Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Missouri preparing to become permitless/carry state

62 comments:

Anonymous said...

Am I the only person that has witnessed people in our state that should not be allowed to carry a nerf gun, much less a firearm? MDC allows people to hunt deer with a pellet gun, provided it comes from a center fire cartridge. Anyone looking for common sense coming out of Jefferson City will need to continue waiting.

Anonymous said...

The people 806 deems unfit to carry concealed weapons probably already ARE carrying concealed weapons. Outlaws and scofflaws don't care what the law says. So, in reality nothing changes with the new law, except that the playing field will be leveled for those who previously obeyed the law by not carrying concealed without a permit.

Anonymous said...

8:06 PM: Have you witnessed such people in nearby Kansas, which has had Constitutional Carry for a solid year and a half? Somehow, Kansas, including its urban areas, has managed, without the literal Dodge City becoming "Dodge City". So have Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, and West Virginia for varying lengths of time, and Vermont never restricted the carrying of weapons.

So there's absolutely no reason to panic, and every reason to expect Missouri's experience will be no worse than those states it's following. As 9:52 PM notes, it's not like those "unfit" aren't already carrying illegally if they want to....

Anonymous said...

Well, it seems I have upset the children. Children, just as your mother told you, I don't care what the other kids are doing, "If they jump off a bridge, would you do so too?". Yes, bad boys carry guns, do you need too also? The facts are guns has killed more US citizens since 1968 than have been killed in all US wars. It's a fact reported by PBS:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/2/22/1279667/-Study-Proves-Since-1968-More-Americans-Have-Died-From-Gunfire-Than-All-U-S-Wars-Combined

If you have never met a non-felon citizen you believe should not be allowed to carry concealed, then you are either lying or one of them. Do you in your fear of being killed by a bogey man with a gun, think all citizens practice gun safety, especially since it is not a requirement ofthis law? The law allowing morons to hunt deer with a pellet gun, .177 caliber center fire, do you believe this law equally coherent? Do you really believe some moron won't try to take a deer with such? It's not if, it's when. I hope you don't kill another because of your fear.

Anonymous said...

Blah, Blah, Blah, I cannot wait to start carrying mine...I have every right to defend my family and myself when in public, movie theaters, malls, restaurants, etc...Proud member of the NRA...

Anonymous said...

Blah, blah, blah?! Perhaps you need your mouth washed out with soap. Here's a little extra from the grown-ups, that you should consider. Any assets you or your wife own will be subject to forfeiture should you neglectfully shoot an innocent person. Not only that, but all future income of you and your spouse can be garnished by an attorney that sues you for the estate of the victim. Do you think the NRA is going to insure you against such liability? No, they will just keep making money off people fearing the government could take their firearms.

Anonymous said...

9:39, I am a grown up and don't need a lecture from you on the law, I know it inside and out...You're assuming by carrying that everyone will be negligent and shoot some innocent civilians, lol...Ithink you may need some sort of safe space so you can cope, liberals....

Anonymous said...

@ 9:59

I made no assertion that "everyone" will be negligent, I simply pointed out that neglince will occur. If you dispute that or anything I've said, prove me wrong. You, the adult, twisted that into everyone. Do you think all liberals lack firearm protection? Lol, how informed. I need no safe place, I am not the one in fear, I survived 60 years on this planet without carrying or being shot. I think I will continue the same.

Anonymous said...

9:39 AM, you might be slightly interesting it you didn't get pretty much all your claimed facts wrong. For example, the NRA has an endorsed insurance policy that will protect you from bogus lawsuits, and they're not the only ones offering such coverage. Note also that Missouri law provides us protection there.

No, [the NRA] will just keep making money off people fearing the government could take their firearms.

Like, oh, in California, with the current new batch of laws, and the newly proposed one to ban all semi-auto rifles, which would likely pass once the relatively sane Governor Brown steps down? The real threat of which is illustrated by their prior registration and "on second thought" confiscation of SKS rifles, which are so obsolescent the BATF classifies them as curios and relics? New York state proposed to do that for any magazine capacities above 6 or 7 rounds, which was a step too far (for now) for the judges that waived the rest of the "SAFE" Act through. In the meanwhile, the law is mostly ignored, which is in no way good.

In the meanwhile, in the non-slave states of the US, the NRA is by and large helping us gun owners to return to the American norms of guns and self-defense, the country has mostly gotten past the attitude of using these laws to suppress blacks (that's how they got started), with, you know, laws like the one you're whining about.

