Is Trump Turning on NRA? Yes, No, or Meh?

 

So in my daily perusal of news, I came across the following article:

“I don’t want mentally ill people to be having guns,” he says in the clip below. So far, so good: No one wants people who are unstable to be armed, even knowing that only a small percentage of the mentally ill are violent. But we have due process for a reason. If the state could strip you of your rights by declaring you “sick,” without a formal adjudication, the potential abuses are endless. Trump doesn’t seem to care, though. He says at one point here that the cops should have taken the Parkland killer’s weapons whether they had the right or not.

The highlights of it being that Trump in a meeting today with Senate Democrats and Republicans offered the following remarks.

  • That the cops should have taken the Florida attackers guns away even if they did not have the right to.
  • That we should take guns away first and do due process second.
  • That Republicans are scared of the NRA which is why Toomey does not have an increase in the age of purchase in his gun control bill before the Senate.
  • And that he is also open to adding an assault weapons ban to the legislation being debated now in Congress.

So … yeah. I have rather lukewarm feelings about guns in general, on a previous thread I objected to Trump’s intent to use executive action to achieve a bump stock ban on the principle that it was an overreach of his authority, but one enacted through legislation would be fine if pointless. Not sure how I feel about raising the age limit for gun purchases. We allow for such distinctions, and if it’s legislated I think it goes down in the same pointless but fine category for me.

Now encouraging cops to just take guns before due process … well that gets dicier. I think before you can seize property you should have to have some minimal due process first even if a more expansive process follows second. So, at the very least, the police would have to demonstrate some sort of cause before a judge, and you would certainly have to have legislation in place first authorizing such actions. But, really the President doesn’t run local police departments so Trump’s opinions on this are just embarrassing rather than determinative of anything specific.

But what do we make of the Republicans are afraid of the NRA comments? Is this a sign that he is going to pick a fight with the NRA? We know Trump loves bashing Republicans, he built his campaign in the primary on this point, and it is one of the reasons his fans here and elsewhere like him. But, now he leads the Republicans and the NRA have been some of his biggest supporters politically. Is this Trump being serious or is he just speaking out without thinking it through? Are those here who both like Trump’s regime so far but are also gun-rights diehards feeling worried? Could the NRA stand up to Trump or do they have to cave?

I’m curious to know what you guys think.

Published in General
Tags: , ,

Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 78 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Misthiocracy, Joke Pending Member
    Misthiocracy, Joke Pending
    @Misthiocracy

    Well, he probably doesn’t need the NRA to keep his own job, and it’s an open question whether he cares if the Republicans keep the House or Senate, so I think I vote “meh”.

    His political persona depends on his ability to “get things done”.  If he can negotiate “something” with the Dems, he’ll be able to add that to the “things done” column.  It’ll also suggest to voters that he doesn’t need a Republican majority in Congress to “get things done”.

    I think the bigger question is whether the Democrats are willing to swallow their pride and play ball with Trump.  These are the same people who’ve been calling for his impeachment after all.  Would they trade six more years of Trump in exchange for control of Congress?

    • #1
  2. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    That we should take guns away first and do due process second.

    Assuming this is a correct paraphrase (and the link seems to highlight it), this is “shoot from the hip” Trump.  Not my favorite version.

    • #2
  3. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    I think what we have is evidence that Trump doesn’t truly know what he is talking about.  He seems to be all about confiscation today….tune in tomorrow it will be a 180 degrees different.

    • #3
  4. livingthenonScienceFictionlife Inactive
    livingthenonScienceFictionlife
    @livingthehighlife

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    That we should take guns away first and do due process second.

    Assuming this is a correct paraphrase (and the link seems to highlight it), this is “shoot from the hip” Trump. Not my favorite version.

    Here’s the video:

    • #4
  5. livingthenonScienceFictionlife Inactive
    livingthenonScienceFictionlife
    @livingthehighlife

    Never mind the NRA, he’s turning against the Constitution.

