Trump vows to veto gun control bills in Congress, White House says

[DoD1776]

Hate him all ya want but I’m still with him! Haven’t lost faith in him.

Trump vows to veto gun control bills in Congress, White House says

As Congressional Democrats try to impose stricter gun laws, the White House has announced that President Trump would be advised to veto any gun control bills that come across his desk.

The White House on Monday issued a statement of administration policy and took aim at House bills H.R. 8 and H.R. 1112 – both of which seek to impose stricter background checks for gun purchases – and declared that neither one would receive the President’s signature because the bills violate the Second Amendment.

“The extensive regulation required by H.R. 8 is incompatible with the Second Amendment’s guarantee of an individual right to keep arms,” the White House said. “By overly extending the minimum time that a licensed entity is required to wait for background check results, H.R. 1112 would unduly impose burdensome delays on individuals seeking to purchase a firearm.”

 

[Darth]

Well, except that whole bump stock thing...

 

[DoD1776]

Well, except that whole bump stock thing...

Not like it was legal in NY anyways.

 

[Darth]

Not like it was legal in NY anyways.

Bump stocks are NY legal bro...

And that's a horrendous argument.

 

[DoD1776]

Bump stocks are NY legal bro...

And that's a horrendous argument.

Not really my argument. Not like it effects us NYers

Bump stocks are illegal my good sir. You can possess one but you can’t attach it to the firearm.

 

[Steal2B]

Hate him all ya want but I’m still with him! Haven’t lost faith in him.

Trump vows to veto gun control bills in Congress, White House says

As Congressional Democrats try to impose stricter gun laws, the White House has announced that President Trump would be advised to veto any gun control bills that come across his desk.

The White House on Monday issued a statement of administration policy and took aim at House bills H.R. 8 and H.R. 1112 – both of which seek to impose stricter background checks for gun purchases – and declared that neither one would receive the President’s signature because the bills violate the Second Amendment.

“The extensive regulation required by H.R. 8 is incompatible with the Second Amendment’s guarantee of an individual right to keep arms,” the White House said. “By overly extending the minimum time that a licensed entity is required to wait for background check results, H.R. 1112 would unduly impose burdensome delays on individuals seeking to purchase a firearm.”

I seriously doubt the President would have to exercise his veto since the companion bill for these in the Senate (S.42) is about 20 votes short of the 60 votes needed to get past the Fillabuster rule.

 

[Steal2B]

I seriously doubt the President would have to exercise his veto since the companion bill for these in the Senate (S.42) is about 20 votes short of the 60 votes needed to get past the Fillabuster rule.

S.42 failing in the Senate will one of the anti-american rallying cries (along with stuffing SCOTUS, Medicare for all Healthcare, Free Public College, forgive Student loans, Money for Nothing, Green Deal, rip down the wall, etc) the Demoncrats will use in the 2020 elections in their crusade the flip the Senate and White House.

 

[Exonautic]

vows and being advised to do so are not the same thing.

 

[Blimey]

Trump is not perfect and has definitely drawn up short on some campaign promises but the alternative would already have had most of us in this thread committed to a labor camp by now, so we need to celebrate wins.

 

[BDinPutnam]

Trump is not perfect and has definitely drawn up short on some campaign promises but the alternative would already have had most of us in this thread committed to a labor camp by now, so we need to celebrate wins.

Perhaps.

But "vowing to veto" a bill he knows won't land on his desk is pandering bullshit.

I said this elsewhere but I will say it again. If the Democrats are stupid enough to run someone that can lose to Trump in 2020 but retain the house and take the Senate, this will indeed land on his desk.

And I have absolutely zero confidence that he will veto it. Regardless of what it is.

 

[livingston]

the 9th Circuit.. Democrats see loss of Senate power in latest judicial vote

why we voted for him ...

 

[Darth]

Not really my argument. Not like it effects us NYers

Bump stocks are illegal my good sir. You can possess one but you can’t attach it to the firearm.

Wrong on both counts.

 

[ProgSpear]

Perhaps.

But "vowing to veto" a bill he knows won't land on his desk is pandering bullshit.

