and moral context of course)

 

And so to that regard, I still am unaware of Trumps National Gun Registry but I am aware of the following Trump position and, unless I can see a current National Gun Registry policy proposed by Trump I'm going to have to believe Trump is pro-2nd Amendment.

 

He is NRA rated A-Q and that ain't cabbage soup.

 

Here's some food for thought from our friends at the Free Republic: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3326323/posts

 

"Donald Trump is unquestionably the frontrunner in the Republican field of presidential contenders at this time.  He says that he is for the Second Amendment.  All candidates say that they are for the Second Amendment, but many of them are lying.  President Obama, for example, seems to thing that the Second Amendment is about hunting.    John Lott has written that while at the University of Chicago, Barrack Obama told him that he thought that people should not be allowed to have guns.   

 

In the year 2000, Donald Trump wrote a book about his solutions to America's problems.  In it, he made his most controversial statements about gun control. 

 

 He wrote in The America We Deserve, p. 102.  From on the issues:

It’s often argued that the American murder rate is high because guns are more available here than in other countries. Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed. The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse even limited restrictions.

 and this statement:

I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

To Second Amendment supporters, that does not look good.  It seems to waffle.   But this was 15 years ago.  The assault weapon ban was law, so Trump was only supporting what already existed.  Even George W. Bush said that he would sign an assault weapon ban if it came to his desk for renewal.   A "slightly longer waiting period" is also problematical, but again, it is in the context of what existed at the time.  

 

Donald Trump wrote that statement 15 years ago.  What has changed to educate him or to change his views?   

 

15 years ago, Donald Trump's two oldest sons were 22 and 16.  Both of them are ardent hunters and second amendment supporters.  Donald Trump says that they have become his most trusted source for information on gun issues.  It seems that they have educated him on some of the finer details of the gun control debate.  In 2012, Donald defended their right to hunt, even though he is not a hunter.   From the dailymail.co.uk in March of 2012:

 Their father does not share the views of his sons, and the elder Donald told TMZ that 'My sons love hunting. They're hunters and they've become good at it. I am not a believer in hunting and I'm surprised they like it.'

'I know that anything they did was 100% OK in terms of the hunting community,' Mr Trump continued.

 

Emily Miller interviewed Donald Trump in 2012 from washingtontimes.com, November 14, 2012

The star of “Celebrity Apprentice” said he owns a “H&K .45 and a .38 Smith & Wesson.” 

Asked about the gun-control measures being pushed by people like New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, Mr. Trump said that, “The way I view it, if nobody has guns, then only the bad guys have them. And they aren’t giving up their guns.”

I mentioned the dangers of gun-free zones like Washington, D.C. and, largely, Manhattan because of all the red tape it takes to exercise the right to bear arms. 

Mr. Trump said an example of this was seen in the Aurora, Colo. shooting. “If some of the people in the movie theater had a gun, they’d have been shooting at him. Nobody had a gun so they were totally defenseless.”

The Donald is a true Second Amendment enthusiast."

 

 

[Whatshername]

Just posted this on the other thread but it really goes here.

When he was asked about obummer's EO and the gun show loop hole...

Trump: I want see what he says, why he couldn’t get this approved by Congress. Why can’t he go in and get this approved? You do have to ask that question, Chris. Why can’t you, if something is seemingly cut and dry as you like to say it is, why can’t the system work the way it was supposed to be, you know, the way it was supposed to be working, the way it was designed. Why isn’t he getting Republicans and Democrats together and doing something? He keeps signing executive orders because he doesn’t meet with people. Maybe he doesn’t like people, I guess. I’m sure maybe they could come up with some kind of a plan. Don’t you think he should do this with Congress? I don’t think he works very hard at it.

He was then called a racist for the inferred 'lazy black guy' slur at the end!

The point is... once again this is a legislative issue and he recognizes that it must be done LEGALLY through congress and not by executive order. Doesn't matter what he thinks unless he has a radical agenda (like obummer) which he does NOT...

