WATCH LIVE: Trump speaks at the NRA Convention! Also, Pence and Cruz!

Trump is scheduled to deliver a speech today at the NRA convention which is just getting underway. His speech should come soon after Pence, which I believe is early in the lineup, somewhere just after 12pm ET.

Ted Cruz is also on the agenda to deliver a speech there at 1:50 ET.

Below are some live streams you can watch:



Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
newest oldest most voted
Warren Z
Member
Active Member
Warren Z

Senator Ted Cruz: 2019 NRA-ILA Leadership Forum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hhhobaTBcY

CalvinCool
Member
Member
CalvinCool

Can we get a link to the Ted Cruz speech please? Eager to see him speak again. It’s been way too long.

Warren Z
Member
Active Member
Warren Z
AFVet4America
Member
Noble Member
AFVet4America

We should never agree to give up any of our rights to own any kind of weapon we want. If you give them anything they always want to take it all.

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

@AFVet Absolutely. People forget that Cornwallis marched on Lexington and Concord to seize privately owned firearms, including cannon

genmar
Member
Member
genmar

When will enough gun laws really be enough? With the number of laws and their redundancy already on the books it seems to me that there will NEVER be enough and to add more to the mix seems like the definition of insanity…more and more guns laws and the effect is the same…bad people kill people, with cars, knives, fists and yes even guns…and we should hold those PREDATORS in low/no regard….imagine a loved one of yours as the victim. The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America was expressly written in by our founders as a tool for citizens to protect this same United States of America from the menace of a tyrannical government that could and may be rising in this country. It was not put into the Bill of Rights for the purpose of duck hunting or target practice. It is to counter… Read more »

Sonofagip
Member
Active Member
Sonofagip

Trump supported the bump stock ban and does not have reliable pro-2nd Amendment views. Having him speak at an NRA Convention is a joke. This is why the NRA is losing membership.

Abe Lincoln
Member
Noble Member
Abe Lincoln

Bump stock essentially turned semi-automatics into automatics which were already banned to general public. So all he did was close a loop hole.

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Trusted Member
Chow Yun Fatty

Nope. It stayed as a semi automatic but employed a spring to allow the firing action to reset. Every round required the squeeze of the trigger. It simply moved the weapon and the finger remained stationary.

I never cared for them myself, and you can basically make a bump stock with a belt. But he should know you can’t give an inch to liberal assholes, or they’ll take a mile. Just like that little b*tch from MSD school said.

Now I’m hearing Cruz is backing federal red flag laws. Buch of p*ssies.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4787987/ted-cruz-supports-potential-red-flag-laws

Sallyjohanna
Member
Trusted Member
Sallyjohanna

My husband was not impressed with his….waste of money!

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

Same here, but that doesn’t give them a right to take it.

Sallyjohanna
Member
Trusted Member
Sallyjohanna

Yes you are totally correct and I believe the same as you! It makes me crazy when they create a circus over stuff like this. I just lost my beloved husband but if I remember correctly, he called it “a gimmick” and something about jamming ….. he was fiercely for the 2nd amendment …..and felt the right to own it….what is going to happen can we be charged with anything for having it in the house?

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

SallyjohannaSallyjohanna So sorry to hear about your husband. He was right, it is a gimmick, or a toy if you will. They’re banned on most gun ranges, difficult to shoot accurately and waste a whole lot of ammo.

Sallyjohanna
Member
Trusted Member
Sallyjohanna

Thank you Doc….I lost my constant companion of 44 yrs and a fantastic person! He loved his gun collection and bought our first gun when we bought our first house….I’ll never forget him taking me for my first time shooting a firearm ..after that initial shaking like Don Knotts on my first shot….I loved target practice!
What they are doing is like with everything else the Liberals do…control us….at any little entry point they can find….makes me sick!

Abe Lincoln
Member
Noble Member
Abe Lincoln

Chow Yun FattyChow Yun Fatty the importance here is that the resulting effect of bump stock is automatic firing action which was already banned via automatic gun ban.

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Trusted Member
Chow Yun Fatty

Once again, it wasn’t automatic firing. If you want to say it simulated automatic fire, that’s correct. Under no definition is one round per trigger squeeze automatic. Jerry Mickeluk can simulate automatic fire with his finger. These nuances are what leftist scum try to conflate to further trample on your rights. It is our responsibility to know these defining traits inside/out to stop their agenda from advancing further. Bump stocks had already passed the litmus test prior. The NRA bent over and basically allowed the ATF to interpret law. Funny, I thought that was the job of the courts.