    • #5
  6. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    This is why the NRA shouldn’t get involved in campaigning for politicians.  Stick with defending the 2nd amendment.  It’s fine to endorse candidates but the Trump stuff was too much for me.  Now he is criticizing Republican congressmen who he says are “scared” of the NRA

    • #6
  7. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    That we should take guns away first and do due process second.

    Assuming this is a correct paraphrase (and the link seems to highlight it), this is “shoot from the hip” Trump. Not my favorite version.

    Do you think this hip shooting will come to hurt Republicans?

    • #7
  8. DocJay Inactive
    DocJay
    @DocJay

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    I think what we have is evidence that Trump doesn’t truly know what he is talking about. He seems to be all about confiscation today….tune in tomorrow it will be a 180 degrees different.

    Yep, I ignore all the words and tweets…..I wait for actions with him.  Life is easier.

    • #8
  9. Michael Minnott Member
    Michael Minnott
    @MichaelMinnott

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    This is why the NRA shouldn’t get involved in campaigning for politicians. Stick with defending the 2nd amendment. It’s fine to endorse candidates but the Trump stuff was too much for me. Now he is criticizing Republican congressmen who he says are “scared” of the NRA

    I think you are correct.  At this point I think “meh”, as we’ll see if any of his proposals have legal, or legislative legs.  I suspect not so much.

    • #9
  10. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    DocJay (View Comment):

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    I think what we have is evidence that Trump doesn’t truly know what he is talking about. He seems to be all about confiscation today….tune in tomorrow it will be a 180 degrees different.

    Yep, I ignore all the words and tweets…..I wait for actions with him. Life is easier.

    But elections are coming up and then his words become the movers of how people vote don’t they? Throughout a campaign his words will matter more. Won’t they? What ever their inherit value is.

    • #10
  11. Mike-K Member
    Mike-K
    @

    Misthiocracy, Joke Pending (View Comment):
    I think the bigger question is whether the Democrats are willing to swallow their pride and play ball with Trump. These are the same people who’ve been calling for his impeachment after all.

    I think this is a major consideration. He dangled the Dreamer thing and they turned it down. That will not go away as a election issue.  Now, the heat is on about guns.

    The two real issues here are mental health and police incompetence, The Coward County Sheriff is a full time Democrat and Debbie WS is the congress critter. Maybe he is just making an opening bid.

    Toomey is up for election and Penn is a swing state.

    • #11
  12. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    His style seems to be-

    throw ideas around and let all the perspectives come out. Appear to be open to all reasonable solutions- or actually be open- as a way of taking the steam (and energy) out of the debate. This way HE’S not the center of the debate, which gives the gun grabbers another villain. People will hash all this out and it also gives other valid narratives time to emerge . ( like mental health, failure of FBI and creepy Broward Cowards)

    Things will settle down, the news cycle will move on and nothing much happens.

    He’s playing the media against itself. They get bored quicker than a nine year old.

    Democrats have to play along or else look unserious.

     

     

    • #12
  13. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    That we should take guns away first and do due process second.

    Assuming this is a correct paraphrase (and the link seems to highlight it), this is “shoot from the hip” Trump. Not my favorite version.

    Do you think this hip shooting will come to hurt Republicans?

    No not really because I think there is around a 100% chance he will do a complete about face in the next 24 hrs.

    • #13
  14. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    DocJay (View Comment):

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    I think what we have is evidence that Trump doesn’t truly know what he is talking about. He seems to be all about confiscation today….tune in tomorrow it will be a 180 degrees different.

    Yep, I ignore all the words and tweets…..I wait for actions with him. Life is easier.

    But elections are coming up and then his words become the movers of how people vote don’t they? Throughout a campaign his words will matter more. Won’t they? What ever their inherit value is.