Trump Releases His Plan for 2nd Amendment… Leaves Millions Furious

One common criticism of billionaire businessman and presidential candidate Donald Trump is that he far too often speaks in vague generalities and rarely offers specifics about where he stands on the issues.

That is no longer the case, at least regarding his stance on gun rights and the Second Amendment, as Trump just released his official policy position on his campaign website.

“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 position paper began.

Trump went on to explain that the right to keep and bear arms is a right that pre-exists both the government and the Constitution, noting that government didn’t create the right, nor can it take it away.

He also rightly denoted the Second Amendment as “America’s first freedom,” pointing out that it helps protect all of the other rights we hold dear.

In order to protect and defend that right, Trump proposed tougher enforcement of laws that are already on the books, rather than adding new gun control laws.

Citing a successful program in Richmond, Virginia, that sentenced gun criminals to mandatory minimum five-year sentences in federal prison, Trump noted that crime rates will fall dramatically when criminals are taken off the streets for lengthy periods of time.

Trump also proposed strengthening and expanding laws allowing law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves from criminals using their own guns, without fear of repercussion from the government.

Noting that many of the recent high-profile shooters had clear mental problems that should have been addressed, Trump proposed fixing our nation’s broken mental health system by increasing treatment opportunities for the non-violent mentally ill, but removing from the streets those people who pose a danger to themselves and others.

Trump would do away with pointless and ineffective gun and magazine bans and suggested fixing the current background check system already in place, rather than expanding a broken system.

[yota691]

Same Subject almost!! Thanks GH!!

Gun Myths Gone in Five Minutes:
ABC News 20/20

[divemaster5734]

Great, he doesn't understand what the 2nd amendment is about, but as long as his kids want to shoot Bambi then it's OK.

 

His confusion continues by declaring no "assault" weapons, you know, those scary looking ,22's, and no large clips.

 

So if there ever WAS a reason to exercise our 2nd, for the reason it is there, we would be using semi-auto  against fully auto, .22 LR vs .263 magnum. It's the principle. You can't say "rights shall not be infringed upon,period", and then outlaw assault weapons, high cap mags, and continue to use a corrupted judicial system to decide who gets to protect themselves.

 

Unless "shall not" doesn't actually mean "shall not", if so, then what else? How many other unconstitutional endorsements?

 

While it is highly improbable we would ever get into a civil war, or a violent revolt against the government, it really doesn't matter, because our wonderful government would instead use drones, hellfires, or mavericks on us, not to mention I don't think an armed confrontation is even necessary, it still misses the point entirely.

 

Anyone a vet?

Use the VA?

How many times are you asked about owning a gun, wanting to harm yourself, etc?

How about have a relationship breakup that went sideways|

An ex with an axe to grind?

 

Maybe I'm being overly skeptical, but Trump is missing the core fundamentals of the constitution and amendments.

Maybe he is only tempering his response so as not to scare off the wet-pants libtards that jump at shadows, and maybe he will just walk into office and make Thomas Jefferson look like a pansy.

Then again, maybe not.

I really hope blind faith works out, because to interject with any comment that raises concern incites some to scorn.

 

I appreciate addressing this with the open minded approach George, I have no doubt my position is tempered by a massive distrust of government employees with agendas.

 

For as long as the health care providers have a financial incentive to demand mental health treatment, and prosecutors and judges have financial incentive to convict, if the 2nd amendment is not observed for its original intent, then Americans will lose.

 

I never intended to create a controversy, I was only stating a very valid point.

 

I still have not heard the words come out of Trump's mouth that would ease the apprehension.

 

After the decades of oppression, staged events, outright lies, and the last person Americans decided to put their blind faith in, I don't understand why some folks are still so willing to throw our destiny to chance, and refuse to even consider the realities.

