Last updated on 2019-05-17
Donald Trump actually did some good today… by giving in to the good sense we liberals have been offering all along.
He banned bump stocks, perhaps the first serious firearms policy response to work its way past Trump’s usual feckless deflections about the gun violence that has taken place during his time in the White House. Conservative commentator Jacob Sullum contends the bump-stock ban actually continues Trump’s impulse to ignore the rule of law… so even if bump stocks are only a tiny step in the right direction on sensible firearms regulation, this move should also help enlist the South Dakota Gun Owners in the drive to impeach Trump, right? Win-win!
Then Trump surrendered to political reality and gave up on threatening to shut down the federal government at Christmastime unless he got money for his wasteful border wall. Of course, he’s still deaf to the majority of Americans who do not want his wall, and he’s asking federal agencies to help him skirt Congress’s appropriations authority by looking for money in their couch cushions to pay for the wall, but hey! If we can keep the government open and move the next debate on the wall to 2019 when Speaker Pelosi can just gavel it did, that’s another win!
These two decisions are simple moderation, not real leftism. But if Trump wanted to ice today’s cake with more sensible governing, he could reverse his coal-mania and call for a moratorium on coal-mining “until we figure out what the heck is going on” with more than 2,000 previously unreported cases of advanced black lung disease among Appalchian coal miners.
Actually, NPR has figured out what’s going on: As mining companies have drained their main veins, they’ve had to dig through more quartz to reach thinner coal deposits. More digging in quartz means miners breathe more silica dust, which is more toxic than coal dust. And since the Clinton Administration, the federal government has failed to protect miners from this known fatal hazard with effective regulations.
This distressing report from NPR offers Trump the perfect chance to protect the coal miners he so deeply loves… and perhaps to soft-land his way out of his dead-end support for a dying industry with a coal-mining moratorium, some generous welfare checks like the ones he’s writing to the farmers he’s hurt with his tariffs, and maybe just a few nice words to miners telling them that they really ought to look into those job retraining programs that could help them find work that won’t destroy their lungs.
Banning bump stocks, backing off on the wall again… add some humane and economically sensible silica/coal-mining regulations, and Donald Trump could lay the groundwork for the greatest plot twist of his current reality-TV program… which, frankly, after three years of non-stop coverage, is getting somewhat repetitive. Imagine: as Nancy Pelosi reclaims the Speaker’s gavel, as the Mueller investigation puts more Trump associates behind bars, Trump could do a 180, return to his liberal New York roots, and start advocating moderate or even liberal policies. He could switch parties, discombobulate impeachment plans, and reach for history by becoming the first sitting President to switch parties and seek reëlection.
Trust me, if I can outline the script, someone in Donald Trump’s production office has thought about it. This is all just a show for him, so what would he care, as long as he gets the ratings?
But fantasy scripts aside, let’s just be happy we got a couple of sensible decisions from Trump today.
I would like to congratulate President Trump for taking the first step in moving the gun debate from prioritizing sales to safety.
I am now off to search to see just how livid the NRA is at this juncture.
NRA is now owned by Russia, lock stock and barrel (but no bump stock). Dirty Johnson is happy as well as his Butina made such inroads with the local yokel’s here in South Dakota. She is such a prize… Winning.
o,
How does this improve safety?
Here’s what’s going on with Trump banning bump stocks. It’s not what you think.
Federal law bans fully automatic machine guns. The ATF has ruled previously that a bump stock, which is not a fully automatic machine gun, isn’t covered by the federal law banning machine guns so congress would have to change the law if it wanted to ban bump stocks. Trump is issuing a regulation redefining bump stocks as a fully automatic machine gun. The problem is that a regulation cannot supersede a law. Trump’s regulation is sure to be immediately challenged, and put on hold for a couple of years while the case works its way through the court. The regulation will be struck down. Trump knows this. Gun rights organizations know this – and they’re for Trump’s regulation even though they will challenge it in court and win.
This is all for show. This regulation is nothing more than cover for Republican politicians. They will argue, “we don’t need to pass a law; there’s already a regulation.” So the Republican senate won’t pass a law banning bump stocks. The regulation will immediately be put on hold by the courts, and will later be struck down. And 2 years from now people will still be buying bump stocks. This whole “regulation” thing serves the interests of the NRA and their Republican handmaidens. They just bought themselves 2 years of no bump stock ban even while claiming they are for a bump stock ban. Most people won’t realize there is a game afoot.
Bump stocks are easy to make yourself.
This does nothing to improve safety as o suggests.
The best way to improve your personal safety is to carry a gun or have a bodyguard with a gun.
Hollywood and Democrats don’t care if you can’t afford a bodyguard.
