Do you think we’ll see any changes to our gun laws under Trump?

[Quite_Exasperated]

Remember the bump stock order? Or the call for extending “red flag” seizures? Mr. Trump needed the votes of gun owners to win, but loyalty only runs one way with him. I expect nothing from him except lip service.

My fear with Trump is that he listens to whoever last whispers in his ear or flashes boobies at him (remember Kim Kardashian and the prison reform bill?) We need our own booby flasher…anyone willing to take one for the team? Not sure my moobs will sway him…

 

[Amd813]

I’d at least like to see national reciprocity. I’d love to see a reversal on Bidens Russian ammo import ban EO, and my long shot hope would be a reversal on Obamas Russian arms sanction (I want a Vepr please).

 

[M1911]

I’d at least like to see national reciprocity. I’d love to see a reversal on Bidens Russian ammo import ban EO, and my long shot hope would be a reversal on Obamas Russian arms sanction (I want a Vepr please).

Russia is not going to be exporting small arms and ammunition for some time.

 

[Amd813]

Russia is not going to be exporting small arms and ammunition for some time.

If ever again. I should have stacked 7.62x39 at .18 cpr under Trumps first term.

 

[KBCraig]

SCOTUS doesn’t need to rule on 10 different AWB cases for each state. We just need one good ruling on a similar ban.

We got one good ruling in Bruen, and we're still fighting states that claim to comply, but don't.

 

[1sern]

Last thing I want is Massachusetts CCW laws to be like Texas.

Texas sucks!

Do they? 30 years ago they sucked super bad, no ccw for them, but I think they've improved quite a bit

 

[Varmint]

We got one good ruling in Bruen, and we're still fighting states that claim to comply, but don't.

We need better clarification on the next one. MA will still ignore it but we’ll find out if the Supreme Court matters then.

 

[Varmint]

Russia is not going to be exporting small arms and ammunition for some time.

I’m sure they’ve built up capacity to extreme levels, if Trump ends the war they might need to export all that excess.

 

[M1911]

I’m sure they’ve built up capacity to extreme levels, if Trump ends the war they might need to export all that excess.

Russia has greatly reduced their stockpiles of weapons and ammunition. I suspect that it will take quite a few years for Russia to replenish their stockpiles after fighting stops.

 

[Rockrivr1]

5.45 is not coming through that door.

 

[CrackPot]

I presume you never travel? And if you do, good luck in a New York jail.

The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally protected civil right. States do not have rights. Humans do. Just like the bigoted southern states were told in the 1960s that people cannot be barred from dining in restaurants or sitting in the front of busses or in theaters, certain leftist states now need to be told they cannot arrest and jail people for carrying guns. Your location says Worcester county. Massachusetts is one of those states that will need to be forced to stop their anti gun bigotry. People have a right to armed self defense no matter where they may travel to,

I have slowed down, but I have historically travelled 60+ nights a year and 100,000+ airline miles. I care more about carrying in states other than my home state more than 95%+ of the people on this forum. I have most of the non-resident permits I can get to permit me to carry when I travel. I take guns in my checked luggage likely more than 99% of the people on this forum (most recently earlier this month).

Your assumptions or presumptions are totally off base.

What I care about is keeping the federal government out of my life and everyone else's. Everything the federal government does, ANYONE or ANY STATE can do better. We need smaller government, not bigger.

The role the federal government has to play in this is through the courts and striking down bad state laws. I want this to get handled the same way marriage reciprocity and driving recirprocity works, through the states, NOT the federal government.

The mantra is "FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD" so in no way am I going to support them taking action to solve a problem that is not a federal law issue. And as I said in my original post, it is unlikely that such a law, federal mandated carry reciprocity, passes constitutional muster short of another abuse of the commerce clause. The current SCOTUS treatment of the commerce clause it itself a total abortion and needs to be changed. Essentially any federal law over reach if it invokes the magic words of "interstate commerce" is constitutional. Not good.

 

[M1911]

This is fundamentally a misguided discussion. The reality is that NO CONTROVERSIAL LEGISLATION WILL PASS DURING THE NEXT SESSION OF CONGRESS. YES, I'M YELLING.

Republicans will hold 52 seats in the Senate. The Senate requires 60 votes to end a filibuster. Republicans don't have that many votes and won't get that many Democrats to cross party lines to vote on something like carry reciprocity.

Similarly, in the House, the Republicans hold 219 seats to 215 Democrats. While they do hold a majority, the margin is so slim that nothing controversial will pass the House either.

Whether you think there should or should not be a federal law concerning carry reciprocity, or whether you think such a law would or would not be constitutional, the reality is that IT WON'T HAPPEN DURING THIS SESSION. And in the mid-term election, the party that holds the presidency almost always loses seats in Congress. So it won't happen next session either.

Those of you hoping for a federal carry reciprocity law are engaging in wishful thinking that is completely divorced from reality.

 

[drgrant]

We're getting there through court rulings.

Don't ask for federal laws, because they'll inevitably be worse than MA or IL carry laws.

Yes.

At this point people really need to sit down and think about if it's really worth it or not trying to Crowbar like maybe five? states with the feds over carry and how badly it would cause those states to convulse in response. The problem is mostly fixing itself organically and things like natrep threaten to f*** all that up. Not to mention there will be douchebags sitting in the wings trying to inject UBC and federal red flag laws into whatever the legislation is. And there's a number of sitting pols who would sell us down the river on those things if they felt like they could frost the turd with reciprocity.