 

What is alarming, is if so many are content to believe Trump can fix everything all by himself, it only proves they just don't understand.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pattyangel]

" What is alarming is if so many are content to believe Trump can fix everything all by himself, it only proves they just don't understand."

 

DiveMaster5734, as for myself, I am not content in believing that Trump can fix everything by himself.  I believe the word I would use would be cautious, because this man is human, this man can make promises that these promises just may or may not come to reality.  The people go through this every elections.  We have to chose between the lesser of evil. 

 

WHN, does make valid points, she has her style that gets to the point, no beating around the bush.  I understand what she is saying.  What choice do we have, our options are few.  I would have to chose anyone over Hildabeast, sad huh, but what choice do we have. 

 

I understand completely where you are coming from too.  Yes, our  judicial system is broken, judges, our individual rights are in danger, have been always, more so now. We're being stripped inch by inch of freedom and liberties. 

 

What do you think its going to take to get Cruz nominated?  What is it going to take to get Trump nominated?  Remember the people want trust from these two,  how are they going to win the peoples trust down to the last minute?

[divemaster5734]

" What is alarming is if so many are content to believe Trump can fix everything all by himself, it only proves they just don't understand."

 

DiveMaster5734, as for myself, I am not content in believing that Trump can fix everything by himself.  I believe the word I would use would be cautious, because this man is human, this man can make promises that these promises just may or may not come to reality.  The people go through this every elections.  We have to chose between the lesser of evil. 

 

WHN, does make valid points, she has her style that gets to the point, no beating around the bush.  I understand what she is saying.  What choice do we have, our options are few.  I would have to chose anyone over Hildabeast, sad huh, but what choice do we have. 

 

I understand completely where you are coming from too.  Yes, our  judicial system is broken, judges, our individual rights are in danger, have been always, more so now. We're being stripped inch by inch of freedom and liberties. 

 

What do you think its going to take to get Cruz nominated?  What is it going to take to get Trump nominated?  Remember the people want trust from these two,  how are they going to win the peoples trust down to the last minute?

 

I know you are a rock solid conservative Patty, and you have a stubborn streak that won't let you just follow the pack.

It's one of the things about you I very much respect.

 

Actually, I don't know if I even support Cruz.

Especially after the last couple weeks, his desperation is showing.

I wish there was a Trump/Carson mix out there, maybe we can help guide Trump in that direction.

I've posted more Trump support comments than anything else.

I never even mentioned anything about any other candidate in the other topic, I realize WHN thought I did because she was fielding anti-Trump comments from others, but my comment wasn't even implying not supporting Trump, it was about trying to make sure Trump is in fact the candidate we are all hoping he is.

That's why I was shocked when WHN jumped on me like I was bashing Trump.

To each their own, and I have no desire or energy to be forced to defend words I never used.

I manage to come up with enough of my own words to stay in enough trouble as it is.

 

All I ever said was basically, if we are going to jump on the trumpwagon, how about making him declare his loyalty to the constitution?

 

While Trump has won over many of the electorate who were really upset with Bush, Clinton, and Obama lies, the electoral is comprised of persons who have been appointed by their respective parties, a total of 539, and based on number of both houses reps.

Right now the WA. GOP is picking their electoral college, but we are declared by state law, so the caucus at the GOP national convention is the only wild card, and only if it goes past 1st vote.

 There are still several states that do not have a requirement for the electoral to follow the popular electorate. While we do have some true conservatives in the mix, the majority of them are there for their declared loyalty to Party.

There are enough undeclared to swing an election, and right now there are some who would rather vote any establishment than upset the apple cart.

Trumps message is resonating, but without a good foundation, it's just another house of cards. It can come crashing down on America January 2017.

Besides, how could we ever earn Trump's respect if we didn't force him to the negotiating table?

.

Luv ya sweetheart   

[RV ME]

I know you are a rock solid conservative Patty, and you have a stubborn streak that won't let you just follow the pack.

