Did Trump endanger Clinton with comment?

[GlitterRose]

24 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Actually there is an interview from a couple of months back in which George Stephanopolous can't get Hillary to acknowledge that the 2nd amendment is a right.  I can't find the video  but while talking about it she keeps answering by saying "If the second amendment is a right" Which indicates to me that one of her goals will be to heavily curtail our 2nd amendment rights. 

 

That being said Trump is way out of line with this little comment which he probably said tongue in cheek.  There are way too many people out the that may take this as a message.  After all Regan got shot by Hinkley because he was obsessed with Jody Foster and one of her movies suggested that, that was a good way to prove your love.

I've seen that thing before. She never said she wanted to do away with the 2nd Amendment. She said that just like with any other amendment, the government has the right to impose reasonable regulations. 

I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment, until the decision by the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities, and states, and the federal government had a right–as we do with every amendment–to impose reasonable regulations.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjA2bzCsrfOAhVEeSYKHZMXBwYQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fbig-government%2F2016%2F06%2F05%2Fhillary-clinton-refuses-say-right-bear-arms-constitutional%2F&usg=AFQjCNFvK8BW7e9yb7r8Xfpp6jNxYQiGcQ&sig2=Pb2oo5hwXcW-c5IYTjkGkw&bvm=bv.129389765,d.eWE

Just like with free speech, we have regulations about inciting violence...it shouldn't be off limits to discuss reasonable regulations to close the gun show loophole, and try to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists or the insane. 

[ellapenella]

11 minutes ago, Leonardo said:

What are you talking about? That started with Ray-Gun and every Administration since then has simply carried on the trend. I know you have a vested interest in hating on Obama, RavenHawk, but you could at least try to make what you write sound more believable.

Oh go cry a river to  Bill Ayers about it.

http://www.obamasrealfather.com/frank-marshall-davis/

[GlitterRose]

7 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

Oh no Donald Trump understands the constitution what to do?? oh no, he's a Patriot. Who would of ever thought a Patriot would rise up at this time.

What ever gave you the idea that he understands the Constitution? Our entire country was founded on the premise of freedom of religion. Trump said he wants a total shutdown of Muslims entering the country. Oh...now he's trying to backtrack that. But it clearly shows that he doesn't stand for the ideals that our country was founded on, and he doesn't even have a rudimentary understanding of Constitutional rights and protections. And it's pretty clear that he's not interested in learning any of that from people who know it. 

Edited August 10, 2016 by ChaosRose

[ellapenella]

40 minutes ago, Sweetpumper said:

Flashback: Clinton Suggested Obama Would Be Assassinated

While leftists go ape over Trump's Second Amendment comments, a reminder that Hillary literally said Obama might be murdered in 2008

In 2008, Hillary declared that she wouldn’t drop out of the presidential race against Barack Obama, despite trailing way behind, because ‘anything can happen’ and then she cited the assassination of RFK.

“We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.” Hillary stated at the time.

Hillary’s campaign went into spin mode almost immediately, saying that people “misinterpreted what she meant,” and that “people did not understand the context in which she made this reference”.

 

http://www.infowars.com/flashback-clinton-suggested-obama-would-be-assassinated/

are her lies catching up to her? thanks to the internet. It's great right that we don't have to rely on mainstream media to spoon feed us. They're loosing the infowars to control the narrative.

[ellapenella]

Just now, ChaosRose said:

What ever gave you the idea that he understands the Constitution? Our entire country was founded on the premise of freedom of religion. Trump said he wants a total shutdown of Muslims entering the country. Oh...now he's trying to backtrack that. But it clearly shows that he doesn't stand for the ideals that our country was founded on, and he doesn't even have a rudimentary understanding of Constitutional rights and protections. 

whatever gave YOU the idea he didn't?

[GlitterRose]

Just now, Ellapennella said:

whatever gave YOU the idea he didn't?

