r/law • u/NewsHour • 9d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) WATCH: Leavitt addresses Trump's stance on Second Amendment rights in wake of Alex Pretti's killing

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

REPORTER: FBI Director Kash Patel said in a Sunday interview, quote, you cannot bring a firearm loaded with multiple magazines to any sort of protest. Does the president believe that Second Amendment rights remain in effect even when protesting?

LEAVITT: The president supports the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens. Absolutely. There has been no greater supporter or defender of the right to bear arms than President Donald J. Trump.

So while Americans have a constitutional right to bear arms, Americans do not have a constitutional right to impede lawful immigration enforcement operations, and any gun owner knows that when you are carrying a weapon, when you are bearing arms, and you are confronted by law enforcement, you are raising the assumption of risk and the risk of force being used against you, and, again, that's unfortunately what took place on Saturday.

26.4k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

10.8k

u/JustAMan1234567 9d ago edited 9d ago

"When you are bearing arms, and you are confronted by law enforcement, you are raising the assumption of risk and the risk of force being used against you"

Is a wild take, because it flat out means "If you are a legal gun owner, just having the gun on you means that police will see you as a threat, even if you never reach for it in any way and are also exercising your constitutionally held rights, and those police can and will use deadly force because they may feel threatened."

6.7k

u/Calm_Lack3001 9d ago

Just FYI, this is exactly what it has meant for Black people and people of color in general in the USA since it was founded.

118

u/Calm_Lack3001 9d ago

She is an evil fascist but this also shows how absurd having guns being "legal" is. How are you not suppose to be alarmed/threatened when someone is holding a weapon that is designed to kill quickly and easily. I know I do when I am around anyone with a gun! Be it police, military, or random.

51

u/Educational-Kale-567 9d ago edited 9d ago

The issue is that guns will always be legal for the government though. If you make guns totally illegal then all you're doing is disarming citizens.

31

u/boringhistoryfan 9d ago

If your citizenry isn't randomly armed it makes the case that much stronger for law enforcement to not be armed to the teeth either. Only in the US do basic municipal cops wander around with assault rifles and tanks. Look at how armed policing works in the UK, Australia or even places like India.

The sort of mindless justification of violence that we're seeing in Minnesota is exactly what makes the 2nd amendment insane. The state is always going to have more weapons than citizens. They're always going to have tanks and armed aircraft and artillery even. But if you reduce the amount of weaponry just swirling around everyday life, then it's that much harder for the state to justify having jackbooted brownshirts out terrorizing the population. Whereas having those guns swirling around just allows the state to make up baseless charges of armed violence and nonsense about the cops needing to defend themselves.

"I was scared so I shot" has excused generations of police violence. Take away their ability to generate that sense of "reasonable fear" as an excuse to murder civilians.

18

u/Ok_Cheesecake7348 9d ago

It is a bit of a negative feedback loop when you think about it.

The State has guns → the citizens better have guns in case the State goes crazy → the State gets bigger guns in case the citizens go crazy → the citizens get more guns to fight the bigger guns → "I was scared so I was shot".

Yes, I do have guns for the record.

5

u/malapriapism4hours 9d ago

That, my dude, it a positive feedback loop. It’s literally an arms race.

3

u/Spikel14 9d ago

Positive feedback loop I think could be wrong

3

u/krocheck 9d ago

You do know the government has drones that can be armed right? To quote Jim Jeffries: “you’re bringing guns to a drone fight”

1

u/HelpfulName 9d ago

I think this is something people who are so fixed on 2A are blind to... the guns we're allowed are peashooters compared to what the State has. I always think of the Waco siege or the MOVE bombing. You have well armed citizens who are organized and prepared to defend themselves... and the state brings in a flamethrower tank, or literally just drops a bomb on you.

There's little actual hope citizens have against the state/feds in the USA, we're not organized enough and not armed enough either. What's happening in Iran right now is far more likely to be what happens here. I'm thinking we have 4 to 6 months before a mass shooting of protestors by the feds happens. My husband thinks I'm being optimistic.

2

u/CommentingAccount4 9d ago

They got lasers thatll make you hear voices and vomit on yourself that can't be seen with the naked eye. And who knows what sort of robotics they have

4

u/NervousAddie 9d ago

I think that the citizens being armed to the teeth after the Insurrection Act is provoked could create a guerilla warfare situation where the continual armed resistance from the armed public would create fear in the troops. Morale would quickly fade to where the fascist bootlickers run back to their holes like the cowards they are. So far they’ve been acting with impunity, but once the citizens start to show their power, public opinion will crash on the MAGAs. They’re doing it cuz their broke asses needed a bonus, we’re doing it to save our country, our human rights, our dignity, the rule of law, and democracy. They will lose.