It's one of the things about you I very much respect.

 

Actually, I don't know if I even support Cruz.

Especially after the last couple weeks, his desperation is showing.

I wish there was a Trump/Carson mix out there, maybe we can help guide Trump in that direction.

I've posted more Trump support comments than anything else.

I never even mentioned anything about any other candidate in the other topic, I realize WHN thought I did because she was fielding anti-Trump comments from others, but my comment wasn't even implying not supporting Trump, it was about trying to make sure Trump is in fact the candidate we are all hoping he is.

That's why I was shocked when WHN jumped on me like I was bashing Trump.

To each their own, and I have no desire or energy to be forced to defend words I never used.

I manage to come up with enough of my own words to stay in enough trouble as it is.

 

All I ever said was basically, if we are going to jump on the trumpwagon, how about making him declare his loyalty to the constitution?

 

While Trump has won over many of the electorate who were really upset with Bush, Clinton, and Obama lies, the electoral is comprised of persons who have been appointed by their respective parties, a total of 539, and based on number of both houses reps.

Right now the WA. GOP is picking their electoral college, but we are declared by state law, so the caucus at the GOP national convention is the only wild card, and only if it goes past 1st vote.

 There are still several states that do not have a requirement for the electoral to follow the popular electorate. While we do have some true conservatives in the mix, the majority of them are there for their declared loyalty to Party.

There are enough undeclared to swing an election, and right now there are some who would rather vote any establishment than upset the apple cart.

Trumps message is resonating, but without a good foundation, it's just another house of cards. It can come crashing down on America January 2017.

Besides, how could we ever earn Trump's respect if we didn't force him to the negotiating table?

.

Luv ya sweetheart

Dive,

I respect your thoughts and I understand what you are saying about Trump not being pinned down on most every / any issue. But think back to any presidential election. Can you identify any winning candidate that fulfilled all of their campaign promises? Has there been a single president that did not enact a policy contrary to their pre-election position? Reagan and amnesty, GHWB with no new taxes, Clinton's retroactive tax increase etc.

It seems to me that every election is a crap shoot and all we can do this election cycle is choose the lesser of two evils and hold the selected's feet to the fire.

While Trump is not a politician, he is a quick study and he knows his support comes from many different groups, including Democrats ( how many quit the Dem party in MA so they could vote for him). I believe he knows if he gets specific he might make conservatives feel better about voting for him but he will lose support from other groups.

None of us knows what he will do if elected, but the same can be said for anyone who has ran for office.

[Shabibilicious]

None of us knows what he will do if elected, but the same can be said for anyone who has ran for office.

 

The Pelosi Concept......elect him to find out whats in him.    

 

GO RV, then BV 

[divemaster5734]

 But think back to any presidential election. Can you identify any winning candidate that fulfilled all of their campaign promises?

While Trump is not a politician, he is a quick study and he knows his support comes from many different groups, including Democrats

None of us knows what he will do if elected, but the same can be said for anyone who has ran for office.

 

Agreed.

 

The difference between a trump or a carson potus is the perspective used to examine every issue, every position, the core procedure.

Carson wants to help educate Americans by nurturing their understanding of what a individually free society entails.

He understands the realization of personal liberty is the result of personal responsibility.

Financial security the fruit of individual fortitude and hard work.

Carson is far more Reganesque in his commitment to the founding principals, and his humility is only possible because of his unshakable faith in Jesus Christ.

 

I would agree that most Americans are just not able to understand the full dynamic Carson would bring, and while it is very possible Trump may come to know a personal relationship with Christ, for now, has neither a comprehensive understanding of the four organic founding documents, or the morality prism.

The fact that there are not hordes of models, secretaries, or other females stepping up to make claims demonstrates he has either managed to avoid commons distractions, or has been exceedingly generous in his payoffs.

 

All that aside, as I mentioned in a post a post last year just after he announced, it may well be that Trump is the only one that will be able to blast the PC police back to the cluttered basements of their parents houses where they belong.

