As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Trump: No to “Extreme Vetting” for Gun Purchases

President Trump was asked earlier today in South Korea by a reporter from NBC if he would consider “extreme vetting” for prospective gun purchasers. He said that it wouldn’t have stopped the killer, but might have stopped the person who confronted the killer, from getting a gun.

Making some kind of political point, the reporter, dumbly, compared extreme vetting of foreigners trying to enter the country from places where terrorists run rampant to extreme vetting of people trying to exercise a constitutional right.

Here’s the exchange.

Reporter: Thank you, Mr. President. You’ve talked about wanting to put extreme vetting on people trying to come into the United States, but I wonder if you would consider extreme vetting for people trying to buy a gun.

President Trump: Trying to what?

Reporter: Buy a gun.

Trump: Well, you’re bringing up a situation that probably shouldn’t be discussed too much right now. We could let a little time go by, but it’s okay. If you feel that that’s an appropriate question, even though we’re in the heart of South Korea, I will certainly answer your question.

If you did what you’re suggesting, there would have been no difference three days ago, and you might not have had that very brave person who happened to have a gun or a rifle in his truck go out and shoot him, and hit him and neutralize him. And I can only say this: If he didn’t have a gone, instead of having 26 dead, you would have had hundreds more dead. So that’s the way I feel about it. Not going to help.

Reporter: And are you considering any kind of gun control policy going forward because —

Trump: I mean, you look at the city with the strongest gun laws in our nation, is Chicago, and Chicago is a disaster. It’s a total disaster. Just remember, if this man didn’t have a gun or rifle, you’d be talking about a much worse situation in the great state of Texas. Thank you.

10 Responses to Trump: No to “Extreme Vetting” for Gun Purchases

    • Well it was probably only a couple of zoomies that were (ir)responsible, but yes, if they had followed federal law, name deleted would not have been able to buy FOUR separate guns from dealers. He might very well have gotten them anyway. According to reports he also attempted to smuggle guns onto Holloman, no info as to what guns those were or where they are now………..

  1. PresTrump to reporter – “Thank you” ( you complete idiot and jerk- memo to self- get that guy’s name).
    There are 100 million or more firearms privately owned in the US, who knows for sure.
    Our own government has been supplying firearms for anyone and anybody around the world for decades- free of charge=- and the libs want to disarm Americans – are they nuts?

  2. Difference to me is, someone wanting to enter this country should be vetted to the nth degree. It’s my constitutional right to protect myself with a firearm. I will go through the process to own one. Don’t put an undo burden on me to exercise my rights. That right is sometimes a liberal will never understand. But that same person wants to let every person into the country, no questions asked.

    • Excellent point about “liberals”…They will allow ANYONE into the US and have the rights of a ‘citizen’…But If I a natural born US Citizen wants to buy a gun I have bend over backwards filling out paperwork etc.