I simply pointed out that neglince will occur

And you think any of us have a problem with punishing such people???

And 60 years old going on 80 or more makes you an ever more enticing target. It's not accidental that concealed carry classes are heavily weighted towards the older and less physically fit, as well as women both young and old.

Anonymous said...

@ 11:59

You state, "the NRA has an endorsed insurance policy that will protect you from bogus lawsuits". Negligent homicide is not a "bogus" lawsuit, you wrongfully kill someone, expect charges and lawsuits. The NRA signed off on the GCA of 1968, nobody has taken your firearms, and crime is down. What is this irrational fear you have that everyone needs to carry a weapon to protect themselves from nonexistent bogeymen. People haven't had the need to conceal carry since before WWII, but now there is a crisis?

As I said I don't fear society or those in it. It's worked for 60 years and has for the vast majority of society as well. Pleasant dreams, don't be scared, everything is going to be okay. The good die young, the rest of us need to buck up and get along. Just please don't try to tell me any person over 18 without a felony conviction should be able to carry a concealed weapon. Like hunting deer with a pellet gun, it doesn't make good sense.

Harvey Hutchinson said...

The first step in Nazi Germany in the late '20's and '30's wasvto register and round up all of the guns.
The 2nd Amendment is very important, and needs all of our support and protection.

The Legislature needs to continue to shore it up st the State level!

Anonymous said...

Well this certainly simplifies the process of arming all the Blacks and Hispanics. At least now they do not have to go through the legal process to carry. In the spirit of true equality, we will continue the process of making certain they they are aware of their right to carry weapons.

By the way Harvey, there was not a Nazi Germany until 1933.

Anonymous said...

@11:59, Since when did being a felon or criminal stop them from carrying a firearm? Never, they could less about the law...All the more reason for my family and myself to be able to defend ourselves..And by the way, not sure if you're aware of the lawlessness in this country, police officers being ambushed, Chicago, Terrorism on the rise, I'm a 58 year old female, that's right, I am a woman and i know how to lock, load and fire! 2nd amendment is my best friend...

Anonymous said...

By the way Harvey, there was not a Nazi Germany until 1933.

He's simplifying, the Nazis initially used Weimar era registration laws to deprive untermenschen of their arms before, you know, throwing them in concentration camps and killing them.

And someone regularly commenting here sure seems to be of the opinion that pointing out that Blacks and Hispanics getting armed should be of great concern to us existing, I presume "white", gun owners, that's not the first time the point has been made here. Try again, especially since Jim Crow possession limiting laws have been eliminated from all but one of the northern states and one of the Carolinas, plus of course the modern slave states that don't particularly discriminate in who they deny weapons possession or carriage licenses to.

Anonymous said...

@ 2:57

You missed the commenter time stamp, I don't think you were addressing 11:59. That said, the crime rate has been steadily dropping according to FBI reports and Police Reports, so I'm unsure of these criminals you fear exist to the extent of your paranoia. Nobody is criticizing your right to defend yourself, just the legislator's assertion that any moron over 18 can carry concealed. If the 2nd Ammendment is your best friend, then you need to get a life. Paranoia will destroy ya.

Harvey Hutchinson said...

The National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: About this sound Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei , abbreviated NSDAP), commonly referred to in English as the Nazi Party (/ˈnɑːtsi/), was a political party in Germany that was active between 1920 and 1945 and practised the ideology of Nazism. Its precursor, the German Workers' Party (Deutsche Arbeiterpartei; DAP), existed from 1919 to 1920.

It is true the Nazi party did not gain control of the German country and government with Adolf Hitler as its head until 1933.

And they used that gun registry from the get-go.

God bless the Second Amendment and the NRA!!

Anonymous said...

@4:15, lol...I have a fantastic life! Lots of great friends and family and we all are in total agreement on this issue,Paranoia is something the left uses to try and justify their ignorance on issues such as this...And my children are well over 18 and theydegrees are impressive, just saying. Target practice tomorrow, it's what we deplorables do, lol

Anonymous said...

Previous intended for @10:16

Anonymous said...

@5:46

You are not the only one with successful children, my youngest is closer to thirty than your 18 year old, but I'm 60 and you're only 58, lol. You say you have great friends, and the 2nd Ammendment is only a "best friend", lol. The only paranoia I have is shooting at the public range at Camp Crowder. There someone will presumably empty his clip, and turn his weapon towards others while removing the magazine. That is negligence, do deplorables target shoot at public ranges and practice gun safety? Some do, some don't.