There are very few businessmen in America that could even give Trump a challenge, and no others with his flair.

Which makes Trump definitely one of a kind.

 

I really don't think it matters at this point, as I stated in early January, Trump is going to get the nomination, and should be our next POTUS.

The time for us to hold his feet to the fire is now, BEFORE we put him in office.

Who hasn't ever had to squirm a little during a job interview?

The best positions I have ever held started with some of the most demanding interviews.

Isn't that the time they tell you what they expect out of you?

Edited March 1, 2016 by divemaster5734

[George Hayduke]

Great Shabs - you found the thread  Now bring over Trumps National Gun Registry you claim exists.  I just gotz to know man your sources, bring the real deal and not an opine.  I mean, I know you wouldn't have said it, if it didn't exist...   I'll wait, just like I'm waiting for Divemasters documentation. 

[Shabibilicious]

Great Shabs - you found the thread  Now bring over Trumps National Gun Registry you claim exists.  I just gotz to know man your sources, bring the real deal and not an opine.  I mean, I know you wouldn't have said it, if it didn't exist...   I'll wait, just like I'm waiting for Divemasters documentation. 

 

Caught...nabbed...found out...pinched....foiled.....I don't have it.  I thought I was doing right, instead I made a grievous error.  I too, was expecting divemaster to reveal said registry, for he has never disappointed.  So, in haste I referenced it in the other thread.....big mistake, for which I apologize profusely.  Can you ever forgive me?    

 

GO RV, then BV 

[George Hayduke]

Caught...nabbed...found out...pinched....foiled.....I don't have it.  I thought I was doing right, instead I made a grievous error.  I too, was expecting divemaster to reveal said registry, for he has never disappointed.  So, in haste I referenced it in the other thread.....big mistake, for which I apologize profusely.  Can you ever forgive me?    

 

GO RV, then BV 

Absolutely brotherman - you are loved and respected.  The reason I called you both out on the issue is I believe in both of your sincerity.  Others do too, and so when you and DM opine, many believe in what you have to say and form an opinion of their own which has been influenced by yours.  That is not a bad thing as long the alleged facts claimed in those opinions can be verified.

 

We can disagree.

 

But we have to disagree on what's real.

 

To that regard allegations based on error, particularly when attempting to show a negative aspect (an important one at that) regarding a presidential candidate must be addressed for clarification.  Divemaster may very well come up with the proof.  Based on my research I don't believe he can and, it may very well be that he, like you, used a source he trusted without verification.

 

I feel a bit silly saying this again, but I have not made up my mind yet as I'm still trying to find a Grover Cleveland among the Mugwumps.  It doesn't look good but that doesn't mean we should accept baseless criticism of a candidate just to prove a point. 

 

Jesus loves you Shabs and so do I, now get back up on that fence and do that thing that you do so well. 

[divemaster5734]

Great Shabs - you found the thread  Now bring over Trumps National Gun Registry you claim exists.  I just gotz to know man your sources, bring the real deal and not an opine.  I mean, I know you wouldn't have said it, if it didn't exist...   I'll wait, just like I'm waiting for Divemasters documentation. 

 

You might want to take another look at what I posted.

 

Understand the full implication of ANY registry, but first it will require detachment from the pom poms.

[divemaster5734]

  I mean, I know you wouldn't have said it, if it didn't exist...   I'll wait, just like I'm waiting for Divemasters documentation. 

 

Case in point, this vet upheld the values, morals, and ethics America used to stand for.

Instead he will get  "involuntary discharged”.

That discharge alone could trigger a mental health alert from the VA.

That alert may cost him his right to arms.

 

Instituting a national registry will trigger a fight between some states and the feds, where a state does not recognize the feds authority, because it has none.

Once the feds get their hands on the names they will in fact begin an aggressive action.

 

And Trump will support it, that IS NOT even an option, please check the constitution, Amendment #2 for reference.