    Hell if anything this makes Republicans look better to gun owners.  We are relying on them to protect our 2nd Amendment rights that Trump doesn’t understand

    • #14
  15. Joe P Member
    Joe P
    @JoeP

    Michael Minnott (View Comment):

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    This is why the NRA shouldn’t get involved in campaigning for politicians. Stick with defending the 2nd amendment. It’s fine to endorse candidates but the Trump stuff was too much for me. Now he is criticizing Republican congressmen who he says are “scared” of the NRA

    I think you are correct. At this point I think “meh”, as we’ll see if any of his proposals have legal, or legislative legs. I suspect not so much.

    The only way it does, is if the Democrats believe they can make it into a positive argument for them to take Congressional control at the midterms. Given that taking more seats requires them to win in places other than where people already hate guns, I kinda doubt it’ll happen.

    • #15
  16. Sabrdance Member
    Sabrdance
    @Sabrdance

    livingthenonScienceFictionlife (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    That we should take guns away first and do due process second.

    Assuming this is a correct paraphrase (and the link seems to highlight it), this is “shoot from the hip” Trump. Not my favorite version.

    Here’s the video:

    As I have said elsewhere, I am underwhelmed.  Pence is discussing something like the gun restraining orders David French brought up, and says that you can go to court, adjudicate the danger, and take the guns.  Trump says you could take the guns, go to court, adjudicate, and then if the danger is not there -return the guns.

    We do this in other areas -emergency injunctions, for example.  Now, I see a bunch of potential problems with this (emergency injunctions are usually only used in the case where stopping the action isn’t that big a deal, restarting is easy, and letting it go forward is irreversable -I can see problems with applying this to guns), but it isn’t crazy.  I imagine other people in the room pointed out some of the problems after the clip ends.

    In this case, Doc Jay is correct -wait and see what his considered opinion is, rather than just one comment in a conversation.

    • #16
  17. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    “Take the guns first and do due process second”

    There’s the temptation to say “well, that’s just Trump, talking”  but no President shouldn’t get an asininity pass because he has a history of saying wild things and not following through. “Do this good thing now that polls well and follow the law later”  is nothing but ignorance and contempt for the Constitution.

    • #17
  18. Mike-K Member
    Mike-K
    @

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    We are relying on them to protect our 2nd Amendment rights that Trump doesn’t understand

    Still a residue of TDS, I see.

    • #18
  19. Painter Jean Moderator
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Hopefully some adult in the room will take him aside and explain what the Constitution is, what the 2nd Amendment is, and so on. Given his attention span they had better make it brief.

    • #19
  20. Painter Jean Moderator
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Mike-K (View Comment):

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    We are relying on them to protect our 2nd Amendment rights that Trump doesn’t understand

    Still a residue of TDS, I see.

    Still a residue of TWS, I see.

    • #20
  21. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    When I hear the President say “Take the guns first and do due process second“, I initially thought he was garbling the line from The Godfather, “Leave the gun, take the cannoli“, but then realized it means we are  all bozos on the Trump bus.  It’s a wild ride, we like some of the stops it makes, but have no idea where, and how, we may finally end up.

    • #21
  22. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    James Lileks (View Comment):
    “Take the guns first and do due process second”

    There’s the temptation to say “well, that’s just Trump, talking” but no President shouldn’t get an asininity pass because he has a history of saying wild things and not following through. “Do this good thing now that polls well and follow the law later” is nothing but ignorance and contempt for the Constitution.

    Correct. However I think the simpler explanation is that Trump trolling. Like he did with the immigration meetings, let’s see if the democrats fall for it again.

    Lets see how far the democrats push when they think they’re going to get their way. Might be some good quotes come out of that for mid term election ads.

    • #22
  23. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    DocJay (View Comment):

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    I think what we have is evidence that Trump doesn’t truly know what he is talking about. He seems to be all about confiscation today….tune in tomorrow it will be a 180 degrees different.

    Yep, I ignore all the words and tweets…..I wait for actions with him. Life is easier.

    But elections are coming up and then his words become the movers of how people vote don’t they? Throughout a campaign his words will matter more. Won’t they? What ever their inherit value is.

    The wind?