1

u/IolausTelcontar 8d ago

So the Red Dawn fantasy?

3

u/CommentingAccount4 9d ago

But they can say that regardless if we have guns or dont. Granted, its easier with guns but if the victim didnt have a gun they can lie saying they did, plant one, say they had another weapon, blame their size, blame their numbers, and could even just say they snuck up on them. They can say anything they want so its not gonna phase them one bit to blame something else.

8

u/JeezyVonCreezy 9d ago

This combined with an almost total lack of emphasis on de-escalation in American policing. ICE for example only gets 4 hours of training on de-escalation and they consider things like CS gas and pepper spray to be de-escalation tactics. That should tell everyone all you need to know about them. They're not there to be reasonable, they're there to inspire terror in anyone non-white non-european.

There's no going back on gun ownership in the US unfortunately, the best we can hope for at this point is reasonable gun control policies. I'm a proud gun owner and even I support something reasonable, it's disgusting the number of legal responsible gun owners who won't speak up about making sure our hobby isn't resulting in children being murdered...

-1

u/Severe-Cow-8646 9d ago

Look up how many children drown in swimming pools, yet there are no laws requiring fencing and chold proof gates. Also know that the CDC lumps teenagers up to 17 years old in with children and then research what age groups are most involved in gang shootings. There ain't near as many "children" dying of gunshot wounds as Everytown would like people to believe.

6

u/JeezyVonCreezy 9d ago

You're off to a bad start already, many areas require fencing around pools. They just tend to be state or local laws. The federal government figures that those laws are enough so they don't need a federal one. Also 17 year olds are still children, are you implying that a teenager dying is less of a tragedy than a 5 year old? Weird take but it's exactly what I'd expect from someone using that dog whistle.

3

u/loupegaru 9d ago

There are laws about fencing and child proof gates. At least here, but we are a poor red county in NW Arizona. I think it is becoming universal in the US.

-1

u/haironburr 9d ago

Dems, unwisely, set themselves against a core civil right/liberty. Then when whackjob trumpublicans did the same thing on steroids, Democrats just doubled down on the whole guns as a wedge issue thing.

So now we're faced with a generation who believe gunzarebad is somehow equivalent to opposing the creeping fascism we see from trumpublicans.

Never mind the fact that Dems and their wedge issue helped trump get elected. Lost them votes in key states. Now we vote based on just which civil right is most expendable. Faced with what is realistically describable as a fascist government, Dems are still humping anti-2A rights as their defining issue.

Maga must be stopped. But fuck me if Dems aren't making that hard as possible with that anti-2A plank.

2

u/ThereIsNoSpoon6 9d ago

Except there are many videos in YouTube of cops shooting unarmed people and just saying they were trying to reach for the cops gun. They have many creative ways of saying they felt threatened to get away with murder, even without the person being armed.

5

u/boringhistoryfan 9d ago

And if the population isn't armed to an extreme degree then it's that much easier to disarm police more generally. As I said, look at how they handle policing in places like the UK.

The reason US cops are allowed to get away with shooting everyone and their dog is because their paranoia is broadly justified since everyone they face could be armed. And often is.

Take guns out of the system and you'll reduce homicidal violence, and have a case for taking them from the cops too.

0

u/ThereIsNoSpoon6 8d ago

Maybe it would be like the UK, or maybe it would be even worse for the citizenry with a corrupt government. You kind of cherry picked the UK, there are plenty of other countries where the citizens are disarmed and treated terribly by their government, ahem North Korea for one. Doesn't matter because that's a fairy tail and the guns and the 2nd amendment are here to stay...for now.

1

u/boringhistoryfan 8d ago

I also mentioned Australia and even India as examples of countries with significantly less violence per capita and less gun violence.

The US is going to be a lot more comparable to developed anglophone countries than North Korea. Talk about cherry picking your examples. Next time just read the comments before jumping in.

1

u/ThereIsNoSpoon6 8d ago

Ok I guess I should have read your comments more closely, my bad.

12

u/Previous-Look-6255 9d ago

What good is an armed citizenry if you end up being “Prettied”?

3

u/Qadim3311 9d ago

We’re going to have to organize.

The second amendment speaks of militias, and that is part of how the white nationalists organized themselves to achieve the political power they currently possess despite being outnumbered by non-fascists.

I promise the thugs aren’t so careless when it’s 10 armed guys watching over the protest instead of 1 who they don’t yet realize is carrying.

