# Trump... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 10, 2019, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002 "2019-09-10T19:55:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/161 "2019-09-13T22:15:17Z")
> [@Locrian](#): > > I took the “vote for Satan” comment as he’d rather vote for a phony character rather than support a Democrat. 😃 I took from it that he’s openly admitting to being evil. And when he then claimed that he prefers Satan because he considered gun-grabbing democrats to be tyrants, I took from that that he’s spectacularly stupid. What, the brainless tool thinks that Satan solicits his electorate’s opinions? ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/162 "2019-09-13T22:29:33Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I’m saying the biggest thing he had to do was show up. > > Suppose I worked in a store and I knew they were having a secret promotion where they were planning on giving a ten thousand dollar prize to the one hundredth customer to enter the store next Saturday. And you’re my buddy so I called you and told you “Hey, be at the store this Saturday and stand in the parking lot and count customers. When you get to ninety-nine, be the next guy to come inside.” You do this and win ten thousand dollars. > > Would you say that you had somehow earned that ten thousand dollars by deciding to not stay home in bed? That your decision to show up and count to a hundred somehow proved that you were more skilled than everyone else? Walk me through your analogy. Who is Trump’s buddy with the inside information? Why did this buddy pick Trump to stand there? The buddy could have picked Santorum, Cruz, and a host of others. Why Trump? What did Obama do that Trump didn’t? It defies logic that he did nothing and got the presidency when there were dozens of others who did almost everything and still couldn’t get there. Trump did things, even if you don’t want to acknowledge that. He got himself attention, sold a message enough other people wanted to hear, and got elected. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/163 "2019-09-13T22:40:32Z")
The point about the popular vote is simply that Trump did not win with a majority of the voting public. Yes, the win was handed to him by the system in place, but that does not change the fact that the “will of the people” to the tune of _millions_ is for the other candidate. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/164 "2019-09-13T22:49:30Z")
All that trump did was to be an overt racist and hateful piece of shit. The republican party has been grooming their electorate to be racist pieces of shit for decades (see: southern strategy), all as part of polarizing their electorate. Quite simply they discovered that evil shits are motivated, and so by aligning yourself against all that is good, you can scoop up various kinds of racists, bigots, mysogynists, xenophobes, cowards, and so on by painting decent people as the enemy, and themselves as being your friend. All they had to do is abandon all decency, and given how overtly well appealing to the toilet had been at keeping them relevant despite tides turning against them, discarding decency was an easy sell. The thing is, though, that prior to Trump they were all career politicians, and remembered the past years when even while you were courting the nazis, you couldn’t _publicly_ court the nazis, because you’d be pilloried by the less-shitty parts of your electorate. They felt they had to toe the line, be publicly decentish while still throwing bones to the deplorables. At the same time, Russia had been pumping the interwebs full of divisive propaganda intended to divide the populace and erode the stability of the country, with the deliberate aim of bolstering the human shitstains and encouraging them to further depravity. This meant that when Trump strolled in with no decency at all, they were at a sudden disadvantage - he was publicly being the worthless, idiotic shitstain that none of them could bring themselves to be. By being a complete shitpile he essentially stole the electorate the the less deranged republicans had been cultivating for themselves, leaving them caught with their pants down. It’s not that Trump did anything _clever_, mind you, he just was willing to dive into the sewer that the republicans had been merely wading in. And by all evidence he accomplished this not through a manipulative act, but because he just really is that horrible. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/165 "2019-09-13T23:59:25Z")