    • #23
  24. formerlawprof Inactive
    formerlawprof
    @formerlawprof

    Sabrdance (View Comment):
    We do this in other areas -emergency injunctions, for example. Now, I see a bunch of potential problems with this (emergency injunctions are usually only used in the case where stopping the action isn’t that big a deal, restarting is easy, and letting it go forward is irreversable -I can see problems with applying this to guns), but it isn’t crazy.

    Not quite right, @sabrdance. Even for emergency injunctions, aka TRO, you have to go to court first, and you have to give the other side as much chance as is feasible to get a lawyer there (even if it’s by phone).

    If a crime has taken place in the presence of a peace officer, or is literally in the process of happening, the authorities don’t need either an arrest warrant or a search warrant. Smash and grab, shoot to kill if warranted by the situation. Otherwise, there has to be some prior authorization by a judicial officer.

     

    • #24
  25. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    James Lileks (View Comment):
    “Take the guns first and do due process second”

    There’s the temptation to say “well, that’s just Trump, talking” but no President shouldn’t get an asininity pass because he has a history of saying wild things and not following through. “Do this good thing now that polls well and follow the law later” is nothing but ignorance and contempt for the Constitution.

    For some of us, he doesn’t get a pass when he says things like this.  But what is the practical result?  For me, it might be a critical post here.  In cases where he has acted, his actions triumph over his words.  Again, it wasn’t a smart thing to say, but am I going to vote against his actions because of his words?

     

    • #25
  26. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    James Lileks (View Comment):
    “Take the guns first and do due process second”

    There’s the temptation to say “well, that’s just Trump, talking” but no President shouldn’t get an asininity pass because he has a history of saying wild things and not following through. “Do this good thing now that polls well and follow the law later” is nothing but ignorance and contempt for the Constitution.

    Correct. However I think the simpler explanation is that Trump trolling. Like he did with the immigration meetings, let’s see if the democrats fall for it again.

    Trump wadn’t trolling the immigration meeting and he wasn’t trolling today.    On these social issues, his instincts align with the Democrats.   His first inclination is that the Federal government has to do something to ‘help.’   People walked him back almost immediately on the immigration thing.    But he couldn’t be reeled in today.   Hopefully that will change.

    • #26
  27. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    But what is the practical result? For me, it might be a critical post here. In cases where he has acted, his actions triumph over his words. Again, it wasn’t a smart thing to say, but am I going to vote against his actions because of his words?

    Don’t take this the wrong way – I’m not trying to be confrontational. I just wonder if this actions-over-words stance, which I hear from all of my Trump-supporting friends from reluctant to enthusiastic, is absolute. Is there anything he could say that would make you vote against him in the primary of the next election? If so, about what?

    • #27
  28. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Mike-K (View Comment):

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    We are relying on them to protect our 2nd Amendment rights that Trump doesn’t understand

    Still a residue of TDS, I see.

    I see its still impossible to criticize President Trump even when he says some incredibly stupid shit without being accused of having some deeply held bias against him down in your nether regions.  Sorry, gonna call an idiot an idiot when he deserves it.  Like my grandpa said, if you don’t want to be called stupid, don’t do stupid crap.

    • #28
  29. Locke On Member
    Locke On
    @LockeOn

    Trump has a pattern of throwing hot issues to the Congress with a policy suggestion that is more than likely to get completely bogged down there. DACA as case in point, as mentioned above.  I hope this is another such.

    If it is not, and Trump has turned (or was never there) on 2nd Amendment issues, then (to re-answer a question that was asked on another thread) that would turn this ReluctantTrump voter into someone open to a primary challenger who was a gun rights supporter.  I vote single issue on this one.

    • #29
  30. Painter Jean Moderator
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Sabrdance (View Comment):
    In this case, Doc Jay is correct -wait and see what his considered opinion is, rather than just one comment in a conversation.

    Trump’s history strongly suggests that the wait time to see what his “considered opinion”  is, is a long one. Look, I’m generally pleased with his administration, but that said, I don’t think that thoughtful consideration of any subject is a trait of his.

     

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.