Do NOT Agree with the Comment - said...

2:14 - "Well this certainly simplifies the process of arming all the Blacks and Hispanics. At least now they do not have to go through the legal process to carry. In the spirit of true equality, we will continue the process of making certain they they are aware of their right to carry weapons."
This is OFFENSIVE!

I read and closed out of this earlier; but, I came back because I could not let this rhetoric go unchallenged.

Anonymous said...

Why is that offensive? You want the right to carry your firearm but want to deny that right to the law abiding eighteen year old Black kid. The point of the whole exercise in stupidity is that the right to carry is a double edged sword. You want to protect yourself, well so does the minority population. I suspect there would have been a lot fewer lynchings way back when if the Klan had been met at the door by a Black man with a shotgun in his hands.

Anonymous said...

Why is that offensive?

Because it was written is such a way as to imply that we current gun owners do not approve.

When we go so far as to use the courts to systematically strike down laws that prevent gun ownership or concealed carry by permanent resident aliens (i.e. Green Card holders), who in principle are every bit legally equal to us except they can't vote (they can be drafted etc.).

Right now minority women have been recognized as the new big block of people getting concealed carry permits and guns, and I've yet to read of anyone upset by this, although I suppose I could mosey over to the Daily Stormer and the like and find such.

We, by and large, do really believe in the principle that everyone of good character should be effectively armed and be able to carry so that protection extends beyond the home, that the government should not be a gatekeeper of this prior to someone demonstrating through committing crimes of violence that they fail this condition---note how e.g. Joplin's police chief as I recall, and other local law enforcement types, plus people like me say, errr, you really should get training with your gun and about the law, but we reluctantly come down on the side of Constitutional Carry---and thus such statements are indeed "OFFENSIVE!"

This is 8:01 - said...

Appreciate your clarification, 10:33.
It was offensive when read as a racist, bigoted comment.
In the context of protection against Klan, and broader equality, it is not offensive.
Thank you for the explanation.

Anonymous said...

Yeah but, this new legislation would trashcan the training aspect. On the bright side, it would also eliminate the ability of local Sheriffs to deny the permits to anyone. Like I said before, this is a double edged sword because the a lot more people would be armed and not all of them would the traditional gun owner.

Anonymous said...

@7:40 Not sure why you are assuming my children are 18, they are 36 and 31, you seriously make no sense at all...

Anonymous said...

You are making one hell of a lot of assumptions. I could care less about your children or their apparent need to carry a weapon.

Anonymous said...

@ 11:04

These people do not carry out of need, these people carry out of fear. If I thought I needed a weapon to exit my house, then crap has gone to hell. But the crime rate is down. Even Barney Fife had the courage to carry his bullet in his pocket, these cowards need a 15 round clip in a handgun to go to the mall. Then they cry about ...get this...Victim Disarmament Zones. Such twits...

Anonymous said...

If someone really wants to do them harm, I guarantee that weapon will not help. They will never see it coming.

Anonymous said...

If someone really wants to do them harm, I guarantee that weapon will not help. They will never see it coming.

How common is that scenario if you choose your friends and acquaintances with any degree of care? The criminals normal people have to deal with are wanting their money, car, children, whatever, and CONSTANT VIGILANCE! goes a long ways towards "see[ing] it coming". Or a sufficiently hardened entryway that gives you enough time to grab a weapon to prepare for a home invasion.

And then there are the situations where you end up being the first responder, like when that guy in the process of knifing and beheading his former coworkers was rudely interrupted by the company's COO. Or the many mass shootings that don't make the news because they're stopped before they get to that point.

Anonymous said...

It is not by accident that the first place the Police look in the event of a murder is the immediate family of the victim.

Anonymous said...

OK, pedant, "... and members of your family you're willing to associate closely with, as well as who you choose for a spouse". And those type of murders are overwhelmingly done by people who are already criminals, so it's not exactly hard to figure out which is which. The principle still stands.

Anonymous said...

@ 4:27

Just admit it, you're scared and think a firearm equalizes your chance if being assaulted. How many times have any of the scenarios you describe occurred in your life. Do you think you can pull your weapon if an armed criminal has his weapon in your face? Someone wants your car, is it not insured, is it worth your death or killing another human over? Are you going to shoot in your child's direction if someone snatches them, vigilance covers that, no firearms necessary. Put your big boy pants on, and face life unarmed, as people have done for over a hundred years. Vigilance need not be armed vigilance. We know you want to be the hero, but your negligence can cause death to innocents. Let the professionally trained do their jobs, crime is down because of their efforts.