> [@robby](#): > > [ALL POSSIBLE RESPONSES TO “THEY SHOULD GET IN LINE AND DO IT THE RIGHT WAY, THE WAY MY FAMILY DID,” WITH CITATIONS](https://deportnation.com/all-possible-responses-to-they-should-get-in-line-and-do-it-the-right-way-the-way-my-family-did-ab0b7dbcbb26) That totally fucking rocks! Thanks for posting it, **robby**! ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/166 "2019-09-14T00:09:06Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > Walk me through your analogy. Who is Trump’s buddy with the inside information? Why did this buddy pick Trump to stand there? The buddy could have picked Santorum, Cruz, and a host of others. Why Trump? What did Obama do that Trump didn’t? > > It defies logic that he did nothing and got the presidency when there were dozens of others who did almost everything and still couldn’t get there. Trump did things, even if you don’t want to acknowledge that. He got himself attention, sold a message enough other people wanted to hear, and got elected. It’s pretty clear by now that you don’t want to see it. So keep on thinking that Donald Trump is a mastermind. And every time he screws up, just tell yourself he’s playing four-dimensional chess. ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/167 "2019-09-14T01:08:17Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Cite, though? What exactly is the phrase “take our guns” being used to mean in this context? > > If Beto or any other politician is using it to mean _“summarily taking away all legally-owned guns from everybody”_, that’s flat-out unconstitutional as the 2nd Amendment currently stands, and the vast majority of Americans (including me) would oppose it. It’s not going to happen, realistically speaking, and no politician with any hope of actually being elected would seriously propose it. > > If, on the other hand, it just means _“slightly increase restrictions on the types of guns that can be owned or eligibility for owning a gun”_, that’s not necessarily unreasonable **or** unconstitutional. If elected legislators have the support of their constituencies for enacting such measures, well, that’s part of the principle of majority rule in a republic. Gun owners should recognize and accept the ups and downs of (legal and constitutional) majority rule, rather than throwing tantrums about alleged “tyranny” any time a law is passed that they don’t like. > If gun owners are willing to make the enactment of some additional **constitutional and legal** restrictions on gun ownership an excuse for literally starting a war, **that’s on them** , not on the politicians or voters supporting such restrictions. > > If you’re saying _“Any attempt to make gun ownership even slightly more restricted in any way is an intolerable act of oppression against gun owners, and I intend to respond to any such restrictions, however legally and constitutionally enacted, with armed and violent resistance”_, then your political opponents are not the ones looking tyrannical and bloodthirsty here. > > If you are responding to proposed **legal and constitutional** restrictions on gun ownership with raging aggressive rhetoric about how you’ll refuse to comply with any such restrictions even if it means starting a god-damned war or whatever, I can see how the FBI would consider it reasonable to red-flag you. > > On the other hand, if you make a reasonable case why you think a particular proposed legal and constitutional restriction on gun ownership would be a bad idea, **while at the same time as a law-abiding rational gun owner you acknowledge you need to comply with legal and constitutional restrictions even if you don’t like them** , then you’ll be more likely to get moderate gun-ownership supporters like me defending your position. > > But if you’re simply raging that you’re going to go to war if anybody does anything that could be remotely interpreted as “taking your guns” in any way, no matter how legally and constitutionally, then you come across as paranoid and dangerous. I’m not gonna defend that. > > > > E @ElijahSchaffer Just google the phrase and look for your self. We have a second amendment. And we have a process for modifying the amendments. The left doesn’t give a fuck about the constitution, and wants a confrontation. The matter is simple. Change the amendment it self, or leave it the fuck alone. You can add your own thoughts and what you feel is right, but that’s doesn’t change the fact that this is wrong, unconstitutional, dangerous, and citizens have every right to fight it. It would, without a doubt, cause thousands of deaths and hundreds of Waco’s and Ruby Ridges, and a real deal constitutional crisis. Several of your party leaders are in the same camp as Beto. ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/168 "2019-09-14T01:21:16Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Annoyed wouldn’t lose. Because he wouldn’t show up for the war. > > He’s internet tough. If the government ever did decide to take his guns, he’d hand them over. > > Then after he got home, washed his face, and changed his underwear, he’d go online and brag about how he faced down the entire army. And then he had sex with a woman! And then he scored the winning touchdown and home run - in the same game! And then he fought a lion and karate chopped it to death! And then President Trump came to his house and shook his hand and said they were best friends! And then when his mom told him to take the garbage out, he told her no, he’ll do it tomorrow! Because he’s always winning! What I would or wouldn’t do doesnt matter. It’s what would happen, even if I died tomorrow. I’m sure that there are many on here that would just love to watch some of the feds gunfight citizens, but I wouldn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/169 "2019-09-14T01:34:01Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > We have a second amendment. And we have a