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

You’re missing the point, Abe. This ban can be applied to anything that increases the rate of fire, such as a high performance trigger or an extended magazine.

bob434
Member
Active Member
bob434

his legislation called for ‘extreme risk’ evaluation before acting against people- red flag laws don’t require any court to determine a person is an extreme risk- and red flag laws violate due process- Ted’s proposal protects due process from the sounds of it- I don’t think his proposal is different than red flag laws- in that a person has to be proven to be an extreme risk- before action is taken- but I’m not sure- hard to tell from just a short clip- hopefully he doesn’t support actual red flag law

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Trusted Member
Chow Yun Fatty

Okay. I like the due process. But like everything else that goes before a judge, it’s up to their interpretation. Would you trust RGB with that decision? I wouldn’t. What happens when your next door liberal neighbor who doesn’t like guns or your 2A shirts decides to falsely accuse you of threatening them? Yes, you’ll have your day in court, perhaps even before they take away your arms, but the burden of proof now relies on you. In the event of a he said/ she said, do you think any judge, constitutionalist or not, is going to side with you? No. They’ll strip you of your arms “for safety” and if you get them back, don’t be surprised if you find your barrel with a nice bend in it.

bob434
Member
Active Member
bob434

the burden of proof is on the court- with red flag laws- you have no due process at all- your guns are confiscated- period- and you are deemed dangerous- however with what cruz is proposing I believe is that you go through due process, and have the ability and right to be evaluated and found to be non dangerous- I’m pretty sure there is a high standard for being deemed a ‘high risk’ or ‘extreme risk’ required by the court- so that your disgruntled neighbor or ex can’t simply declare you a danger and have your rights revoked without due process- The court has to determine, at their own expense, that you are an ‘extreme risk’ too mentally unstable to own guns- red flag laws have none o that- no due process- and these rad flag laws are beginning to sweep across this country- An ‘Extreme risk’ rule would be… Read more »

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Trusted Member
Chow Yun Fatty

I’m not debating that what Cruz is proposing is better than a standard red flag law. The point is this is still a case of potential punishment before the crime. From a text book point of view, the burden of proof lay with the court, yes. But ultimately one judge will rule on your situation. If that judge has a hair up her ass about gun owners, do you really think he/she’s going to go by the constitution? What’s to stop them from making a decision, not based on facts, but based on their emotion? Will state/federal oversight come in and overrule? No. So, okay it goes to the supreme court. Meanwhile you are still disarmed, you’re now made a public figure unwillingly, and your bill of rights lay in the hands of non elected individuals where your fate lay in the nominated balance of the supreme court. And who… Read more »

bob434
Member
Active Member
bob434

[[If that judge has a hair up her ass about gun owners, do you really think he/she’s going to go by the constitution?]]
Yes- that’s what the Constitution is for- and if a judge can’t abide by it, then it needs to go to supreme court- unfortunate that it should have to go there- but if that’;s what it takes, then that’s what it takes-
[[Time will come where wearing a MAGA hat will fall under “extreme risk”.]]
No sorry- we still have freedom of speech- prot4ected again by our constitution-
[[In certain cases I support this.]]
So doesn’t Ted- which was why he is introducing the extreme risk policy to undermine the unconstitutional, due process violating red flag laws-

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Trusted Member
Chow Yun Fatty

You trust the federal government, it’s inhabitants, and it’s system a lot more than I do.

Ciceroni Excogitatoris
Member
Noble Member
Ciceroni Excogitatoris

Please Abe… don’t use facts with these anti-Trumpers. They’re like MSNBC and CNN.

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

How can Tromp arbitrarily decide that something that the BATF said was perfectly legal suddenly is not? Under the NFA, it’s a lawful device. Congress didn’t change the law, this was done without grandfathering stocks that were already in posession or compensating owners for them. We had to turn them in, destroy them or become felons. That’s some real banana republic $#!+ right there.

Sonofagip
Member
Active Member
Sonofagip

Ciceroni ExcogitatorisCiceroni Excogitatoris If you’re against criticism of Trump for supporting gun control, you’re certainly not conservative.

David Jenson
Member
Trusted Member
David Jenson

SonofagipSonofagip

I didn’t realize a bump stock itself was a firearm and covered by the second amendment

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

No, the BATF decided that it was NFA compliant, until they didn’t.

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

Yeah, and his support for the red flag laws is downright scary. I hope that someone talked some sense into him.

Sonofagip
Member
Active Member
Sonofagip

@dr. strangelove Trump has the 2nd Amendment views of your typical establishment Republican. While not as awful as liberal Democrats, they aren’t conservative, and the NRA’s ostrich routine with Trump is strange.
http://time.com/5195469/donald-trump-gun-control-white-house/

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Noble Member
Dr. Strangelove

SonofagipSonofagip 10 years ago my doctor prescribed an anti-depressant for sleeplessness. (I took it for a day or two and threw it out.) Some day, SWAT will bust down my door because I suffer from depression and am a danger to myself and others.

Back to Top of Comments