And how gun friendly is Trump! Interesting article in this week's British 'Shooting Times' magazine. In 2008 he was trying to get permission to build one of his golf courses in Scotland on what was wildfowl shooting land by the coast. At a public enquiry he stated his opposition to the shooting taking place claiming that 25,000 birds were shot each year there (total made up nonsense). Quote, his words at the enquiry; 'When you are on site right now, it's sort of disgusting. There are dead animals all over the site that have been shot. There are some people who are into that. I am not.'

He may not be so gun friendly if he wants to build one of his golf complexes on what is currently a shooting range. Hope I am wrong. Lagopus.....

Just be happy it wasn't a gold plated shopping mall.

______________________________
Golf is my religion (and hockey)

I suppose being a businessman he will say what he wants to get what he wants.

Now when Obama visited Britain he showed he was pro-gun by bringing loads of his friends over who were armed to the teeth. They thought so much of him they followed him everywhere. :-) Lagopus.....

Here's a link to a recent interview with Donald Trump by Chris Cox of the NRA-Institute For Legislative Action:

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160929/trump-the-official-nra-qa

I think we'll be just fine with Donald Trump at the helm. I also think we all know that Hillary Clinton intended to come after our gun rights. We know because she came right out and said it and posted it on her campaign website. I certainly have no remorse for my vote for Trump. And I believe that he is smart enough to know that if he turned on us, he would certainly be a one term President.

So close to the election, this story was already in the pipeline. I doubt it would have mattered much here, but the magazine might be owed a bit of appreciation. Normally, these types of stories are intended to undermine candidates, not publish footnotes after decisions are made. At this point, if true, good for the magazine for taking the high road and getting political. Hopefully, they have a similar policy with vetting your candidates before elections. It's an interesting thing if the environmentalists don't have anything to say about paving over wetlands.

Hillary stated her "Crowning Achievement" (My words, I forget the exact term she used) was when She made Enemies of the NRA. Absolutely No Doubt where she stood on gun ownership. She had also stated the Supreme court was "Wrong" when they ruled the 2nd amendment was an individual right. Had she won she obviously would have "Stacked" the Supreme Court with liberals who are more interested in "Legislating from the Bench" than interpreting the Constitution. As soon as she got the needed majority we no doubt would have had some other suit filed in which the Supreme Court would have ruled & overturned that previous decision.
Hopefully Trump will live up to his promises to us. We have Absolutely no Doubt Hillary would have lived up to her promises, & that was to "DISARM" American Citizens.

Most Americans do not understand that unless billionaire gets his/her income from making guns, ammunition or components he/she has zero interest in poor people being armed. I voted for him only because I found Hillary Clinton to be less acceptable alternative. I did not believe in anything that was mentioned during the campaign.

I think plenty of environmentalists (including hunters, who were environmentalists before anyone had ever heard the term) say plenty when there are plans to pave over wetlands. Concerns about paving over a wetland here in Iowa not so long ago resulted in a highway being routed around the wetland. And since it was a particularly unique wetland, the state bought it from the private owner, thus preserving and protecting it for the future.

He doesn't really care much about hunting and is probably opposed to it. However his sons are into hunting so he won't say much about it.

But the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting its about gun ownership for any reason you want. And President Trump understands that, that's good enough for me.

You got that right. We All best well believe the "Anti's" know it too. They are trying to appease the hunters until they break the 2nd amendment. After that they can take what-so-ever their little hearts Desire. When it becomes a Privilege & not a Right, all is Lost.

He can appoint not only Supreme Court vacancy but also many unfilled positions in the lower Federal Courts with not only pro second amendment justices but also NRA approved second amendment justices with a simple majority of the Senate. So even the lower circuits will be filled with staunch second amendment justices.

But, don't get your hopes up on legislation as we only gave him a razor thin edge in the Senate. Legislation, unlike the simple majority by the senate to confirm a Supreme Court or lower court justice, will take 60 votes to get any bill through and that means Democratic support for any legislation.

Don't hold your breath waiting for that support.

The argument in favour of your 2nd. amendment as an individual right is easily proven by the fact that when there is a war they call upon the civilian force to assist; they call it conscription. Politicians start the war then can't work fast enough to arm the civilian population to get them out of the mess they started and save their butts.