process for modifying the amendments. The left doesn’t give a fuck about the constitution, and wants a confrontation. > > The matter is simple. Change the amendment it self, or leave it the fuck alone. > > You can add your own thoughts and what you feel is right, but that’s doesn’t change the fact that this is wrong, unconstitutional, dangerous, and citizens have every right to fight it. > > It would, without a doubt, cause thousands of deaths and hundreds of Waco’s and Ruby Ridges, and a real deal constitutional crisis. The present interpretation of the Second Amendment is a recent thing pushed into law thanks to NRA money, and can be changed back to what it used to be without changing the amendment. And if right wingers are so attached to their guns they are willing to murder for them, that’s just an indication that it’s a good idea those guns be removed. Right wingers are the primary source of terrorism in the US. ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/170 "2019-09-14T01:54:19Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > The present interpretation of the Second Amendment is a recent thing pushed into law thanks to NRA money, and can be changed back to what it used to be without changing the amendment. > > And if right wingers are so attached to their guns they are willing to murder for them, that’s just an indication that it’s a good idea those guns be removed. Right wingers are the primary source of terrorism in the US. All of the first paragraph is false, ignores historical context and intent, ignores the federalist papers, and is revisionist horseshit. ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/171 "2019-09-14T01:57:08Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And if right wingers are so attached to their guns they are willing to murder for them, that’s just an indication that it’s a good idea those guns be removed. Right wingers are the primary source of terrorism in the US. “Murder” he says. And if people refuse to give them up? They’ll be murdered by the government. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/172 "2019-09-14T02:20:31Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > [https://twitter.com/betoorourke/status/1172342680178716672?s=21](https://twitter.com/betoorourke/status/1172342680178716672?s=21) > > [https://twitter.com/repswalwell/status/1172527925687721989?s=21](https://twitter.com/repswalwell/status/1172527925687721989?s=21) “We’re going to take your AR-15” in the sense of “We’re going to pass laws making ownership of AR-15s illegal” is not necessarily an unconstitutional infringement of Second Amendment rights. It might be, but that’s for the courts to decide, if a legislature does end up passing such a law. > [@Annoyed](#): > > We have a second amendment. And we have a process for modifying the amendments. […] > > The matter is simple. Change the amendment it self, or leave it the fuck alone. You seem to think that the existence of the Second Amendment means that placing **any** type of legal restriction on owning **any** type of gun is unconstitutional and can only be justified by formally changing the Constitution. That’s simply not true. Gun ownership **can** to **some** extent be legally regulated without infringing the underlying right “to keep and bear arms”. Where and how far such regulation properly extends is a matter for the courts. > [@Annoyed](#): > > You can add your own thoughts and what you feel is right, but that’s doesn’t change the fact that this is wrong, unconstitutional, dangerous, and citizens have every right to fight it. Those aren’t “facts”. Whether outright banning of all AR-15s (which I personally am not convinced would be a good idea, btw) is morally **wrong** is a matter of opinion. Whether outright banning of all AR-15s is **unconstitutional** is, as I said, a matter for the courts. Whether outright banning of all AR-15s is **dangerous** depends largely on whether hitherto law-abiding gun owners decide they’re entitled to just ignore a law they don’t happen to like, and resort to violent crime in response to attempts to enforce that law. Whether **“citizens have every right to fight”** a law banning all AR-15s depends on what you mean by “fight”. Certainly you have every right to fight such a law by expressing your disagreement with it, by encouraging your representatives to vote against it (but leaving out the death threats plz, thx), and by using all forms of legal protest and debate to change people’s minds about supporting such a law. But citizens aren’t entitled to “fight” such a law by turning into violent terrorist groups bloodily resisting its enforcement. I have no sympathy with that. > [@Annoyed](#): > > It would, without a doubt, cause thousands of deaths and hundreds of Waco’s and Ruby Ridges, and a real deal constitutional crisis. That sort of implied threat of violence is not helping your case one little bit. If American gun owners are really crazy enough to respond to the passage of laws banning **one** high-profile type of firearm (however ill-considered or ineffective such a law might be) with massive unlawful violence causing “thousands of deaths” in “hundreds” of terroristic uprisings, then they’re not responsible enough to