Browse By

Donald Trump Just Shot $3 Million NRA Ad Campaign In The Face

There is no more effective deterrent to gun ownership than the example of an inept gun enthusiast. For every story we hear about a homeowner shooting an intruder, there are ten stories of violence enabled by irresponsible gun ownership: Children killing themselves while playing with guns their parents have left out in the open, of gun owners killing their own children, of deranged right wing activists using guns in the attempt to spark treasonous rebellion against the U.S. government, or of the Vice President of the United States shooting a friend in the face by accident during a quail hunt among Texas political elites.

One thing no one can accuse Donald Trump of is the crime of actually picking up a gun and shooting another human being. Yet, Trump came disturbingly close to inciting such violence yesterday, when he suggested that, if Hillary Clinton becomes President and begins appointing federal judges, gun owners could address their grievances, not with petitions, but with their weapons. Trump told a crowd, “Hillary wants to abolish — essentially abolish — the Second Amendment. If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks, though the Second Amendment people, maybe there is.”

Gun merchants have spent huge amounts of money trying to convince people that gun ownership is normal, safe, and even family friendly, but impulsive comments like those of Donald Trump quickly erase the gains made by these marketing campaigns, reminding Americans that the difference between an idiot with a gun and an idiot without a gun is the difference between life and death. Voters now can’t help but wonder now what the consequences of Donald Trump’s reckless attitude would be if he carried a gun instead of just shooting his mouth off. From now on, every time voters see a Trump supporter getting worked up over gun rights, they’ll begin to wonder whether this is one of those “Second Amendment people” who might try to use their right to bear arms against President Hillary Clinton.

Many gun accidents are due to poor timing. Poor timing was certainly displayed by Donald Trump yesterday, as his hints of the assassination of Hillary Clinton by enraged gun owners came on the very same day that the National Rifle Association spent almost three million dollars with Starboard Strategic, Inc. on internet and television advertisements supporting Donald Trump, and telling gun owners that they should be angry at Hillary Clinton.

Before yesterday, these new NRA advertisements might have encouraged voter turnout. Now, they’ll only serve as a reminder of everything that’s wrong with Donald Trump and the American gun culture that he has embraced.

15 thoughts on “Donald Trump Just Shot $3 Million NRA Ad Campaign In The Face”

  1. ella says:

    Please read something beneficial to America and Americans”

    We at Irregular Times have a longstanding policy of not allowing readers to simply post links to third party articles in response to our articles. If you can’t write your own comment, please don’t bother commenting.

    1. ella says:

      It is hard to make a reply that is not negated immediately. Sometimes sarcasm is best served with another link. However, I just decided to answer someone here, so I have written my own note. I apologize for breaking your rule of thumb.

  2. Daniel says:

    Unfortunately, you are stretching on this one.

    I hope the “Second Amendment” crowd can do something, by supporting pro gun candidates in Congress and in the states too, because the Republicans picked an authoritarian for their potential president, which is the main reason I can’t support him.

    To say that Trump was saying the “Second Amendment crowd” should kill a President is ridiculous. It’s articles like this one that is making me second guess not voting for Trump, just to keep the anti-gun presidents away from the Second Amendment.

    I suspect if Hillary wasn’t an anti-gunner she would win by even a larger landslide than I think she will this time, but badmouthing us gun owners are keeping us away from the Democrats forever. I would love to work inside the Democrat party on some things but their hate of the Second Amendment is keeping me far away. If I can’t trust them on the Second Amendment, I sure can’t trust them to support the rest of the Bill of Rights when the going gets tough. It’s not a Bill of Privileges. It’s called the “right” not “privileges” to keep and bear arms.

    1. Juniper says:

      Bull, Daniel. Trump’s comment was in the context of action AFTER an election, not before one. Gun owners like you have been pissing on America and telling us that it’s raining. You know damn well what Trump was talking about, and you confirm everyone’s worst fears about gun owners when you pretend he meant something harmless.