Obviously, you didn't read what I typed. Our country was founded on freedom of religion. He wants to bar people from entering our country based on their religion. Our Constitution does not allow for that. 

[+OverSword]

5 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

I've seen that thing before. She never said she wanted to do away with the 2nd Amendment. She said that just like with any other amendment, the government has the right to impose reasonable regulations.

Rose, over and over again she prefaced everything she said with the phrase "assuming the second amendment is a right" and George, no matter how much he (surprisingly) tried, could not get her to say the second amendment is an American right.  To me this means the she actually believes that it is not a right and I'm quite sure her intentions are to undermine it or do away with it entirely.

[GlitterRose]

1 minute ago, OverSword said:

Rose, over and over again she prefaced everything she said with the phrase "assuming the second amendment is a right" and George, no matter how much he (surprisingly) tried, could not get her to say the second amendment is an American right.  To me this means the she actually believes that it is not a right and I'm quite sure her intentions are to undermine it or do away with it entirely.

Despite the wild claims over the last 8 years of "Obama's gonna take yer guns," I have yet to see him show up at my door and ask for mine. Nor have I seen any legislation even proposed that would result in this. 

You're gonna believe what you're gonna believe. I think she avoids saying it because there are clearly people out there who shouldn't have access to guns (terrorists and the insane). And there's a lobby that has effectively blocked anyone from doing anything about that. 

[+Liquid Gardens]

6 minutes ago, OverSword said:

 To me this means the she actually believes that it is not a right and I'm quite sure her intentions are to undermine it or do away with it entirely.

But why would it matter since Presidents do not have that power?

[ellapenella]

 

 

 

[ellapenella]

9 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

Obviously, you didn't read what I typed. Our country was founded on freedom of religion. He wants to bar people from entering our country based on their religion. Our Constitution does not allow for that. 

We will NEVER agree. I see what direction You want the country to go in and I don't wish to follow that false direction. We don't have to let anyone come here to be correct but we do but come on already get real about the problem.

[GlitterRose]

Just now, Liquid Gardens said:

But why would it matter since Presidents do not have that power?

I think most Americans believe very strongly in the 2nd Amendment, but it doesn't mean they don't also believe that there should be background checks, closing of gun show loophole, etc. She could appoint Supreme Court justices who agree with her about those things. 

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, Liquid Gardens said:

But why would it matter since Presidents do not have that power?

So you actually believe that a president has no influence over this kind of thing whether it be through court appointments, presidential orders or simply encouraging others to introduce legislation huh?  Did a President have the power to push through healthcare reform?  You likely would have said not really until it happened, right?

[GlitterRose]

6 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

We will NEVER agree. I see what direction You want the country to go in and I don't wish to follow that false direction. We don't have to let anyone come here to be correct but we do but come on already get real about the problem.

To be correct, we cannot ban people from a particular religion from our country. We can impose sanctions on countries that harbor terrorists, and yes, we can restrict immigration from those countries. We cannot impose a blanket ban on people from a particular religion from entering our country. 

If you don't agree that our country was founded on the principle of freedom of religion, then I suggest you look into the founding of our country and what the founding fathers believed. You seem to idolize them so much, yet not know very much about them.

Edited August 10, 2016 by ChaosRose

[ellapenella]

Some of you need to STOP misleading people. There was a time that  when people came to America THEY had to be examined and not carry in disease's nowadays they place next to children in school and all. People had to go through a process before entering our country.  Please just stop lying about what's going on in the world already because no matter how many times some of you continue to lie it is still nothing but a nasty lie,that's causing harm.

[Leonardo]

1 minute ago, OverSword said:

So you actually believe that a president has no influence over this kind of thing whether it be through court appointments, presidential orders or simply encouraging others to introduce legislation huh?  Did a President have the power to push through healthcare reform?  You likely would have said not really until it happened, right?

The right to bear arms is written into the Constitution, but that document is silent with regards healthcare - so those things aren't comparable.

