HE WAS RIGHT .. SO is TRUMP

Up-voted. He was nearly the first person to issue spoiler alerts to the Dem Party itself . . . and then he turned out to have been 100% correct.

Because he was one right up to the point he saw what they were really doing.

True.

I remember Democrats wailing that he was too old to serve as President. Insinuating he was senile.

He was 77 when he retired. Joe Biden was 78 when he took office.

And now his wife has to hold his hand so he doesn't get lost walking off stage

Biden on his best day is way worse than Reagan on his worst day ever was.

Well if he didn't say this quote, he most definitely said this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsOaHnWF0qA

https://mobile.twitter.com/ronaldreagan/status/1286100976181473282?lang=en

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5483006002

1987, spoiler alert! LOL

Speaking of restricted freedoms.

Here's the thing. When a politician who supports the 2nd amendment says he doesn't "believe that an AK-47 or a machine gun is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of home" they are just speaking an opinion.

However, when an anti-freedom politician, who does not support people's right to self defense, says the same thing then that means that they want to impose their personal opinion on the entire nation and are looking into ways to force people to comply to their will.

Reagan never passed any legislation to restrict firearm ownership.

Also I personally know people who do small game hunting with an AR-15. An AR-15 is a close quarter combat weapon, meaning it is ideal for home defense. It is more accurate than a pistol. I don't own an AR-15 or an AK-47 (and I am not just saying that because I am paranoid that the government might be reading this, I seriously do not own either firearm but I am not opposed to anyone owning either) and I don't hunt because I don't like the idea of killing something even though I love eating meat. I would rather let someone else kill the animal for me.

Machine guns have been mostly illegal since the days of prohibition. You have to jump through major hoops with the federal government to get a license to own a machine gun and machine guns are not cheap. They are the most expensive guns out there, with the exception of some rare collectable firearms that people collect just for show and nothing else.

Plus machine guns are not very accurate and waste a whole lot of ammo. The way they shoot them in movies and TV is NOT how the military trains you to fire them. You fire them in short burst of maybe 3 to 4 shots at a time. In the movies they just cut loose and they never seem to run out of bullets.

If he said this, then it only proves he was human and fallible. Besides, an AK-47 is not a machine gun. That's the old actor in him talking.

And to be fair (something rarely, if ever, heard from the left leaning here on imgflip) it was a different time, even as recently as 43 years ago. If Reagan could see how far the Dimocrats have let things deteriorate, particularly in crowded urban areas, he might very well realize that a weapon with the capabilities of the AK are needed today for home defense.

Ah, okay, so high school children with legitimate grievances about the culture surrounding guns in this country are freedom hating monsters working for the deep state, but when Daddy Regan pushes the exact same anti-gun talking points as modern democrats he's fallible and human. Glad to see where your cognitive biases lie.

Regan was a far greater threat to the second amendment than any democrat, especially during his time as Governor. Ask any former member of the Black Panthers.

"so high school children with legitimate grievances about the culture surrounding guns in this country are freedom hating monsters working for the deep state"

Who said that about high school children? I know I didn't say that. It would be nice if what you post in reply to my post actually had some bearing on what I said. But I'm a big believer in free speech, so just keep on saying whatever random thought crosses your mind. I'll do what you seem incapable of doing, and that's address your point, even though your point had nothing to do with my point. High school kids, or anyone else for that matter, who want sensible gun control, need to come up with a sensible plan. And that plan has to somehow take into account that the 2nd Amendment is going nowhere any time soon. But to just clamor for more of the same ineffective gun laws when the libs in charge hypocritically don't even bother to enforce the laws we already have on the books, is pretty silly and ultimately a waste of taxpayer money. And as a taxpayer, I'm all about not wasting taxpayer money.

"when Daddy Regan pushes the exact same anti-gun talking points as modern democrats he's fallible and human."

Naturally, you took that out of context. Again, to be fair (there I go again...) that was a major component of the point I made. But just try to keep some perspective. *IF* he said that, it was about the AK-47, and just the AK-47, and the times were vastly different then. So, for you to take the single component out of the larger point I made, and try to expand it into another point entirely, makes no sense whatsoever. (and sort of tells anyone all they need to know about your cognitive biases)

Regarding Reagan's signing of the Mulford Act, I won't agree that it was a threat to the 2A. I'm not opposed to concealed carry for states with sane citizens, but as a long time resident of California, I can state with absolute certainty that allowing Californians to carry loaded firearms is a bad, bad idea. To your point, I would probably feel less worried about the Black Panthers openly carrying firearms than I would about a bunch of dumb leftists running around with concealed weapons. And believe me, we have buckets of dumb leftists here in California. So like I said, I'm not against sensible gun control. Just put some dayum effort into making it sensible, not a rehash of what's already on the books but ignored by leftist DAs.

Yeah, that's true. I prefer this quote more anyway.

I do to. If you take away my right to self-defense then you put mine and families life in danger. The founding fathers would have agreed with Reagan also and in fact they said as much. The tree of liberty sometimes needs to be watered with the blood of tyrants.

I'm not advocating violence, I am just saying it is our right. That is why we have the 2nd amendment.

Bummer. I hate it when that happens. Well, I think Reagan probably would have agreed with it.

Imagine being a 67-year-old Trumper lol.

This was before. This was when the Republicans still were sane and believed in freedom. Now it's swapped.

So your contention is that now it's the democrats who are sane and believe in freedom? If so, why are they trying to take away all our freedom? The sane part is obviously not true.

How are they try to take away freedoms?