His true colors are coming out?
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second
His true colors are coming out?
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second
I guess we can forget about the 4th Amendment as well as the 2nd.
All throughout his campaign he would flip-flop on issues. He is making it up as he goes along. Now that he is finally showing weakness on your issue, only makes you late in awareness.
I understand that Mayor Blasio is going to evict everyone from Trump Tower before there is an eviction hearing.
We already only have a forth amendment in name, what's another exception.Well; in the name of the "war on opioids" how about cops kick down the door first and worry about a search warrant later??
Well; in the name of the "war on opioids" how about cops kick down the door first and worry about a search warrant later??
my issue? late in awareness? have i ever spoken to you before? did i say that this is a shock to me? has he said this specifically before? ok didn't think so.
Welcome to America Baby!!!!!Somebody I was talking with the other day about this "due process" angle pointed out that Trump was complaining about the LACK of due process concerning his people being "investigated" and now he wants to do the same to us? This would be similar to the TSA's "No Fly" list as well as "Emergency Orders of Protection" that are being used to strip people of their rights based only on an accusation with no allowance for due process beforehand. Look at how many people have been incorrectly put on the no fly list and find it virtually impossible to get off. Heck, some of them can't even find out HOW they were put on the list OR find a lawyer that can help them get off of it.
Trump 2017 was carefully constrained. (At least by his standards.) Trump 2018 is pushing and testing the boundaries. Anything is possible. He can be our best friend or worst enemy now, it seems. So we have to make crystal clear what the no-deal issues are, where the boundaries are, the rewards and loyalty he will receive for defending our rights, and the devastating consequences for selling them out. That's what he understands and respects. So keep writing and calling Trump and Congress as needed, let them know we will have their back to the very end if they are true, or they'll find themselves in deep political trouble if they are not! If they do the right thing, take the trouble to say thanks - you have to do that to make it work. If they start to waver or announce a bad plan, remind them who their friends are and the terrible situation if that relationship ends.
Yep, I agree, but this isn't about what should happen. It's about what will actually happen based on our actions and his. Speak up (to him/them) if you want a better outcome.
Trump never had the advantage of hanging out at OCDO - homeboy needs a little education on 2A! Like so many other people. The truth makes us free. But he's the priority above all other people, we need him to learn pronto! If we're firm enough he'll take note.
I searched this thread for the word "dangerous," but it wasn't mentioned, even though that word, along with a couple of other words, are absolutely pivotal to the nature, meaning, and extent of President Trump's statement. By avoiding those words you are taking his statement out of context, inaccurately altering its meaning.
Let's try that again, with those critical words highlighted in red:
President Trump on Wednesday voiced support for confiscating guns from certain individuals deemed to be dangerous, even if it violates due process rights.
“I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida ... to go to court would have taken a long time,” Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said.
Was he talking about everyone? NO.
Was he talking about only gun owners? NO.
Was he talking about persons who are a danger to themselves and others because of mental instability or imminent criminal intent? YES.
Many states already have such laws on the books. If I come across a private citizen who is waiving around a firearm in public, regardless of whether they're mentally incompetent or criminally menacing others, one way or the other, they're going down, and my state laws back me up.
Some of you wrongly jumped to the conclusion that I would shoot them, just as some of you wrongly jumped to the conclusion that President Trump wants to take your guns away. That's not what he said. Always consider the context.