be trusted with a water pistol. Wild-eyed threats about how destructively dangerous you’re going to become if legislators respond to **popular majority opinion** about firearm danger by lawfully enacting legislation banning one particular type of firearm does not make your dissent from that popular opinion look more reasonable. It just makes you look like a belligerent lunatic who needs to be red-flagged into a padded cell ASAP to avoid danger to himself and others. TL;DR: Why on earth are you **encouraging** people to fear gun owners as irresponsible, lawless and dangerous by ranting and raving about how irresponsible, lawless and dangerous you’re going to be if a popular majority decides to pass a law you don’t like? You are simply feeding into stereotypes of gun owners as irrational untrustworthy nuts with no fundamental respect for the rule of law. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/173 "2019-09-14T02:32:32Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > All of the first paragraph is false, ignores historical context and intent, ignores the federalist papers, and is revisionist horseshit. So you’re on board with the second paragraph of the post you quoted, then? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/174 "2019-09-14T02:35:02Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > It’s pretty clear by now that you don’t want to see it. So keep on thinking that Donald Trump is a mastermind. And every time he screws up, just tell yourself he’s playing four-dimensional chess. Ah yes… the refuge of someone who clearly has no clue how to apply his own analogy. “I’d tell you, but you wouldn’t understand.” Idiot. I don’t think Trump is playing four dimensional chess. Never have. He couldn’t have created the situation he took advantage of, but he was smart enough to take advantage of the situation. There is a difference. If you want to keep telling yourself he is a complete idiot that is going to screw himself out of the presidency, knock yourself out if it makes you feel better. This is exactly why he has a chance to win again. No one gave him any chance to win the first time, yet he did. So deny he is capable of doing it again and we are all in huge trouble. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/175 "2019-09-14T02:45:50Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > We have a second amendment. And we have a process for modifying the amendments. The left doesn’t give a fuck about the constitution, and wants a confrontation. That’s two lies in one statement. The Left absolutely does care about the constitution. That’s why they talk about it and talk about following it, something your hero, Trump, is unable to do because he is completely unaware of what’s in the constitution. And the only confrontation the Left wants is thre one at the ballot box. Agan, something the Rght is fairly adverse to, given both their proven stance on unconstitutional restrictions on voting and their acceptance of foreign meddling in the electoral process. > [@Annoyed](#): > > You can add your own thoughts and what you feel is right, but that’s doesn’t change the fact that this is wrong, unconstitutional, dangerous, and citizens have every right to fight it. Yet, when the Left points out Trump’s unconstitutional stunts and goes to court over his writing out an executive order to illegally override the constitution, the Right freaks out. Take a wild guess what “IOKWARDI” means. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/176 "2019-09-14T03:11:02Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > TL;DR: Why on earth are you **encouraging** people to fear gun owners as irresponsible, lawless and dangerous by ranting and raving about how irresponsible, lawless and dangerous you’re going to be if a popular majority decides to pass a law you don’t like? It’s simple; the right wing is and has always been fundamentally terroristic. They want everyone else on the planet to be terrified into obedience, or dead. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/177 "2019-09-14T03:23:12Z")
> [@Kamino\_Neko](#): > > And Trump didn’t even have to do that. > > Trump was ‘go to the store and stand around until I tell you to go in’. And make sure you have picture ID! ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/178 "2019-09-14T04:17:56Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > “We’re going to take your AR-15” in the sense of “We’re going to pass laws making ownership of AR-15s illegal” is not necessarily an unconstitutional infringement of Second Amendment rights. It might be, but that’s for the courts to decide, if a legislature does end up passing such a law. > You seem to think that the existence of the Second Amendment means that placing **any** type of legal restriction on owning **any** type of gun is unconstitutional and can only be justified by formally changing the Constitution. > > That’s simply not true. Gun ownership **can** to **some** extent be legally regulated without infringing the underlying right “to keep and bear arms”. Where and how far such regulation properly extends is a matter for the courts. > Those aren’t “facts”. Whether outright banning of all AR-15s (which I personally am not convinced