A President, by appointing the judges of the SCOTUS, can have an influence over how the 2nd Amendment is interpreted, but neither the President nor the SCOTUS can "take away" that Amendment. That can only happen via an act of Congress and requires a supermajority of House and Senate, which is exceedingly unlikely in reality.

[GlitterRose]

3 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

Some of you need to STOP misleading people. There was a time that  when people came to America THEY had to be examined and not carry in disease's nowadays they place next to children in school and all. People had to go through a process before entering our country.  Please just stop lying about what's going on in the world already because no matter how many times some of you continue to lie it is still nothing but a nasty lie,that's causing harm.

People still have to go through a process before entering our country. There are plenty of American citizens who don't have their children immunized and then they send them to public schools. There is international travel every day. 

If you're so concerned about disease, then consider all of the US citizens who are in the Olympics in Zika-ridden Rio. They're all coming back here. Are you suggesting we reneg on their passports? 

Edited August 10, 2016 by ChaosRose

[ellapenella]

That's just crazy that ANYONE would believe they could changed that fact about America and why OUR founding Fathers gave to us the 2nd amendment and to now why they did so. 

Edited August 10, 2016 by Ellapennella

[ellapenella]

Seriously, no one is giving up that because if that were to ever come about we know that tyranny is looking us in the face and America is done . That's the key though right? that's the entire force behind the 2nd amendment. To fight back against a government that went full tyranny on us.

[GlitterRose]

3 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

That's just crazy that ANYONE would believe they could changed that fact about America and why OUR founding Fathers gave to us the 2nd amendment and to now why they did so. 

Like I said, most Americans believe strongly in the 2nd Amendment. That doesn't mean we think terrorists or crazy people should have them. 

And I keep repeating...our country was founded on the principle of freedom of religion. People came here to escape persecution over their religion. Now you support a candidate who wants to persecute people over their religion. Literally, who wants to bar them from the country over it. 

He also wants to torture people and commit war crimes.

Edited August 10, 2016 by ChaosRose

[GlitterRose]

1 minute ago, Ellapennella said:

Seriously, no one is giving up that because if that were to ever come about we know that tyranny is looking us in the face and America is done . That's the key though right? that's the entire force behind the 2nd amendment. To fight back against a government that went full tyranny on us.

What tyranny is it that you feel has been committed against you? Is it that some poor people now have health care? 

[ellapenella]

2 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

What tyranny is it that you feel has been committed against you? Is it that some poor people now have health care? 

What? First of all the government wasn't designed to support you or to educate you or to provide healthcare for you. It's there to protect us is all.

[ellapenella]

and if it can't protect us, we don't need it.

[ellapenella]

I don't like that our borders are and have been unprotected for far too long. I don;'t like that  they have been shipping in radicals.I don't like that criminals of treason are occupying the White house. We The People of this land   aren't stupid we know that Obama is a tyrant and so is Hillary we don't want them.

[+Liquid Gardens]

15 minutes ago, OverSword said:

So you actually believe that a president has no influence over this kind of thing whether it be through court appointments, presidential orders or simply encouraging others to introduce legislation huh?  Did a President have the power to push through healthcare reform?  You likely would have said not really until it happened, right?

Where is there an amendment that deals directly with healthcare reform?  I didn't say she has no influence, but you need a super-majority of states (3/4 I believe) to amend the Constitution and the President's approval is not required or requested.  Thus, "Hillary's going to take away all your guns" kinda comes off as a little ridiculous.  This is not at all directed at you, but it gets tiresome to read people complaining about something that a member of the government is going to do when it's actually 'the people' who are specifically endowed with the power to make happen or not.  If we're concerned about gun control then we should be looking at our representatives and neighbors, not the President.  If we don't want the President to have as much influence, we can address that also in the representatives we elect.  I say let's blame ourselves first, we are the ones given the ultimate power regardless of whether we are motivated to use it or not.