    2. ella says:

      Thank you Daniel, and Freedom of Speech says we have a right to defuse a situation with comedy. There were guns owners in the crowd who were making arousing comments and Trump defused it with humor, while at the same time inferring votes would be the way to defeat Hillary. The media has sounded like it is State owned and strongly supporting the Obama agenda for Hillary Clinton, or Bill as the case may truly be. This throughout has made Donald Trump sound like something more of an authoritarian than he really is, although this nation could use more of a father figure than the Clinton dictatorship. Two terms are spoken for in the Constitution – no more. In Alabama George Wallace married three times so he could run a ‘wife’ for Governor so he could continue his time in office. That is what Bill Clinton is doing with Hillary. It has suited because Bill spent an inordinate amount of time with his wife in the White House telling Obama what to do until it was time to once again go on the campaign trail. I cannot vote for an un-Constitutional act. I vote for a compassionate yet strong leader, Donald Trump, who honestly has the best interests of the United States as his basis for running – not power and riches. It is possible that there are now more Socialists and Communists in America than freedom loving Republicans, the “Democratic” Party is counting on it. And the “Moral Majority” may be outnumbered by the new “African Majority” as well.

      1. J Clifford says:

        Ella, by no actual survey of the American people are there more Socialists and Communists in America than Republicans.

        There is no new “African Majority”, and Jerry Falwell’s “Moral Majority” fell apart long ago as a result of Falwell’s arrogant corruption. I wonder what you’re trying to get at. Are you afraid of African-Americans?

        If you are worried about unconstitutional actions, there is no way that you can vote for Donald Trump with a clear conscience, as Trump has proposed dramatic violations of the First Amendment’s freedom of religion, the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable search and seizure, the Fifith Amendment’s guarantee of protection from self-incrimination, the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a right to a fair trial, the Eighth Amendment’s protection from cruel and unusual punishment, the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

        For you to ignore Donald Trump’s outrageous agenda against the very foundations of freedom in the United States of America, and to pretend that Trump has not encouraged physical violence against Hillary Clinton, suggests that your idea of a “Moral Majority” has very little to do with compassion.

        This year, the Republican Party has been exposed as the home of violent fascism. That it is crumbling under this exposure is a reassuring reminder that the majority of Americans aren’t willing to endanger our nation’s system of Liberty in order to indulge their emotional attachment to bigotry.

        1. ella says:

          I’ll start with the first of your questions. 1) No, I am not afraid of a persons race, skin color, or place of birth., so I am not afraid of Africans. A woman of African heritage stood before the Democratic Convention, and said now that she was a part of the “…new Black Majority…” and went on with her speech. It is to that I refer. Whether she meant within the Democratic Party, or as a portion of the population of America, I do not know. The U.S. Census has said that those of African American decent in the United States would be in the majority by either 2020 or 2030 as best I remember without looking it up again.
          2) The Moral Majority did not die with the dissolving of a TV evangelist’s “ministry”. The Moral Majority existed before and after, still do. They unfortunately came to regard the need for their participation in the voting process as something everyone else could take care of. Those people need to be reminded how important a right the vote is, and why. That is to some extent being done.
          3) Donald Trump has not espoused any actions contrary to the Constitution of the United States. He has made note of the supposed differences between the Rights granted in the Bill of Rights to the Citizens of the United States and those of illegal aliens, and immigrants. That line has all but been erased allowing all nationals the same rights and benefits, but not all privileges granted to American citizens. Although it has been tried by the Democratic Party to grant illegal aliens and immigrants the privilege of voting, to further their political agenda.
          4) You cannot have either been in the gathering where the comment was made, in the middle of another policy point of course, have never seen the entire video of it, or are deliberately disseminating information falsely. Donald Trump was interrupted mid-sentence by some unruly people, who he had the presence of mind to defuse with a humorous comment and continued on like an established orator. The obvious manner in which the Democratic campaign has maligned Trump’s remarks, and the context in which they were made, throughout this political cycle, and the manner in which he has handled it, shows a person of great experience and integrity, the ability to draw out the truth. His mistake was in believing that the media would also be seeking that end, not just “drama” and headlines. I believe that will be a thing of the past.
          5) I do believe that you sincerely support the cause opposing Donald Trump, based on your final statement, but it is based in dogma. The “system”, like someone who has done a repetitive job for 20 years, has become something it was not to begin with. What Donald Trump has done is expose some of the developed flaws. What he wants to do is make the government financially viable again and give Americans back what they had 50 or more years ago, with the advances that we have made today, in all areas of society. He is in tune with all of the people of America, not just those he thinks might give him a job in Washington, he really does not need it, he already has everything. But he has a desire to help the nation that helped his family and him to live the life that they have. I find that admirable. I hope you will look closer at what is being said and done. We The People love our country, no matter what religion, race, or creed. Thank you

  3. J Clifford says:

    Ella, you write that ” Donald Trump has not espoused any actions contrary to the Constitution of the United States,” but that’s plainly not true. Rarely does a day go by when Donald Trump fails to espouse actions contrary to the Constitution.

