Jump to content

For those who hate the Trump Administration...

Yeti

By Yeti
in National Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

Yeti Member

Yeti

Posted
Posted

I am not a Trump fanboy and do not agree with everything he and his team say and do but, since this is a Second Amendment related forum, can you please tell me which administration has ever given us something like this for the 2A?  Or-- for those already taking a stand that they won't vote for any current Trump administration member in the future-- which candidate will demonstrate that the 2A is a civil right as much as this (as discussed by Harmeet Dhillon at the Shot Show in this interesting video)?

 

 

 

 

While I am perpetually disappointed with how much the 2A has been historically abused and by the slow pace of reclamation of our 2A rights, letting "perfect get in the way of good" is not how politics work in a Democratic Republic.   If you believe that to be incorrect, who has done more for the 2A in your lifetime at a federal level or who is electable that will definitely do more?

mauserme Member

mauserme

Posted
Posted
On 3/17/2026 at 12:06 PM, Yeti said:

... can you please tell me which administration has ever given us something like this for the 2A?  

 

 

I didn't watch the video but, even without it, I can't think of an administration that has come so close along side us as President Trump's has.

 

Yeah, he's imperfect.  I am too.  But I do my best to protect our rights and I think he's trying to as well.

 

 

 

 

mab22 Member

mab22

Posted
Posted
On 3/17/2026 at 8:10 PM, mauserme said:

 

I didn't watch the video but, even without it, I can't think of an administration that has come so close along side us as President Trump's has.

 

Yeah, he's imperfect.  I am too.  But I do my best to protect our rights and I think he's trying to as well.

 

 

 

 

Ditto!

If I could vote for him again I would walk through broken glass on fire to do it! 

Yeti Member

Yeti

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 3/17/2026 at 8:10 PM, mauserme said:

 

I didn't watch the video but, even without it, I can't think of an administration that has come so close along side us as President Trump's has.

 

Yeah, he's imperfect.  I am too.  But I do my best to protect our rights and I think he's trying to as well.

 

 

 

 

Agreed mauserme.  I believe the video can only strengthen that opinion.  There is no perfect person or politician but we are making more progress in regaining 2A rights with this administration than we have with others.

Vodoun da Vinci Member

Vodoun da Vinci

Posted
Posted

https://www.wiley.law/alert-Executive-Order-Signals-Rollback-of-Biden-Era-Firearms-Regulations

 

Quote

 

The review will be sweeping. At a minimum, key areas for scrutiny will include:

  • Presidential and agency actions that may have restricted firearm rights.
  • Rulemakings by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that implicate the Second Amendment.
  • Reports and policies from the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.
  • The Government’s legal positions in litigation implicating the Second Amendment.
  • Agency firearm and ammunition classification policies.
  • The processing of applications to make, manufacture, transfer, or export firearms.

After Attorney General Bondi submits her proposal, DOJ will work with the domestic policy advisor to finalize and, ultimately, implement the plan of action. This could result in a broad unwinding of the Biden Administration’s firearms policies.

 

 

Now if we can just count on Trump to pressure SCOTUS to enforce Bruen and Heller and get the justices to push PICA and such off the roof we can breath easier. Most of what I have seen at this point is window shopping and lip service. We need to get SCOTUS to hear/rule on the unconstitutional stuff that States are enacting. We need a Federal law that protects US from marauding State legislatures who seek to rewrite the 2A and take my rights to keep and bear. He (Trump) needs to get much more aggressive because the current trend in America, in many states, is to normalize infringement to the point of virtual disarmament. It's blatantly unconstitutional and it needs to be addressed head on much more aggressively.

 

Is Trump the best we have seen for many years on 2A issues? Of course he is. But that's a pretty low bar, IMO. He's still just the "lesser of two evils" as my 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights have been usurped by past executives and the state of Illinois.

 

VooDoo

mauserme Member

mauserme

Posted
Posted
On 3/18/2026 at 12:55 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

https://www.wiley.law/alert-Executive-Order-Signals-Rollback-of-Biden-Era-Firearms-Regulations

 

 

Now if we can just count on Trump to pressure SCOTUS to enforce Bruen and Heller and get the justices to push PICA and such off the roof we can breath easier. Most of what I have seen at this point is window shopping and lip service. We need to get SCOTUS to hear/rule on the unconstitutional stuff that States are enacting. We need a Federal law that protects US from marauding State legislatures who seek to rewrite the 2A and take my rights to keep and bear. He (Trump) needs to get much more aggressive because the current trend in America, in many states, is to normalize infringement to the point of virtual disarmament. It's blatantly unconstitutional and it needs to be addressed head on much more aggressively.

 

Is Trump the best we have seen for many years on 2A issues? Of course he is. But that's a pretty low bar, IMO. He's still just the "lesser of two evils" as my 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights have been usurped by past executives and the state of Illinois.