 

Shall Not, is SHALL NOT.

 

It doesn't say, if the mob majority demands to rape humans of their basic right to protect themselves then it's okey dokey.

[George Hayduke]

You might want to take another look at what I posted.

 

Understand the full implication of ANY registry, but first it will require detachment from the pom poms.

 

OK.

 

Your words, "How about his national gun registry? Look it up, that's what Trump is calling for".

Read more: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/216583-trump-make-america-feel-the-earn-again/page-2#ixzz41gjhJN00

 

OK, aghin... I attempted to look it up but I couldn't find it.  You've given it a title, 'HIS National Gun Registry' and claim that is what Trump is calling for.  You have apparently read it because you referenced it.

 

How about a link or a cut and paste?  We don't need an opine DM, I/we pretty much know where you stand but for the same reasons I pointed out to Shabs, verification of something as important as a presidential candidate calling for a National Gun Registry is, well, pretty much important. 

 

It was easy enough for you to say it, it should be easy enough for you to substantiate it.

[new york kevin]

Boo yeah Whatshername. You put the wo in woman. You stated it perfectly. Thank you.

[divemaster5734]

OK.

 

Your words, "How about his national gun registry? Look it up, that's what Trump is calling for".

Read more: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/216583-trump-make-america-feel-the-earn-again/page-2#ixzz41gjhJN00

 

OK, aghin... I attempted to look it up but I couldn't find it.  You've given it a title, 'HIS National Gun Registry' and claim that is what Trump is calling for.  You have apparently read it because you referenced it.

 

How about a link or a cut and paste?  We don't need an opine DM, I/we pretty much know where you stand but for the same reasons I pointed out to Shabs, verification of something as important as a presidential candidate calling for a National Gun Registry is, well, pretty much important. 

 

It was easy enough for you to say it, it should be easy enough for you to substantiate it.

 

Until just a very few days ago, I knew a group of individuals that shared my love of America and understood the difference between constitutional policies, common law, and Admiralty statutes.

While we rarely every agreed on everything 100%, all shared the ability conceptualize,  could examine with microscopic focus, or zoom out to digest  bigger issues which brought far reaching repercussions over  long term policies.

Combined with a thorough knowledge of history, political ideologies, and human nature, they were able to read between the lines of the deceitful media articles, and were able to understand what was really being said, because s often, the truth is never told in black and white print.

 

I treasured those friends, aside from a very deep respect for each and every one, I learned much from our discussions.

 

Suddenly, everything seems to have changed.

Rather than listen to the words I wrote, my friends started accusing me of saying things I never said, and questioning not only my meaning, but my motives, intent, and character.

Instead of keeping an open mind, they have decided to ignore any words they don't like, and even worse, have started to imply I am not being truthful if I don't immediately  satisfy their demands.

They seem to have forgotten everything I have said, and everything I have stood for, since the day we met.

Aside from my daily reality of running a business, I have a great many other tasks as an active participant in the republican party.

 

 

I don't know where they went, but I really wish they would come back.

I miss sharing the ideas, thoughts, and hypothetical theories our combined critical thought analysis would produce.

The way it is now, they not only refuse to bother separating hopeful anticipation from actual content, I am attacked if I dare suggest a potential eventuality that does not complement their imagination.

Where have they gone, I wonder, I only wish they would return.

I miss them greatly.

[Shabibilicious]

No offense, Divemaster.....but those friends you are speaking of, smack me beside the head and demand FACTS whenever I state something that shocks their conscious.  So if hypotheticals are now officially welcomed as reasonable talking points from both sides of the aisle, as well as from the fence, then......I'm all in.    

 

GO RV, then BV

[leanonme]

Go trump!

[Shabibilicious]

Go trump!

 

He's a silver spooner......the only "blue collar" he's familiar with is made of silk.  As always, just my opinion.    

 

GO RV, then BV