Across this great nation, select groups of people are angry with President Trump. That probably doesn’t surprise you. However, what might surprise you is that these groups now include some conservatives as well.
Why? Because on Wednesday, Trump used words. Shocked? He spoke of confiscating guns from certain individuals that are deemed to be dangerous, even if it violates due process rights. Oddly enough, some liberals and even some conservatives appear to be confused as to why so many would get mad about taking guns away from people that are deemed dangerous. Unfortunately, that’s missing the forest for the trees and not really why conservatives are mad.
Trump was responding to comments made by Vice President Pence that local law enforcement should have more tools in regard to dangerous individuals with weapons.
“Allow due process so no one’s rights are trampled, but the ability to go to court, obtain an order and then collect not only the firearms but any weapons,” Pence said.
“Or, Mike, take the firearms first, and then go to court,” Trump responded. “Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said.
Since then, many conservatives across this nation have publicly withdrawn their support for Trump moving forward – or at least temporarily. Don’t worry… no doubt Trump will do something cool and people will love him all over again. Just wait a couple of weeks.
But on a serious note, it seems as though there was some sort of surprise about Trump’s unconstitutional positions. I’m not entirely sure why because he has several. I’m not shocked he said something like that, even though it sounded like he was just spit-balling. Either way, people like me have been making that point very clear since we discovered he was going to run in the first place.
Earlier today, I received a text from someone I know seeking my thoughts on his statements. The text asked: “Just curious on your thoughts about the statement pointing to confiscation before due process?” To which I replied: “Similar to how he doesn’t want states to make their own decisions… he’s a Republican… not a Constitutionalist.” Maybe that will anger some but it’s true.
I want everyone to really think about that point for a second. Trump is a Republican, not a Constitutionalist. Does it really shock anyone that a President would say or do something that somehow opposes the Constitution? Let’s try another President that had similar issues. Obama is a Democrat, not a Constitutionalist. Make sense?
Now think about where we find the rules for things like “Freedom of Expression”, “Due Process” or the “Second Amendment”? Wouldn’t it be important to know a thing or two about the Constitution so that we can ensure that the people wanting to run for office know a thing or two about it (perhaps even love it) if we are going to hire them to uphold it? Wouldn’t saying things that oppose the actual document pretty much prove you’re merely a party member and NOT a Constitutionalist?
I get it… it’s tough. Like every President before him, Trump said “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” And much like most Presidents before him, he has not really been able to follow through with that promise entirely. This even includes some of the great ones.
Why? For lots of reasons. However, in many cases since the early-1900’s, it’s because you cannot support, love or defend something you are unfamiliar with or don’t fundamentally care about. It’s not rocket science. Just think about how terrible Woodrow Wilson was.
On January 24th, 2016, I wrote an open letter to Donald Trump concerning his unconstitutional statements during an interview that he had in an outdoors magazine. In the article, I made it clear that one of two things must be true. Either 1) he has not read the Constitution, or 2) he has read it but that he simply does not care about certain provisions in it. I told him that “You either support the Constitution or you do not. If you merely pick and choose a section to support in a particular moment in time because it appeals to those with whom you are currently speaking, or those who can help get you elected, then what makes you any different than the person you aim to replace, and what reason do any of us really have to support you?”
Now, I’m not saying that anyone should withdraw their support from Trump; it’s not like he’s written or passed any laws. What I am saying is that you shouldn’t be surprised and that what he said also doesn’t matter. I hope that those that are so angry understand that laws concerning such things are made in Congress, so it doesn’t matter what he says about it; it matters what your representative says about it. In fact, that should bother you more because with the exception of only a few, your current Congress is inept, ignorant and more dangerous than any words I’ve ever heard come from the mouth of Trump – in my opinion. So where is all the outrage about that?
Anyway, the point is that when Trump says some words about confiscating guns from certain individuals that are deemed to be dangerous (by government), even if such actions would violate due process rights (like most laws) and the Second Amendment; then try to understand that it’s just words and really just status quo. I should probably clarify that. I’m saying that with a level of apathy to suggest that perhaps you should be upset about more than just those few statements. As I demonstrated in my book RELOADED: An American Warning, Due Process is dead and has been for some time. Why are you not angry about that? There are years worth of ACTUAL Constitutional infringements that should be on your list of things to be angry about. If his words really make you angry, then you really need to look around and see what is ACTUALLY going on because Constitutional and Second Amendment infringements are happening every day, all over this great nation and nobody is doing a damn thing about it. It’s not just words. If you’re going to get mad, at least focus it at something that is actually happening.
Now with that being said… let me close by saying that (at least as far as I know) Trump never really claimed to be a Constitutionalist. He is a Republican; which is only slighter better than a Democrat in most cases (and yes there are exceptions). Here’s the silver lining though: while he may not be perfect, as far as we know right now… he’s not a socialist either.
Let me just add something that I think fits well with this. On one of my social media pages, I wrote the following post. It was geared towards the left but I think it fits nicely right here as well because it alludes to what I am talking about in this article. Ultimately, left or right doesn’t matter when freedoms are being eroded. Anyone attempting to take away liberty is an enemy of the Constitution. Be angry about it all.
Way too many believe that the talk from the left is just talk and that everything will be fine because it’s been okay thus far. I believe that such apathy and/or complacency is more dangerous than the ideas being spouted because such talk has always equaled erosion. Things can only erode so much. No amount of excuses can exclude you from the responsibility you have and historical (both national and global) ignorance in regard to this responsibility and/or the outcome of ignoring it will not and cannot shield you from the eventuality that faces us. My advice? Beware the promise of comfort and supposed safety. Either of which cannot be provided by others and any such attempt can only come with an exchange; where you get to reduce your own abilities to provide such things for yourself. Also… beware the wolf in sheep’s clothing – especially in regard to Natural Right. Sometimes the one supposedly looking out for us is not looking out for us after all. And I don’t care how weak your opponents appear; your opponent is much stronger than you think. Finally… I want you to remember that “A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” This mean that ANY law that is incompatible with the Constitution of the United States is neither valid or legally binding. That is… if you believe Chief Justice Marshall of the Supreme Court as cited in Marbury v Madison. And before anyone decides to retort with some unnecessary compromise or other nonsense, remember what Thomas Jefferson said: Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.