 

VooDoo

 

 

I'm not so sure he can live up to your expectations.  There are some fairly good justices on SCOTUS because of him, but even they don't solicit his advice on which cases should be granted cert.  And I don't think any president has ever been in a position to pressure any court.

 

We need Federal law?  We'll see what he signs if/when the legislature sends him something.

 

As far as being aggressive, there's Justice Department Sues the District of Columbia for the Unconstitutional Ban of Semi-Automatic Firearms and U.S. Department of Justice Announces Second Amendment Pattern-or-Practice Investigation into California’s Los Angeles County, along with some amici supporting the 2A and such.

 

He may not always prioritize our rights as highly as we would if we were sitting in his chair, but there have been a few other things keeping him busy.

 

 

 

 

TRussell Member

TRussell

Posted
Posted

If and when another Democrat comes to power nationally, look out. They want the firearms gone. Make no mistake about it. We have got to get the turnout numbers up for those that are 2A participants. 

Yeti Member

Yeti

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 3/18/2026 at 12:55 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

https://www.wiley.law/alert-Executive-Order-Signals-Rollback-of-Biden-Era-Firearms-Regulations

 

 

Now if we can just count on Trump to pressure SCOTUS to enforce Bruen and Heller and get the justices to push PICA and such off the roof we can breath easier. Most of what I have seen at this point is window shopping and lip service. We need to get SCOTUS to hear/rule on the unconstitutional stuff that States are enacting. We need a Federal law that protects US from marauding State legislatures who seek to rewrite the 2A and take my rights to keep and bear. He (Trump) needs to get much more aggressive because the current trend in America, in many states, is to normalize infringement to the point of virtual disarmament. It's blatantly unconstitutional and it needs to be addressed head on much more aggressively.

 

Is Trump the best we have seen for many years on 2A issues? Of course he is. But that's a pretty low bar, IMO. He's still just the "lesser of two evils" as my 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights have been usurped by past executives and the state of Illinois.

 

VooDoo

I don’t disagree that the pacing isn’t what we would love but the video above speaks to some of the challenges, including what it takes just to set up a new 2A team in the Civil Rights division for the first time.  And I would bet all my ammo that a “President Harris” wouldn’t have done at least that nor will a “President Newsom” or a (shudder) “President Pritzker”.

 

The radio interview in this topic speaks to the Supreme Court pacing.

 

Perhaps if President Trump was actually the dictator he is made out to be by some we could get more of our 2A rights restored more quickly… 

 

soundguy Member

soundguy

Posted
Posted
On 3/18/2026 at 12:55 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

Now if we can just count on Trump to pressure SCOTUS...

 

SCOTUS does not answer to the President.

Nor do the states.

Or Congress.

 

Cheers,

Tim

TomKoz Member

TomKoz

Posted
Posted
On 3/18/2026 at 9:15 PM, ScopeEye said:

Trump is the greatest President ever...

Agreed.  


Just imagine if we could give him a Super Majority / Filibuster Proof House and Senate after the midterms !!!

 

we need a Too Big to Rig Republican / MAGA turnout !!

yurimodin Member

yurimodin

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 3/18/2026 at 9:15 PM, ScopeEye said:

Trump is the greatest President ever...

You misspelled Andrew Jackson.......last time we were debt free, and he had the stones to tell the judges to pound sand.

 

 

Anyway I really wish Dhillon was the AG instead of Scam Blondi.

 

harmeet.png

Edited by yurimodin
  • 2 months later...
TomKoz Member

TomKoz

Posted
Posted
On 5/25/2026 at 5:13 PM, roundkot said:

 

The greatest president ever has sacrificed his domestic agenda to a pointless war in a faraway land that so far has achieved nothing and is not likely to achieve anything.  MAGA has left the White House long ago, and he has done next to nothing for the 2A that won't be undone with a simple executive order.  I feel cheated. Do you really hope to get supermajority when voters that were promised no foreign wars, cheap gas, and no H1-Bs decide to vote for someone else?

Iran needed to be stopped before they could get nukes.  Plain and simple.

 

You can disagree.  I don’t care.  I’m glad we have a President willing to do what is necessary rather than what is politically convenient.

 

Voters that are informed, logical, intelligent, and don’t suffer from TDS will vote for Trump’s agenda !

Quiet Observer Member

Quiet Observer

Posted
Posted
On 5/25/2026 at 5:13 PM, roundkot said:

 

The greatest president ever has sacrificed his domestic agenda to a pointless war in a faraway land that so far has achieved nothing and is not likely to achieve anything.  MAGA has left the White House long ago, and he has done next to nothing for the 2A that won't be undone with a simple executive order.  I feel cheated. Do you really hope to get supermajority when voters that were promised no foreign wars, cheap gas, and no H1-Bs decide to vote for someone else?