'The right of ordinary citizens to possess weapons is the most extraordinary, most controversial and least understood of those liberties secured by Englishmen and bequeathed to their American colonists. It lies at the very heart of the relationship between the individual and his fellows, and between the individual and his Government.' Joyce Lee Malcolm. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Guns-Violence-Joyce-Lee-Malcolm/dp/0674016084

At least Trump has given the U.K. a warm welcome for when it leaves the E.U. Obama issued veiled threats regarding trade if we left and I think that swayed a lot of undecided people to vote 'Leave'. We don't like foreigners telling us what to do or making threats. Trump may be an oddball but I think he is the better choice for U.S. & U.K. relations. Lagopus.....

Lagopus:
Very well put!
Jim

Granted my grasp of history is a bit sketchy, but when you say ..."those liberties secured by Englishmen and bequeathed to their American colonists" you mean we shot y'all's azzes up at Lexington and Concord and sent you packing back to Boston when you tried to take our guns and ammo, then yes, I agree.

A golf course and front of the line on any trade deals! Cracking good show! It will give the Duck a good excuse to go to Spain and shoot partridge instead of freezing in some bloody awful Scottish bog.

_______________________________
Bloody 'ell. Shoulda went to Spain with the Duck!
(As I snap hook another Titlest into the North Sea)

lagopus, I believe our armies were always drawn from the militias. The "donkeys" orders in 1915 resulted in virtual destruction of the old professional British Army, at the Second Battle of Ypres particularly, where my uncle was a machine-gunner from Bermuda. More British soldiers died in the first two hours at Loos than the number of casualties in all three services on both sides on D-Day 1944.

loansome roads we couldn't afford to spare the troops because of a potential threat from across the Channel in France after the colonists solicited help from Britain's main enemy the French. Neat move of your part. One interesting statistic from the Colonial War was that more British troops deserted to be with their colonial sweethearts that were actually killed in the fighting. Another neat move on your part.

King Brown, the British army were always a professional army until the First World War when conscription became a requirement due to losses. My Great Uncle was also killed at Ypres in 1915. It was a tough war but the 1914 British professional lot were the best trained, equipped and experienced in the world at that time. Although greatly outnumbered they stopped the Germans in their tracks with the Germans believing that we were all armed with machine guns because of the speed and accuracy of fire. We then had to retreat to close the gap between us in Belgium and the French army and then it was a case of just dig in and hold. Lagopous.....

A better grasp of history would confirm you just picked a good time to depart (and a strategic ally). It actually wasn't some kind of David and Goliath triumph. I know it's sometimes surprising but often, there are things going on outside your country. But having said that, myth making is important and in America's case, led to great things.

Like I said before about the Brexit vote, we've kicked your ass and saved it for centuries and now you're telling us what to do, I don't think so.

Your revolution succeeded mostly because the British had bigger fish to fry. We burned your White House down last time we had a violent disagreement. During WWI, you did your very best to stay out of it until the last year, and in WWII you again tried hard to stay out of it. When you did enter the fray, it was after 3 years of hard fighting already and only because you were attacked. No wonder you seemed fresh by comparison. You were.

As per my earlier post, please refrain from repeating myths or excessive jingoism. Instead, learn history and then comment on it.

Hardly a case of "we've kicked your ass and saved it for centuries"

During the revolution the presence of the French in North America played a two-fold role against the British. Not only was active combat against the British in the Colonies, but the British were spread thin throughout the Caribbean guarding sugarcane plantations against French intrusion and seizure.

NOooooo. I was referring to the English people, who have saved Europe for centuries, that decided to leave the EU by the Brexit vote on my post. I was NOT in any way referring to the American people.

Ahh, two people separated by a common language.

Sorry Treblig, misunderstood your comment. I get it now. Cheers!

James

Thanks James!!!

But I agree with you as people do get carried away with their juvenile oversimplification, "We kicked your ass" assessment of the American Revolution. It does get annoying.

Ignorance, the way the ubiquitous "we" gets used for outcomes not only of the Revolution, Civil War and, collectively from the West, the Second World War.

(At least I had a big smile on my face, and listeners knew what I meant, when I said "we" cut and split six cords of dry hardwood on the weekend!)

That's a pretty good pile King. Did three (bush) cords last winter and that was enough for a while!

Cornish Pasties are the answer in Cold weather...

Just getting ready to make some tourtierres using duck, sharptail and pork! Just the thing for a cold winter evening!

Thanks Lagopus for posting the link to that book. There are a couple books noted there that examine the British experience with gun control that seem worth reading. I will have to order them.