Natrep is a disaster waiting to happen.

 

[Mark from ?]

I follow 2 people on X (twitter), congressional stock trader and nancy pelosi stock trader. In any event they beat the market year after year, so why not?

Same here.

 

[ware]

maybe towards the end of his term?

 

[M1911]

maybe towards the end of his term?

You think Congress will pass pro-gun legislation after the Republicans lose control of one or both houses of Congress in the mid-term elections? What makes you think that would happen?

 

[milktree]

Natrep If imposed by federal law is a disaster waiting to happen.

It's not the reciprocity that's the problem, it's the top-down enforcement of it.

 

[drgrant]

It's not the reciprocity that's the problem, it's the top-down enforcement of it.

I've never been against States voluntarily having a reciprocity compact.... but of course none of the ones that need to be bludgeoned are going to do that, but you could probably get a compact that could be signed by like 45 something states that would ameliorate a lot of BS. I'm trying to remember offhand but some of the states have actually done this in a smart way there are states that have multiple layers of licenses based on reciprocity needs. In other words there might be a state that has like a lifetime license but that doesn't work for reciprocity because some states will only do the 5-year thing so what you do is you offer a secondary license for people that want that level of reciprocity, while the locals who don't want/need that bullshit, can just take the easier license instead that they've always had.


At this rate to be honest trying to get the remainder shall issue States over to constitutional carry is probably a lot easier than trying to make a compact.

The problem children states are going to keep being a problem until the fed's bludgeon the shit out of them in court. Trying to "force" them to recognize a license is not likely too effective.

 

[Rockrivr1]

Even if NR was passed, one day the Supreme Court will swing back to D control and they’ll rule it unconstitutional, just like the Rs did with Rowe v Wade.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

I’m glad about the LTC reciprocity (if it actually goes through) but what about everything else? Snopes got rescheduled so that’s off the table for a while presumably, lower circuits seem to have a circle jerk with everything state side by sending it back over and over. Do you think we’ll see congress drafting and/or passing any pro 2A bills like national stand your ground or constitutional carry this term?

Considering his past support for the AWB, red flag law, and confiscation of bump stocks without compensation in violation of 4th amendment rights.... I sure as hell hope not... Because no good can come from such...

Best we can hope for is status quo... If we're lucky, maybe a win on another case at the Supreme Court..

 

[CMEBoston]

I voted for Trump in spite of his 2A stance
I voted for him on pure economic policy and the fact he isn’t Kamala Harris.

I’ll never understand the pipe dream that politicians will “give” you your rights. Especially the entrenched congress and senate.

My hope is Holman starts arresting leftist politicians for harboring the illegals and at best they won’t enact more gun laws.

 

[KBCraig]

Considering his past support for the AWB, red flag law, and confiscation of bump stocks without compensation in violation of 4th amendment rights.... I sure as hell hope not... Because no good can come from such...

Best we can hope for is status quo... If we're lucky, maybe a win on another case at the Supreme Court..

If we're lucky, the same people who handed him judicial nominees the first term, still have his ear. If not, we're screwed.

 

[KBCraig]

The role the federal government has to play in this is through the courts and striking down bad state laws. I want this to get handled the same way marriage reciprocity and driving recirprocity works, through the states, NOT the federal government.

Odd thing: marriage is recognized as an "official act", so it has Constitutional reciprocity. Driving licenses are not. There is no federal law or court ruling that says states must recognize other states' driver licenses. They do so through interstate compacts, or simply deciding to adopt universal recognition.

 

[granitestater]

I have slowed down, but I have historically travelled 60+ nights a year and 100,000+ airline miles. I care more about carrying in states other than my home state more than 95%+ of the people on this forum. I have most of the non-resident permits I can get to permit me to carry when I travel. I take guns in my checked luggage likely more than 99% of the people on this forum (most recently earlier this month).

Your assumptions or presumptions are totally off base.

What I care about is keeping the federal government out of my life and everyone else's. Everything the federal government does, ANYONE or ANY STATE can do better. We need smaller government, not bigger.

The role the federal government has to play in this is through the courts and striking down bad state laws. I want this to get handled the same way marriage reciprocity and driving recirprocity works, through the states, NOT the federal government.

The mantra is "FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD" so in no way am I going to support them taking action to solve a problem that is not a federal law issue. And as I said in my original post, it is unlikely that such a law, federal mandated carry reciprocity, passes constitutional muster short of another abuse of the commerce clause. The current SCOTUS treatment of the commerce clause it itself a total abortion and needs to be changed. Essentially any federal law over reach if it invokes the magic words of "interstate commerce" is constitutional. Not good.

so then, if this is so unconstitutional what about nationl carry for police? Since that will probably never go away, all of us who pay their salaries should have the same right to self defense when traveling.

Your arguments against national carry are nice and theoretical but in the modern era they are nothing more than fiction.

Sometimes, .gov needs to step in to right the wrongs. I view this similarly to the 1965 civil rights act that stoped racial discrimination in the south. Now, in the 21st century congress needs to step in to stop anti gun discrimination in places like NY, NJ Mass, Calif Hawaii.

 

[Twigg]

I'm happy with the lack of firearm laws in NH.
President Mump won't make a difference. At least until the next election cycle.