Anonymous said...

Given the right circumstances, anyone is capable of murder. And you do not have to have a criminal resume to commit the deed.

Anonymous said...

5:36 PM: You'll get further with a kind word and a gun than a kind word alone.

The ~2.5 million times per year that people defend themselves with guns, and the zillions of poorly publicized (since they don't fit the narrative) but collected on some web sites anecdotes are all I need to refute your plea that we maintain a posture of helplessness.

Heck, for all I know you're a criminal who's just trying to discourage us so your prey is helpless; 6:35 PM certainly believes if not now, you most certainly could become one in the future.

Thinking about it, it certainly has to suck for today's criminals that more and more of their prey is armed, not too many years after a state gets shall issue the population with licenses, obviously not all carrying all the time, generally reaches 5-10%, it was 5% in Jasper County when I last renewed my license in 3 or so years ago. If they aren't near a locality with disarmed subjects, for example, criminals from Northern Virginia would go into D.C. because it was a much better environment for them, their knowing there's a significant chance their predation would be replied with bullets, yeah, no fun at all for them.

Anonymous said...

Ah, forgot to reply to some of your most nonsensical points:

We know you want to be the hero

You claim to know an awful lot about a person you've never met, had a verbal conversation with, etc. Including how good a shot I am under stress.

but your negligence can cause death to innocents.

Then I guess I'll just have to continue to responsibly handle my guns, as I have for half a century without harm except to innocent forest critters. Note also this is felony murder, the onus is on the criminal who created a situation requiring lethal force in response, unless, of course, one is truly negligent, but in practice that's very rare.

Let the professionally trained do their jobs, crime is down because of their efforts.

Strange, but the professionals in the Joplin area very much want us to be armed, they, for example, run the course MSSU has for getting the Missouri license. I think they really don't like being relegated to the cleanup crew of violent offenses, they certainly said they wanted us to come out on top in such encounters. They go so far as to say on the record, about a woman who used lethal force against home invaders, that she had "an absolute right" to do so.

And as best we can tell, crime is down because the Baby Boomer cohort of young men have become older men, with plenty of the criminals in prison for long sentences. And given that shall issue concealed carry started its sweep of the nation with Florida in 1987, ending in Iowa in 2011 with all but 8 states, totaling about 3/4ths the nations population, plus all the Constitutional Carry states, how can you know that's not a factor as well?

What else are you spouting off about that's just not in the least true?

Anonymous said...

Hey, 6:35 PM, how about you stop projecting the moral deficiencies of yourself, your family, friends and acquaintances onto the rest of us, people who, you know, you've never met?

You've implicitly told us you're (plural) morally depraved ... well, I suppose there's value in that, it certainly increases my motivation to continue carrying concealed every time I walk outside my front door.

Anonymous said...

@ 5:07

You really need to try to keep up with the conversation, you're spouting off about concealed carry when licenses required gun safety classes, actual shooting (practice and tested), and a required background check by the county sheriff prior to a license being issued. Did you not watch the video? I expect not, do you think the fact that any fool without a felony record over 18 years old can carry without permit, in any way discourages their carrying. All the fools are doing it, he's just another unknown fool until he uses it.

If you think police are in any way FOR this nonsense, you are sorely mistaken. They support constitutional rights, but the idea of incompetent people with no training or gun safety knowledge being able to carry concealed should worry anyone with common sense. They train people at MSSU to carry responsibly, that is no longer required of ANYOnE. Buy yourself a gun and stick it in your jacket, what geniuses we have in our legislature. I own weapons that I will protect my home with, but there is a big difference going in public where legislators decided any moron without ANY training whatsoever can carry a concealed weapon.

Talk about spouting off bullshit, you claim concealed carry has reduced crime, there is absolutely no evidence to back that bullshit up. The police that you seemingly mind read, are more responsible, and you should thank them, while you're at it why dot you get their opinion as to whether allowing untrained civilians, with no gun safety knowledge to walk into a store, buy a weapon, and stick it under his jacket. What moron thinks this is in any way a good idea?

Don't be scared cupcake, everything will be okay, there are no monsters waiting for you outside, under your bed, it's only a dream. I will die a proud man without a gun, than die a coward with one.

Anonymous said...