Turning a semi-auto assault rifle into full auto is easy to do as well, so what is your point? People don’t do it often because the consequences are very severe. Reduction in violence caused by unneeded attachments is a win in my book. I have 1 bump stock and 5 ARs. I will have no problem turning that ammo wasting, barrel warping, inaccurate piece of crap in. The only people I ever see using them at the range are half inbred morons who I wouldn’t let use a glue gun. Go buy a jacked up truck with testicles hanging from the back if you want to compensate like all the other underprivileged men.
The point is banning something that is not a harm to somebody will not make someone safer.
How does banning a bump stock cause a reduction in violence?
Great link on the black lung Cory. How can anyone think that coal burning really has anyplace in our world? The only purpose of coal is to filter water, let’s leave it where it is, underground, doing it’s intended job.
The same way a ban on producing full auto weapons for civilian ownership has led to a reduction of them being used in the commission of a crime. When the cost to obtain one is high enough and the penalty for possessing one without the proper permits is very extreme, people don’t tend to try to get their hands on them. That is why their use since the ban was put in place has declined dramatically. Gangs don’t run around with Tommy Guns that often anymore like they did in the early 20th century.
Daniel,
This isn’t the Capone era. Now they use uzi’s.
Let’s talk about 2018 and the majority of Americans that are not criminals.
The majority of gangs use handguns.
Are you saying they should be banned?
Uzi’s, eh? Care to provide the facts to backup that the use of full auto weapons in the commission of crime has not decreased? The undeniable truth is that after the full auto ban went into effect, their use was decreased dramatically.
I’m saying a reasonable level of regulation should be done to reduce mass shootings, especially when it involves accessories that are nothing more than a loophole to create a weapon that is virtually identical to one that is illegal. I’m not worried about the gang banger and his hi-point trying to kill a few people. I’m more worried about the mass shooter looking to take out an entire crowd of people.
Daniel,
The Vegas shooter could have used a homemade bump stock and done the same thing.
You bringing up the 1930′ is hilarious since full auto’s weren’t dealt with until the 80’s.
There are many on this board who think semi-auto is full auto.
I have never seen a newspaper describe a gang attack or a drug deal where they used full auto guns.
I wonder why that is Daniel?
As for “mass shootings”, can you link us to where a full auto was used in the past 50 years?
He could have made a bomb as well but it’s obvious that criminals go for what is quick, cheap, easy to obtain, and easy to get rid of. Full autos began to be controlled by the National Firearms Act of 1934 which made them impossible to obtain legally without registration creating a higher level of accountability for owners. In 1986, they banned the production of them. Keep up the ignorance. I don’t care what many people on this board think. It is irrelevant. I’ve forgotten more about firearms than you will ever know. You don’t hear about it because they are highly regulated and tracked. You are only proving my point that since regulation of full autos, their use in commission of a crime has decreased dramatically. Laws can work if the penalties are high enough.
I didn’t see an answer to my question about full auto’s being used in a mass shooting in your post.
Please explain in detail how regulating law abiding gun owners will prevent mass shootings?
A bomb is quicker to make than getting a full auto weapon.
I will ask again, can you link us to the last mass shooting done with a full auto gun?
Full autos aren’t used in mass shootings today because of their regulations. Simply put, gun regulations have decreased their use. I can’t explain it any more simpler terms for you. If done correctly with severe enough penalties, the same thing can work in other aspects of gun regulation. No, a bomb capable of the same destruction is not easier to make since the ingredients are highly tracked now. Once again, you are only helping my argument because bombings have decreased dramatically since their components began to be regulated. Anyone with basic metal working tools like a saw and drill can alter a semi auto to full. You are too dense to even understand that your question is proving that regulation works. Mass shootings with full autos don’t happen because of their level of regulation.
Daniel wrote:
Full autos aren’t used in mass shootings today because of their regulations.
You haven’t answered when a full auto was last used in a mass shooting in the US yet.
I have asked at least 3 times. If you don’t answer that question, your posts are meaningless.
My bad,
I only asked you twice before the last post.
It should have said i have asked you at least twice not 3 times.
I would guess the most recent was the North Hollywood shoot out. I bet something similar happens again eventually. That still doesn’t change the fact that regulation reduced the use of full autos in crimes drastically. Prior to regulation, killings with full auto weapons happened almost weekly.
1997 Daniel?
That wasn’t a mass shooting. That was a bank robbery.
What were the years that killings with full auto weapons happened weekly?
Sorry, but the North Hollywood incident is classified as a mass shooting. How the shooting begins doesn’t matter. During prohibition, when full autos were most prevalent, killings with full autos were at their highest.
You are comparing the 1930’s to the 1980’s?
