Wednesday, November 09, 2016

Donald Trump Will Be The Death Of The Second Amendment

Bob Owens at Bearing Arms warns us (too little, too late) that Trump is a RINO who probably not  support the the Second Amendment:

Donald Trump Will Be The Death Of The Second Amendment:
(Posted at 2:13 pm on February 15, 2016 by Bob Owens)
 Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz on Sunday said primary rival Donald Trump will erase the Second Amendment if he is elected. “And if Donald Trump becomes president, the Second Amendment will be written out of the Constitution, because it is abundantly clear that Donald Trump is not a conservative,” Cruz said on ABC’s “This Week.” Trump has regularly insisted on the campaign trail that he is in favor of the right to keep and bear arms. Cruz also said Trump would not “invest the [political] capital to confirm a conservative” nominee on the court. I have bad news for supporters of Mr. Trump; every bit of evidence that we have about Donald Trump’s political core suggests that Senator Cruz is probably correct. Trump’s personal history shows that he is, at best, a “Republican in Name Only,” (RINO), who has changed his party affiliation at least five times.
All of this may be true, and Trump may stab Second Amendment supporters in the back, as Owes warns.

But I'm not convinced.   I don't think that Trump has erasure of the 2nd Amendment on his agenda.
Whether he has its support in mind, we have yet to learn.

On the other hand ... what were our alternatives?

Hillary?  She categorically stated that one of her first actions as President would be to gut the Second Amendment.

If Trump is the president (which he is), and his worst action would be to not actively support the 2nd Amendment (counter to his campaign promises), then we are faced with a president which does NOT live up to his promises.   But he is  not yet an avowed antithetical foe of the constitution.

Considering the paltry alternatives, a lackadaisical president seems preferable to an ambitious president with an agenda.

I don't like the prospect of being a casualty to a President who doesn't much care about the Constitution; but I find it vaguely preferable to being dead-center on Hillary's campaign promises.

Perhaps we'll see that a President with no agenda is preferable to a President with a vindictive attitude toward the gun owners.

When the choices are this vague, a lack of intention to do harm is marginally preferable to an intention to kick ass.

Which leads us to Field Marshal Helmut Von Moltke's Four Types of Military Leaders:

In the mid-1800s a Prussian Field Marshal named Helmuth Karl Bernhard Graf von Moltke developed a means to evaluate his officers.

Smart & Lazy – I make them my Commanders because they make the right thing happen but find the easiest way to accomplish the mission. Smart & Energetic – I make them my General Staff Officers because they make intelligent plans that make the right things happen. Dumb & Lazy – There are menial tasks that require an officer to perform that they can accomplish and they follow orders without causing much harm. Dumb & Energetic – These are dangerous and must be eliminated. They cause things to happen but the wrong things so cause trouble.

In the case of Trump, we find a leader who is Smart and Energetic; not perhaps the best leader, but at least not dangerous.

Hillary, however much she may consider herself smart, is actually dumb.  But energetic?
Oh, yeah!

See the matrix .. that's a dangerous combination.

As a nation, we are fortunate that we avoided this.  we've already seen the consequences of a Commander in Chief who is dumb and energetic ... wasn't eight years of Obama enough to teach us?

(Apparently it was, else we would have elected another Obama for another eight years of bad timing and worse choices;  after all, she WAS 'in the room' when our Ambassador in Benghazi phoned begging for support when he was under attack, and she DID decide that her best option was to sit on her thumb!)


Archer said...

Bob Owens is complaining that Trump will end the Second Amendment, and holding up evidence that Trump is not actively and committedly pro-2A?

I'm with you: What were our alternatives?

Hillary, with her active and committed anti-2A agenda?

Johnson, who took no position personally but who picked a VP with an active anti-2A history?

I'd pick someone who may or may not support us over someone who actively opposes us -- and has us in her cross-hairs -- any day.

And to Bob Owens: Get it together, man! The time to complain about Trumps 2A bona fides was back in May, during the GOP primary, when we had other decent options.

Anonymous said...

What @Archer said.

cassierina said...

Too little too late? You realize he wrote that article in February, right? 8 months ago. During the primaries. When there WERE better choices. "The time to complain was in May?" How about 3 months before that. Reading is hard.

Jerry The Geek said...

You're right, Cassierina; reading IS hard! But, I was 5 years old before I learned to write my name, and it was a while longer before I realized I had been writing the "R" (in script) upside down. So I think that Writing is quite a challenge, as well.

I don't write well, but I do write. I don't think so purty good either, but I do think. And one thing I do know is that when a man writes and publishes his thoughts, he should be sure of what he says in a wide audience.

Maybe I should learn to practice that in my own writing. You think?

(Thanks for your comment Cassierina!)

cassierina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.