    Just today, for example, Donald Trump declared that if he is elected President, he will have American citizens put on trial through military tribunals that are designed to evade constitutional standards for fair trial.

    ” I know that they want to try them in our regular court systems, and I don’t like that at all. I don’t like that at all,” Trump said.

    1. ella says:

      Here is that full quote: “He added that he would be “fine” with trying US citizens in military tribunals at Guantánamo Bay, the US naval base that is also home to a military prison housing captured terror suspects. ”
      He is talking about people who have already been imprisoned in Guantanamo. Trump is also trying to persuade impressionable youths in America that they should either be Americans or be traitors. And that being Traitors has consequences that they may not find as encouraging as walking down the street with their $100 sneakers and jeans, that playing the tough on the street is different from entering into war activities against the nation that gave them those freedoms and luxuries in life. Guantanamo has been publicized enough so that they know about it, but a military tribunal only hears the facts in a case.

      Media is only spreading that which supports a Socialist view and negates common sense, or cultural improvement in America. To that end, any misinterpretation of wording that sounds remotely anti-American, or uses the things that THEY are using by twisting what Trump says to appear as the same thing THEY are spreading within their own ranks, they throw out and see where it will stick against their opponents. Children do this all the time, using one parent against the other to get their way. Don’t you think that there are yet enough Americans not political monkey trained, or controlled, to hear and know the difference in what is being done?

      1. ella says:

        Actually, the only quotes from what Trump said in this piece are “at all” and “fine”. The words used outside of that are not even in quotes as words used by the interviewer. So it is impossible to tell whether the interviewer was simply putting words into Trumps mouth and he was responding to some part of what the interviewer said. That has been consistently used to make Trump appear he is saying something he is not as well. That is probably why Hillary gives no interviews.

      2. Jim Cook says:


        Contrary to what you write, in the United States of America you are not a traitor until you are convicted of treason in a criminal trial. Donald Trump just declared he is okey-dokey with short-circuiting the constitutionally-guaranteed right to a fair trial for American citizens. How disappointing that you are okey-dokey with Trump’s stance.

        1. ella says:

          I am okay with his ability to call a person giving aid and comfort to the enemies of America the availability a military trial. A trial is just that, if they are innocent they stand a better chance in a military tribunal than in a civil court. Only facts are considered in a military trial. There are no legal complication to put an innocent man/woman or whatever in prison. The civil society we live in has changed a great deal in the past 50 years and that includes the justice system. I wish you would allow the civilized thoughts that are floating around penetrate.

          1. J Clifford says:

            No, Ella. You can’t just make up facts.

            No, a person does not stand a better chance of vindication in a military tribunal than in an ordinary trial.

            No, Ella, civil society has not changed very much in its fundamentals. Terrorist attacks in the United States are extremely rare.

            No, Ella, not all facts are considered in a military tribunal. Military tribunals enable the prosecution to withhold evidence from the defense team, and don’t allow defendants to choose their own legal representation.

            The fact that you as an individual wish to live under a military autocracy does not negate the fact that in the United States of America, the Constitution, and not your whim or the orders of Donald Trump, are the fundamental basis of all law. As long as you live here, you have to live under the rules of the Constitution.

            I am very sorry that you so deeply despise the principles of the Constitution, Ella. I am confident that most Americans will disagree with your anti-Constitution attitudes, and vote against Donald Trump.

          2. ella says:

            I am so sorry you twist and misrepresent the words of other people. Good Bye.

          3. Jim Cook says:

            If you’re ok with that, you’re ok with violations of the constitution. Recognize the extremity of the place where you and Donald Trump stand.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!