@ 4:48

You've cited that 1% of the population of our country has defended themselves with firearms, but don't state your source or what time period you have cited. I'm just leaving out the first ignorant statement, you'll notice. Then you quote ZILLIONS, wtf dude, now your just making up more nonsense. Your paranoia then leads you to think I'm a criminal setting up an anonymous commenter to trap him. HAHAHA, do you use your brain for anything other than a hat rest? 6:35 is commenting on the fact that anyone is capable of murder under the right circumstances, pretty sure he's not talking about me. To top it off, you have somehow gotten into the minds of criminals in northern Virginia and determined that they had to go to D.C. because of the armed citizens of Virginia. You are too funny, and if you really believe such nonsense, you are unqualified to even discuss the matter.

Anonymous said...

He is what everybody needs to do.
Carry or don't carry.
If your scared MOVE.
Other wise live with it.
I have never heard a bigger group of whiny cry babies who are scared when it relates to guns.
A firearm is a tool. That's it.
Just like Trump's win you snowflakes need to get over it.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:21

I don't know what any of this has to do with Trump, we are talking about the Missouri legislature. But being as you brought up the Donald, I have a scenario I would like these people, who need weapons when they leave their home, to answer. Trump has been recorded telling a reporter that he can grab a woman wherever, even her genitals and get away with it because of his celebrity. In February the President of the United States comes to Joplin, Missouri. While here he meets your wife, daughter, mother or sister and does what he has bragged he can do, and grabs them by their genitals. Do you pull your weapon and shoot the POTUS, or do you pull your weapon and say, "Cease and desist" while the Secret Service guns you down. Or do you just say "Thank you, Mr. Trump" and go about your business.

Anonymous said...

@2:58...Trumps off handed comments were between 2 adults having a private locker room laugh, caught on hot mic 11 years ago, this country has sold nearly 100 copies of 50 shades of gray, so seriously it's ridiculous to make something big out of that, so now I'll direct you to you tube, search Obama eating ribs and p***y, Talk about Nasty, it's all right there, But hey Merry Christmas Everyone! ��✡��

Anonymous said...

@10:21 , Right On!!! Snowflakes need to get a life, so glad and proud that my children get it on guns, 2nd amendment, and political correctness....This momma didn't raise no fools!

Anonymous said...

@ 2:58

I have no problem with what goes on between two consenting adults, consenting being the operative word. I have heard the locker room excuse before, but Trump was 60 years old when he said that. Hardly teen-age locker room banter. What kind of 60 year old man says that? It cost the NBC reporter his job, the culprit admits to sexual assault and gets elected President. WTF? After reviewing your suggestion to view Obama's video and noticed the source/producer was "ThaSPCrew", not a known news organization, and I concluded it to be the "fake news" we are experiencing. Cut and paste video. People should pay more attention to their news sources. But in any case, I return your seasons greetings to everyone, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian. Peace to all!

Anonymous said...

Well now, we will all be able to strap a big iron on our hips and have high noon shootouts on the town square. The only thing better would be for the State Legislature to make the "duel" legal again.

Anonymous said...

https://youtu.be/WKYmiWiNqOw

Anonymous said...

And here's Trump talking about sexually assaulting women...

https://youtu.be/FSC8Q-kR44o

Harvey Hutchinson said...

Don't forget Bill Clinton, the convicted perjurer, and his lying wife who destroyed numerous innocent women,!till they got to Monica, who saved the blue dress physical evidence. If Bill Cosby is tried in Criminal court, then the white Bill Clinton should be as well, and Hillary for coverup and obstruction of justice!

Anonymous said...

Looks like the time is coming when we choose up sides and start killing each other. Aw well, we all knew it was coming.

Anonymous said...

Harvey, stay on subject! As a data guy, you should know that bad data in, is bad data out. Talking about Trump boasting he could sexually assault women because he's a celebrity. You should try to focus your comment on the data discussed, not ramble and blather about your problems letting go of the Clintons. BTW, Trump is NOT appointing a special prosecutor against Clinton, because he can't.

Anonymous said...

Looks like the time is coming when we choose up sides

We're rapidly doing that. Hillary helped a lot with her "irredeemable" "deplorables" speech, let us see behind the mask that the Left indeed has no space for us in their Utopia. Mook, her campaign manager, said that was the inflection point in their internal polling, and is one reason why their Get Out The Vote (GOTV) effort actually got more people into the booths to vote for Trump.

and start killing each other. Aw well, we all knew it was coming.

Well, the Left could decide it is wiser to start leaving us alone, but even this thumping from the top of the ticket to the bottom in the states hasn't been enough of a clue, they've turned it up to 11 (actually, I think they did that some time ago) and are practicing massive resistance, this time they're calling it not "normalizing" him as the nation's president. They succeeded in neutering the Tea Party with the Deep State; if they succeed in doing that to Trump, they really won't like what comes next.