I said this elsewhere but I will say it again. If the Democrats are stupid enough to run someone that can lose to Trump in 2020 but retain the house and take the Senate, this will indeed land on his desk.

And I have absolutely zero confidence that he will veto it. Regardless of what it is.

This is not "pandering bullshit", it's sending a message to his supporters. Trump has fulfilled a remarkable part of his agenda, his approval has exceeded 50%, yet the only counter the D's have is unbridled hatred for them and us. Let the "Party of Death" get more and more extreme in their demands, as it is not playing well for them.

 

[DoD1776]

Wrong on both counts.

Nope,
https://www.democratandchronicle.co...gun-control-ny-democratic-control/2151575002/

 

[SomeSoldier]

This is not "pandering bullshit", it's sending a message to his supporters. Trump has fulfilled a remarkable part of his agenda, his approval has exceeded 50%, yet the only counter the D's have is unbridled hatred for them and us. Let the "Party of Death" get more and more extreme in their demands, as it is not playing well for them.

This is true but he still failed us with bumpstocks.

 

[BDinPutnam]

This is not "pandering bullshit", it's sending a message to his supporters. Trump has fulfilled a remarkable part of his agenda, his approval has exceeded 50%, yet the only counter the D's have is unbridled hatred for them and us. Let the "Party of Death" get more and more extreme in their demands, as it is not playing well for them.

What message? That he'll veto legislation that isn't on front of him to sign?

 

[Criticalt]

I also vow to veto any anti-gun bills that come across my desk.
Wooohooo!! Im a hero!!

 

[S&W Fan]

Actions speak louder than words in my book.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Perhaps he made the statement to inform some people who thought he would be the type to sign gun control bills. There are some people on this very forum who have said that.

 

[BDinPutnam]

Perhaps he made the statement to inform some people who thought he would be the type to sign gun control bills. There are some people on this very forum who have said that.

I just did.

Twice.

Because I think he would.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Well we will see. He's been a man of his word otherwise for all other issues.

 

[Doc8404]

Well we will see. He's been a man of his word otherwise for all other issues.

But but but he hasn’t built the wall.



Yet

 

[Modean]

Bump stocks are NY legal bro...

And that's a horrendous argument.

legal to possess, but illegal to mount on a firearm. That’s pretty much illegal.

 

[Blimey]

legal to possess, but illegal to mount on a firearm. That’s pretty much illegal.

So it's like buying a lambo on Craigslist with a blown powertrain. You keep it in your garage, but you have no money and never will to get it fixed.

 

[Darth]

legal to possess, but illegal to mount on a firearm. That’s pretty much illegal.

Nope,
Gun control in New York: Four ways laws could change

You just posted an article that confirms what I said.

Where is the penal code?

 

[RBean]

I can't believe some of you complaining about Trump because you don't get 100% of what you want. Would you rather have Clinton nominating judges, pushing gun control, forcing the ATF to extremes etc.? Not perfect but far better than the alternative.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I can't believe some of you complaining about Trump because you don't get 100% of what you want. Would you rather have Clinton nominating judges, pushing gun control, forcing the ATF to extremes etc.? Not perfect but far better than the alternative.

Some people are so naive as to think that there is a President that is 100 percent in line with their views so they'll chastise the one who's about 70 to 99 percent in line with their views.

It's literally impossible for one man or woman to be 100 percent in line with the views of every American. Like it or not, everyone has to choose someone who's closest to their views.

 

[Darth]

I can't believe some of you complaining about Trump because you don't get 100% of what you want. Would you rather have Clinton nominating judges, pushing gun control, forcing the ATF to extremes etc.? Not perfect but far better than the alternative.

They said the same thing with Obama, and Obama passed less gun control than Trump.

The "so you'd rather have Hillary" crowd seems to always forget that.

 

[Marine Cpl]

They said the same thing with Obama, and Obama passed less gun control than Trump.

The "so you'd rather have Hillary" crowd seems to always forget that.

You also forget that he couldn't.

 

[Uzi]

They said the same thing with Obama, and Obama passed less gun control than Trump.

The "so you'd rather have Hillary" crowd seems to always forget that.

Better than Hillary, braah.