Republicans are silent on gun control a week after Trump rally shooting

34 comments

1. Why would they talk about gun control? Republicans support the current interpretation of the 2nd amendment. Frankly, irrespective of my own views on guns, gun violence, and gun ownership in the U.S., I respect that they’re at least sticking to their principles on this issue.

   I know that this will get me downvoted, but at least there is one issue where they are not compromising. Unfortunately, it happens to be guns and the 2nd amendment.

2. NRA pays them well to not talk about it.

3. They should be over it by now

4. And why would they? Republicans believe that it is a people problem and not a gun problem. The gun didn’t shoot, the person with the gun did.

5. This is the final confirmation

   NOTHING will make them move on the topic. Not dead kids, not almost dead Messiahs, nothing

   The man killed at the rally probably wouldn’t support gun control after his own demise

   That’s how fervently these people worship guns

   The bad times are coming in America, because there comes a point where we have to say “fuck what they want, WE are tired of getting killed in school or at the grocery store”

   We can’t continue with BAU, we’ll rip each other apart

   Idk what the answer is. The 2nd will be necessary against P2025, while we still have a 2nd, but at the same time we’re all at risk of being shot anywhere, even by police invading our homes, so when is enough enough and we at least try to do a better job of regulating firearms?

6. Nope. Not silent. Still want to protect the constitution, our families, ourselves, and our properties with all types of arms. Very NOT silent.

7. Because we know guns are not the issue, they are inanimate objects.

8. Probably make the least restrictive states gun policies automatically reciprocal for travelers if I’m reading the campaign positions correctly if getting into the weeds 

   For example, a Texan traveling through California would have to follow Texas law irl.  Not saying they could shoot willy nilly (murder and mayhem still being jail-able offenses), but if legit self-defense, an counterparty suing for damages would have to file in Texas (= dismissal) 

9. But he’ll wear his “maxi pad of courage” for the rest of the election season.

   Because he “took a bullet for democracy”…

10. We need bigger more better guns. Good guns, great guns, we need the best guns!

11. At least they’re finally consistent about something.

12. Duh

13. The issue was making the rally a ‘gun free zone’. Gun-free zones can’t work because guns are just inanimate objects, and they don’t make their own decisions.

    Therefore, unrestricted access to guns can’t possibly create a problem under any circumstances.

14. Does anyone else think a Trump dictatorship would ban guns anyway?

15. Trump almost getting what’s been coming to him since he raped kids with Epstein, at the very latest, is one of the best arguments I’ve heard against gun control.

16. They claim it is all mental illness but then vote against funding for mental illness. Classic deflection of the issue

17. Of course they are. They don’t want to tell people right now they intend on taking their guns after Trump wins because they 100% will and point to this incident to justify.

18. Of course, of course.

19. So far Republicans have showed support for mandatory drug testing to purchase a firearm (Hunter Biden) and restrictions on open carry of long rifles (Trump assassination). I’m sure the laws are being written as these are important issues to conservatives…..or not.

20. Gun control means using both hands

21. Democrats being silent on gun control after this is more concerning. This is very low hanging fruit that no one is biting on, wtf? I cannot be smarter than democrat strategists.

22. >More than a week after the attempted assassination of Donald Trump with an assault weapon, his political supporters and fellow members of the Republican party have remained silent on the issue of tightening America’s notoriously lax gun control laws.

    >Reagan’s assassination attempt led to bipartisan support for reforms. Now, the GOP will probably focus on security instead

    Isn’t calling for gun control Democrats’ job?

    How many administrations called for gun control after an assassination or assassination attempt of a President or politician?

    We saw nothing after the Congressional baseball shooting. The Brady Bill was passed during Bush Sr. administration, more than a decade after Reagan was shot.

23. Almost like they are well aware it’s not the rifle it’s the maniac behind it that’s the problem.

24. How is that a surprise?

25. If he had been killed or wounded enough to drop out, they still wouldn’t talk about GUN CONTROL.

    Only how the demonrats suck./s

26. Once Trump gets in office guns will only be allowed to carry out his orders. Americans will then worry if they are on his hit list.

27. Why would they?

28. I mean, the attempt kind of re-enforces the pro-gun talking point of “the police and government can’t protect you”

29. If only every patron had a gun too, this never would’ve happened

30. Well because gun control wouldn’t of stopped anything

31. Maybe republicans should have more guns in their rallys, their logic stat that the good guys with guns will protect from all bad guys with guns.

32. Of course they are

33. The problem is that so are Dems. They should have been forcing gun controly, especially after it was a known fact the shooter wasn’t a lefty. It wasn’t a “both sides are polarized” issue but the Dems let it become that instead of the availability of arms.

34. You know what? Good.
    At least they’re consistent.

    I’m glad that at least they are not *more* in favour of gun control after their candidate almost gets shot than they usually are after a school gets massacred.