I don't think we can "know" that it's coming, but it's hard to see any scenario where it doesn't. My side certainly hasn't been arming itself in unprecedented numbers, even after the election, just to look at the guns, although of course a good subset of this is per the ostensible topic of this discussion, ever more liberal (heh) concealed carry regimes.

Anonymous said...

4:28 Who cares? He won! Bill Clinton was a serial harrasser of women and Obama is not pure by any stretch either, he's all over you tube speaking to audiences about eating ribs and p***y, It's ok though because it's slick Willy, Face it in these times people don't care, we picked an outsider, business man and we're damn proud of it...Now those on the left know just how we felt the last 8 years, and none of us took to the streets to burn things down, our side doesn't loath our law enforcement, we're just sick and tired of all the lawlessness under Obamas presidency, Thank God for Trump!

Anonymous said...

11:37 & 11:48

You Trump chumps need to see who made the video before you spout off about Obama. "ThaSPCrew" is not news but just jokers splicing/making videos that nobody every witnessed. However, Trump's video was provided by NBC news and repeated on CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and pretty much the entire world. That's because the idiot admitted to sexual assault, if Obama's video was true you might have seen it on at least one reliable news source, not fake news like ThaSPCrew. Lol, what morons.

Anonymous said...

If you are going to allow kids to carry weapons at 18, you might as well lower the drinking age to 18 also. What fun is shooting up a place unless you are drunk at the time?

Anonymous said...

No problem. To hell with trust, simply treat every person you meet with as a potential threat and be prepared to draw your weapon at any suspicious move anyone makes.

Anonymous said...

@1:30, that's not a fake video, it's without a doubt BHO, of course you never saw it on CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, why would you, they never report real news, they've always had one objective, carry the water for the lying, deceptive liberal party, haven't you noticed their ratings? Nobody believes anything they say anymore, Fake News at it's very best, Another reason Hillary is a 2 time looser, love it and hope she disappears back into the deep woods of Arkansas where she belongs. Go Trump #2ndamendment wins.

Anonymous said...

@ 8:42

If you don't believe the respected news services, then you're too far up Trump's butt to see reality. You do recollect that not one newspaper supported him, are they in on it too? Let me know in 4 years how well that billionaire fraudster takes care of you. Mexico will pay for the wall, Hillary Clinton will go to jail, all illegals will be deported, Muslim registries, Hahahaha, ain't gonna happen.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe you do not see that it ain't the Liberals who are likely to take your guns but rather the Conservatives. Trump is not going to secure your gun rights, he is going to take your guns.

Anonymous said...

4:44 PM: And on what basis do you say this?

The "Liberals" are very liberal in talking about how they want to take our guns away.

Outside of terrorism, Trump has said nothing of the sort, and promises to do good things for us. His eldest son is part of Gun Culture 1.0 and maybe 2.0, Trump Sr. himself has a concealed carry license.

Just what insight makes you so sure he's going to betray his son and his base? Because I indeed cannot see it.

Anonymous said...

@5;58 ,4;44 is just another loony liberal, only the lefties dream of confiscating our firearms, period!

Anonymous said...

Trump has already betrayed you. He betrayed the Klan with his stance on Israel. He betrayed the working man by naming a Cabinet of Money Men. He betrayed the Jingoists by backing down on the "Wall" and "Deportation" issues and he betrayed the entire country by continuing the Pay to Play agenda. Face it, you got conned by the best Con Man America has ever produced.

Anonymous said...

@5;58, 4;44 is just another loony liberal, only the lefties dream of confiscating our firearms, period!

Indeed, as he shows at 7:55 AM, leading with "He betrayed the Klan..." because KKKrazy Glue is the only thing holding the modern US lefty coalition together.

Too bad enough of the nation saw through this kraziness; I sort of look forward to how more unhinged they become when God-Emperor Ascendant Trump drops the "Ascendant" 22 days from now. Although if they manage to suppress Trump, as they did with the much more innocuous "Tea Party", they really won't like what follows. Especially since it will have much better fashion sense than the Klan.

Anonymous said...

Fashion sense huh? What are you guys going to do, wear red robes? I bet you change your mind when you find out how much it costs to dry clean those damned robes. In truth, I am not worried about Trump because I seriously doubt that he will serve out his term. I don't know which side will force him out, but I am convinced that somebody will.