would be a good idea, btw) is morally **wrong** is a matter of opinion. Whether outright banning of all AR-15s is **unconstitutional** is, as I said, a matter for the courts. Whether outright banning of all AR-15s is **dangerous** depends largely on whether hitherto law-abiding gun owners decide they’re entitled to just ignore a law they don’t happen to like, and resort to violent crime in response to attempts to enforce that law. > > Whether **“citizens have every right to fight”** a law banning all AR-15s depends on what you mean by “fight”. Certainly you have every right to fight such a law by expressing your disagreement with it, by encouraging your representatives to vote against it (but leaving out the death threats plz, thx), and by using all forms of legal protest and debate to change people’s minds about supporting such a law. > > But citizens aren’t entitled to “fight” such a law by turning into violent terrorist groups bloodily resisting its enforcement. I have no sympathy with that. > That sort of implied threat of violence is not helping your case one little bit. If American gun owners are really crazy enough to respond to the passage of laws banning **one** high-profile type of firearm (however ill-considered or ineffective such a law might be) with massive unlawful violence causing “thousands of deaths” in “hundreds” of terroristic uprisings, then they’re not responsible enough to be trusted with a water pistol. > > Wild-eyed threats about how destructively dangerous you’re going to become if legislators respond to **popular majority opinion** about firearm danger by lawfully enacting legislation banning one particular type of firearm does not make your dissent from that popular opinion look more reasonable. It just makes you look like a belligerent lunatic who needs to be red-flagged into a padded cell ASAP to avoid danger to himself and others. > TL;DR: Why on earth are you **encouraging** people to fear gun owners as irresponsible, lawless and dangerous by ranting and raving about how irresponsible, lawless and dangerous you’re going to be if a popular majority decides to pass a law you don’t like? You are simply feeding into stereotypes of gun owners as irrational untrustworthy nuts with no fundamental respect for the rule of law. Funny, Beto states “Hell yes we’re going to take your AR-15’s and AK-47’s” and you go from that to some weird, watered down, personal interpretation of what that means, ignoring Swalwells comment altogether. This is what it means: “We’re going to take your rifles, by force if need be, if you resist we are going to red flag you and publicly label you a domestic terrorist”. I am not threatening anyone, I’m stating a fact. If the left starts to go and overnight make felons out of millions of its own citizens, confiscating their weapons, and labeling them terrorists, all of which are mostly good, law abiding people, there would be a disaster. There’s no stopping it, there’s no way around it. Millions of people believe, deeper than any other position, that those rifles are the last stand. Would they all fight? Of course not, but thousands probably would. This is how twisted the left is. They will go after their own people, by force if they could, to get what they want. You guys think Trump is the divider in chief mini hitler, but your own party is doing a damn fine job of alienating millions of its own citizens on their own. ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/179 "2019-09-14T04:27:59Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > It’s simple; the right wing is and has always been fundamentally terroristic. They want everyone else on the planet to be terrified into obedience, or dead. Always good for a chuckle watching hardcore lefties opine on what they think the right is all about. It’s funny because leftwing politics has killed more people on planet earth than any other, continuing to do so to this very day, yet the big bad right wing just wants our constitutionally protected rights to be left alone. Time and time again throughout history leftwing politics have disarmed, starved, murdered, stolen, and crippled continents, and even after ALL that, they STILL think everyone else is the baddie. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002/180 "2019-09-14T04:28:41Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > Funny, Beto states “Hell yes we’re going to take your AR-15’s and AK-47’s” and you go from that to some weird, watered down, personal interpretation of what that means, ignoring Swalwells comment altogether. > > This is what it means: “We’re going to take your rifles, by force if need be, if you resist we are going to red flag you and publicly label you a domestic terrorist”. > > I am not threatening anyone, I’m stating a fact. If the left starts to go and overnight make felons out of millions of its own citizens, confiscating their weapons, and labeling them terrorists, all of which are mostly good, law abiding people, there would be a disaster. There’s no stopping it, there’s no way around it. Again, most Republicans do think that there should be things like red flag laws. Are they left wing? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump/840002.md?page=10)