Trump blames Democrats for not acting on gun control earlier

[fallenleader]

Well I believe the problem with Republicans and those of us that align with them is in general we are polite, nice people who are busy with things like work and family. Maybe a way to phrase that is they use our positives to exploit and defeat us. I've known democrats through my life and I'd say for the most part they are mean and spiteful people walking around with a victim complex or some sort of mental illness. They seek happiness through taking from others and they mean what they say and what they want to do. Republicans and our side need to toughen up a bit, stop playing nice and play to win.

you've won some caek.
it's time for us to take off the white gloves and bloody our knuckles a bit. or frankly, we won't be gaining any ground and will stay in this purgatory until dems retake government and ratchet the laws back up on us.

[Berncly]

I don't read that to mean that he wishes they had taken action.
He's just talking the way he talks - to piss the other side off.

That said, it's not a topic I'd like to see him taunt them about, because it's just going to rally them to DO something when they CAN.

Then again, most every time he pisses them off, they flip out and then a week later it's on to another topic.

I'm with Empty on this one.

[tarzan]

I'm a Trump person all the way. If it wasn't him in the WH we would not have a 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendment now, even if one of the other Republican candidates would have won. I truly do not like this comment he made, no matter what he meant to accomplish. By saying it, he is going to put us right into another rough 2nd Amendment battle.

[JAKIII]

He should have laid the blame on the FBI for failing to act on the tip off they received.

aaaand coincidentally...

Trump blames FBI for Florida school shooting and says it is 'spending too much time' trying to prove Russia-Trump ties than focusing on 'the basics'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ttack-FBI.html

[Pilot321]

I hope Trump just didn't throw out a deal incentive to the Dems. I don't think he did. I agree with others that he is just pointing out yet another example of Democrat hypocrisy. When Obama had majorities in both houses his first two years in office, the Dems didn't act on passing more gun control legislation because they know it is political suicide. Al Gore lost his home state, and the Presidency largely over gun control. The Dems fear losing elections more than they fear guns.

[JAKIII]

What needs to happen is they need to reinstate the AWB and then we all watch while mass shootings CONTINUE to occur.






tongue in cheek...

[Coops]

I'm with Empty on this one.

That's the way I read it too.
He is taunting them for using serious issues as talking points instead of taking action. Basically emasculating their entire platform as political pandering that they find more valuable than problem solving.
Meanwhile their base is scratching their heads and looking towards socialists like Bernie and away from center Dems (if there is such a thing). Dems cannot win with 20% of their voters off the reservation to the left. Trump wants to win over independents by getting things done.

[ItchyTick]

I wonder if he will be involved with horse trading and what would be traded?

[eagleclaw]

What needs to happen is they need to reinstate the AWB and then we all watch while mass shootings CONTINUE to occur.






tongue in cheek...

Why make a statement like this? Joking around or not the anti-gun crowd will welcome a reinstatement of the 90s “assault weapons ban”. They will call it a first step. If there is shooting after the law is enacted they are going to say that the law didn’t go far enough.

They are also going to cite a case like Australia where they enacted a ban on semi autos and they haven’t had a mass shooting to date.

The anti-gun crowd will never admit that a gun ban or restriction didn’t work. Their excuse is going to be “it’s a first step”, “if it saved one life it’s worth it “, “we need a tougher law”. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in fantasy land. In addition it's naive to think that all the other side wants is a ban on "assault rifles" . In the 80s all they wanted was a 7 day waiting period on handguns.

[GeneCC]

They are also going to cite a case like Australia where they enacted a ban on semi autos and they haven’t had a mass shooting to date.

The anti-gun crowd will never admit that a gun ban or restriction didn’t work. Their excuse is going to be “it’s a first step”, “if it saved one life it’s worth it “, “we need a tougher law”. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in fantasy land. In addition it's naive to think that all the other side wants is a ban on "assault rifles" . In the 80s all they wanted was a 7 day waiting period on handguns.

In the 1970s Nelson Shields wanted a total ban on Civilian handgun ownership. They've lowered their sights a bit I guess.


The Port Arthur Mass shooting was in 1996. They had one at Monash University in 2002. Five wounded, two dead. Parliament banned the possession of some handguns.

They had a shooting in 2011, 3 dead, 3 wounded. Another mass shooting in Sydney, three dead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_in_Australia


We Americans had few mass school shootings before the Democrats turned school property in 1990 into Target Rich environments. If the Gun Free Schools act isn't working then a Gun Free America probably won't work too well either. Trying to get a Gun Free America would give some a license to go Social Justice Warrior on "the right" under the color of law, and maybe that is the whole point?