Trump to GOA - The War on Guns

🚨BREAKING: President Donald Trump speaks to GOA members:

"When I am President, I will always listen to Gun Owners of America… You're strong on guns and that's the way we want it! "

We are proud to be the only No Compromise gun lobby in Washington, D.C.! 🇺🇸🔫 pic.twitter.com/r8tX68cRF2
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) August 21, 2024

The promise to “listen to GOA” is what we’ll need to remind him of. And he needs to understand there are difference between them and NRA, and why.

Share on Facebook

Save

Author: admin

David Codrea is a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. View all posts by admin

3 thoughts on “Trump to GOA”

He can piss up a rope. Take the guns first and screw the law. Donald J Trump after Vegas.

admin says:

August 23, 2024 at 2:24 pm

We all know. So what are you going to do?
$PLC says:

August 24, 2024 at 2:17 pm

So he once uttered the same belief that virtually every single federally and most state Democrats have before backtracking after seeing the backlash. I agree that this is terrible, but he also appointed three SC justices who are supposed to be pro gun, when Dem appointees are always guaranteed to be 100% anti-gun.

We know Kamala wants to implement a permanent “take the guns first” law, not to mention gun confiscation orders for 25 million plus privately owned rifles in a so called “buy back” scheme. Her Marxist father probably gave Kamala the idea that all property belongs to the state, so it is being “bought back.” Stolen Valor Walz also supports the above, and wants to end states cooperating with honoring CCW permits. So good luck visiting to another state and being able to conceal carry as millions do on a daily basis.

One candidate spoke directly to the GOA because he knows he can’t win without their member support. The other would just as soon throw them all in prison given the left wing track record. Like Codrea suggested, we know Trump is a bit of a BSer, but he knows which groups he needs to support him. That’s why he backed down from previous gun control supporting comments, and why he is directly appealing to the most hard-core 2nd amendment supporting group at the federal level I have ever seen.

This is not the squishy NRA we are talking about. This is the group who are correctly blamed by the Dems for stopping gun control after the CT and FL school shootings when the NRA was willing to compromise our rights away.

I will take the guy who might be 70% as good as a Ron Paul or Thomas maasie on gun rights any day over a group who openly brag about being 0%. Besides, if you pay attention to the professional pollsters like Richard Baris, trump is literally the only republican we have who could win this race. What other candidate do you propose to beat the gun banners?

This analysis of mine is only directly relating to the gun rights aspect. I am not even bringing up Kamala wanting to legalize another 20 million plus illegal aliens who will make sure and vote for the party who does not believe individuals have a right to own firearms, let alone the freedom to post these thoughts on this website.

Let’s take the guy who we will at least have some sway over and who is talking directly to us instead of the people who openly despise us.

What say you?

Comments are closed.

HOW THINGS WORK AROUND HERE

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Anyone not happy with anything on this site at any time will get 100% of all money they paid to me refunded, no questions asked. (No gratuities solicited or accepted.)

Comment House Rules

Keep them on topic. Trying to hijack threads really grinds my gears. No spam.
I moderate them so I’ll get to them when I can.
No threats against anyone except me. No fights–this is my place and if things get ugly, I treat unruly visitors the same way as I would in my home. Do not feed trolls–I’ll take out the trash.
Try to keep it clean.
I’m the final arbiter. If you don’t like the rules, start your own damn blog.

WarOnGuns Correspondents

Story tips received via email and social media messages will be credited. Just let me know how you want to be recognized (real name, first name/last initial, or screen name.)

Link Policy

I maintained a WogRoll at the old Blogspot place predicated on reciprocity with like-minded RKBA-related sites. Truth be told, I never got much in terms of site visits to make the effort worth the time. I may try to do something again in the future, but for now, my hands are more than full trying to get a new site started.

Advertising Disclosure

This is a placeholder for now because I have not done ads on the old blog for years. In case I ever start them up here, this will be the policy in effect: The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don’t think we’re getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you’re stupid, too. I have had a few ads on the old site in the past and may do so again if I think it’s worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn’t buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don’t mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now–you’re not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer without complete disclosure.

About “The Only Ones”

So named from a comment by DEA agent Lee Paige, who told a classroom full of kids he was “the only one” qualified to be armed and then promptly shot himself in the foot, the purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it’s also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank, or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they’re involved in gun-related incidents.