A few people are beginning to realize that he is not the second coming. 

BobPistol Member

BobPistol

Posted
Posted

It is impossible to make America Great Again while having a $38T (and growing rapidly) national debt.

 

It is impossible for him to cut spending if he didn't sue to get the Impoundments Act declared unconstitutional.

ealcala31 Member

ealcala31

Posted
Posted
On 3/18/2026 at 12:55 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

Most of what I have seen at this point is window shopping and lip service.

People will come up w/anything when HATE is involved

 

On 3/18/2026 at 8:03 PM, soundguy said:

SCOTUS does not answer to the President.

Nor do the states.

Or Congress.

Agreed.

 

On 5/25/2026 at 5:13 PM, roundkot said:

and he has done next to nothing for the 2A that won't be undone with a simple executive order.

Again, some will say anything to justify their viewpoint

Quiet Observer Member

Quiet Observer

Posted
Posted

Light at the end of the tunnel.

 

"March 1: Trump said in a speech that "combat operations continue at this time in full force, and they will continue until all of our objectives are achieved." When The New York Times asked him how long the United States and Israel would continue the attacks, Trump said: "Well, we intended four to five weeks."

March 2: Trump said at a White House ceremony: "We're already substantially ahead of our time projections. But whatever the time is, it's OK." He repeated that the initial projection was "four to five weeks, but we have capability to go far longer than that."

A timeline of Trump's shifting statements about how long the Iran war will last | PBS News

TomKoz Member

TomKoz

Posted
Posted
On 5/26/2026 at 1:01 PM, Quiet Observer said:

Light at the end of the tunnel.

 

"March 1: Trump said in a speech that "combat operations continue at this time in full force, and they will continue until all of our objectives are achieved." When The New York Times asked him how long the United States and Israel would continue the attacks, Trump said: "Well, we intended four to five weeks."

March 2: Trump said at a White House ceremony: "We're already substantially ahead of our time projections. But whatever the time is, it's OK." He repeated that the initial projection was "four to five weeks, but we have capability to go far longer than that."

A timeline of Trump's shifting statements about how long the Iran war will last | PBS News

You think he should broadcast definitive operational start / stop dates to the world?

Operational Security is a real thing.

 

Also, do you not think that deception is a useful tactic during times of conflict??

 

As stated above “

Voters that are informed, logical, intelligent, and don’t suffer from TDS will vote for Trump’s agenda !”

Smallbore Member

Smallbore

Posted
Posted

I believe intel was Iran was close to attacking our friend Israel. Iran military resistance in spite of US bombing indicates Iran had a strong arms build up for some reason. I would rather have high prices over high body count of our friends. Would Iran be evil enough to use nukes. Sure they would.

davel501 Member

davel501

Posted
Posted

The objective result of this latest tussle shows we waited too long and let Iran build up too much of a stockpile. Whoever thought we had sufficient stocks of interceptors in the region got it wrong. 

 

I'm no fan of the cheeto man, but if all his bets pay off our kids will live in a free and open world like our great grandparents did. We've really been at war since wwii. 

Quiet Observer Member

Quiet Observer

Posted
Posted
On 5/26/2026 at 9:14 PM, TomKoz said:

You think he should broadcast definitive operational start / stop dates to the world?

Operational Security is a real thing.

 

Also, do you not think that deception is a useful tactic during times of conflict??

 

As stated above “

Voters that are informed, logical, intelligent, and don’t suffer from TDS will vote for Trump’s agenda !”

"March 1: Trump said in a speech that "combat operations continue at this time in full force, and they will continue until all of our objectives are achieved." When The New York Times asked him how long the United States and Israel would continue the attacks, Trump said: "Well, we intended four to five weeks." 

 

That sounds pretty definitive. 

 

It does not look like they achieved their objectives in 4 or five weeks. And now it will end, "when I feel it in my bones". 

Trump: Iran war will end when I ‘feel it in my bones’ - POLITICO  

 

No one is asking for detailed plans of attack. 

 

 

mauserme Member

mauserme

Posted
Posted

Just to clarify, what I meant when I quoted the "2 Months Later ..." tag is that I've noticed a recent trend on this forum and elsewhere, to diminish the President's successes on various issues, 2A included.  I take this to imply an understanding that criticism of activities in Iran will soon be moot, making different talking points necessary.

 

Again, it's just a hunch.  But I don't believe the trend is coincidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

John Q Public Member

John Q Public

Posted
Posted (edited)

He was an idiot for doing anything other than killing the Nuc operation, before the midterms. He likely, gave both houses to the left and will be lame duck, for the last two years. I hope to God I am wrong, but.... That also means, if a SC seat comes up, there's no way in heck he gets anyone who cares about the rule of law and the Constitution confirmed.

 

IMHO this was is FUBAR.

 

 

 

 

Edited by John Q Public

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...