LOL. I will bet you your 5 AR’s that there are more full auto ak-47’s in the US than there were Tommy guns in the 30’s.
Btw, who is classifying a bank robbery as a mass shooting Daniel?
Who ever did that is an idiot.
I now understand why no one bothers with you. When you can’t argue the point being made, you attempt to alter it to something different. Crimes committed with full autos have decreased drastically since they began to regulate them. It can be done elsewhere when the penalties are severe enough. I won’t respond to you ever again unless you post your full name. I don’t like putting in time debating with people too coward to identify themselves. I said my statement and you can’t prove it wrong. You are a waste of time. Have a great night.
Daniel,
You lost. You don’t have the facts to back up your posts.
I find it odd you didn’t mention that full autos are smuggled into America.
I still find it odd that you had to bring u a bank robbery for a mass shooting.
I am now sure that you have wasted my time. Good job.
Jerry, remember when Trump showed up to the UN climate summit and tried to promote coal? The entire UN laughed at us once again.
Jason says – “You bringing up the 1930′ is hilarious …..” THINK about this attitude toward “out-datedness” and irrelevance of “ancient ideas” in the modern world you display here the next time you “bring up” the 1791 2nd amendment.
Both perpetrators were killed, twelve police officers and eight civilians were injured, and numerous vehicles and other property were damaged or destroyed by the nearly 2,000 rounds of ammunition fired by the robbers and police.
Sounds like a mass shooting to me. Got to see much of it live on tv Including first perp’s suicide. Cops were sadly and badly out/undergunned that day.
Jason, my point was clear that this action guides the discussion to issues of safety. Bump stocks make weapons more dangerous; therefore, this is a safety issue. The use of the bump stock in the Las Vegas massacre made that shooter more dangerous — more effective in killing more people. Moreover, it now opens up the discussion that elements of gun ownership are not absolute and sales must be looked at through a public safety lens — not only through a sales/profit/absolute right lens.
As a society we have to address guns and safety. This action shows that we can at least take on those discussions. Far too much discussion has been suppressed with NRA absolutism and Second Amendment absolutists. As such, we will test claims like those from Jason that claim the good-guy with a gun is only answer to a bad-guy with a gun. We know the statistical evidence does not say that. Guns in homes kill family members more often than they kill intruders. Good-guys who use their weapons to attempt to stop shootings often are ineffective, harmful, or themselves shot by police on the scene.
For all the rhetoric of Jason, I am never quite sure how much of your arguments of workarounds are actually advocacy — that homemade bump stocks SHOULD be used or are good. I am never quite sure what you are trying to work toward — only what you wish to tear down.
Looking into my crystal ball that tells the future, I will also post this: Google it yourself jJason, those statistics have been posted often here, on other threads my myself and others.
Mr. Rorschach, you’re spot on with that analysis. But it may leave that door open a crack as well for another day. In France, there was a terror shooting that killed a couple of people and wounded a dozen more. In the United States, we call that a day that end in Y.
There are so many responsible hunters and gun owners that the nut cases make us all look like terrorists. I have no idea what the nut cases say when they ambush the innocent, but my guess is that it is something like “God is Greater”, that can be translated into many languages, while they suicide. Anyway, we are due for another angry white man’s big one as the holidays are upon us. Nothing says Peace and Goodwill like the staccato of an AR on full hate with a slobbering white boy squeezing the trigger.
In the ‘Dirty Thirties’ the Tommy Gun reigned supreme and lots of death and destruction.
Weapon of choice of nearly all gangsters.
Anyone else notice the ominous quiet from the National Rifle Association since Trump made this announcement?
Last week there were reports that the NRA was near financial collapse after having to defend themselves against multiple investigations regarding the $30 Million campaign donations the Russians made on Trump’s behalf.
Roger, is this a favor to the NRA from Trump? He takes “anti-gun” action to allow the NRA to stay silent and appear as “reasonable” on gun safety legislation? Or is this Trump flexing muscle and showing the NRA has no power over him?
Daniel, your responses to Jason are appreciated and well worth the read as they are quite accurate. While Jason may not understand or appreciate these comments, other readers will. And your satire at 22:06 is a hoot!
It now looks like the hard line on the wall finding might be the last howl of the President for 2018. IT sounds like he is now taking the position that GOP leadership promised him wall funding to get the last omnibus spending deal, so now he wants to collect.
I can only imagine the President’s outrage: to be promised something then have it not delivered. It is a good thing we have Tucker Carlson to keep this President focused.
o, Oh wait, trump now says he will dig in. No wait, now he says he is okay. That boy is higher than a kite. Must be snorting that Adderall again. Adolph had that same problem with narcotics, stays in the family I guess.