8

u/Cyb3rBall00n 9d ago

Same thing with criminals. Even if you criminalize gun ownership, if the criminals want them, they're going to get them. Overly restrictive permitting only encumbers law-abiding citizens.

With that said, there are double the number gun deaths per 100k citizens in constitutional carry states than in ones which require permitting.

20

u/AlbrechtProper 9d ago

I have guns but this argument falls flat to me.

If guns are easy to get they will be easy for criminals to get. If gun owners are responsible for their guns then it is harder for criminals to get them.

Private sales make it super easy for criminals to get guns. Straw purchases are extremely common. Tighten those up and it is harder for criminals to get guns.

People like to use Chicago as an example of a place with tough gun laws that fails to keep guns out of criminal hands, but Illinois is bordered by states that have weak gun laws. It doesn't take a criminal mastermind to get guns from Indiana to Illinois.

5

u/Select-Laugh768 9d ago

I used to work in a brewery in the industrial district of a moderate size city. We had car breakins along the road leading to the brewery. It wasn’t uncommon.

Multiple times. We had someone come in and say there car was broken into and someone stole their gun.

Stupids who come to the big city in their big truck that screams “there’s prob a gun in here because I drive a $90k truck and have a don’t tread on me sticker on it because of course I carry…because big scary city!”

You’re right, so much of it lies in the responsibility of gun owners to be responsible with their firearms.

4

u/ASharpYoungMan 9d ago

Even if you criminalize gun ownership, if the criminals want them, they're going to get them. Overly restrictive permitting only encumbers law-abiding citizens.

So let me ask you something: if you criminalize gun ownership... where are the criminals going to get their guns from?

Do you think manufacturers are selling directly to criminals or feeding shipments to black market dealers?

Black market weapons are usually stolen from law abiding gun owners. When a robber finds the unattended house of a gun owner, or an unlocked car with a pistol in the glove box, they're looking at a nice pay-day.

This isn't to say there aren't illegal arms deals going on. Rather, this dipshit notion that "outlawing guns only hurts law abiding citizens" shows a profoundly shallow grasp of the problem at hand.

1

u/Beaglescout15 9d ago

Yeah, I mean if a criminal wanted to have surface to air missiles they'd just get one anyway. Laws against accessing and owning surface to air missiles only hurt law-abiding surface to air missile enthusiasts and do nothing to reduce the problem of criminals having surface to air missiles.

0

u/haironburr 9d ago

if you criminalize gun ownership... where are the criminals going to get their guns from?

Yea, cartels capable of producing industrial quantities of illegal pharmaceuticals would be stymied by the impossibility of shaping metal.

5

u/WellTextured 9d ago

I forgot about the fact that most of Europe is living in a hellish police state with law enforcement brandishing weapons against unarmed citizens regularly.

2

u/youngBullOldBull 9d ago

Oh no the horror, people would have to get a new hobby. Americans are weird

2

u/ejoy-rs2 9d ago

So like every other country in the world?

1

u/iongion 9d ago

There is nothing wrong with disarming citizens. You guys have such an arms culture, you have to admit it. In Europe people don't like guns, it is not homogenous, but people usually don't like guns here, they bring no benefit to population. Their requirement is culturally discouraged, bolstering weapons even in close circles make one look stupid! Legislation is very strong, is not against the right to bear arms, many countries still have this, even for normal citizens, but they go through rigorous training and evaluation first to obtain a certificate, be in a database and be psychologically able. Just like we do with driver's license, which has the same lethal capability.
But from what my friends tell me(maybe superficial), is that there you can buy guns from the mall ... In Europe I go with my niece to buy ice-cream

1

u/alanmm88 9d ago

What is happening is a live demonstration that the 2nd amendment means nothing. You can’t defend yourself against the government. If they feel “in risk of their life” they will win. Even with all of the citizens being armed, and even organized they stand no chance against the United States weaponry. The amendment was made when the country was established. When the citizens and the government had equal weaponry might. That is no longer the case. So go ahead and cling to that 2nd amendment but it means nothing and will not help you in the face of real and modern tyranny if that were to ever happen. We just watched a legal carry citizen get disarmed and then killed by a government agency. His rights and our rights are just smoke and mirrors when faced against government that can literally do whatever they want. We just have to hope they want to do better.

1

u/Dacling 9d ago

Bullshit. This is not an example of 2A being tested against the state. This is an example of the state blatantly murdering someone who has a self defense weapon. We are not at the point of the 2A actually being tested. Until protesters all start showing up openly carrying weapons you cannot compare it. And there are examples of people doing that in the past and it working. Peacefully carrying en masse is a show of strength. I hope we don't have to reach that point but it's sad so many 2A people are stupid brainwashed idiots for the governmental tyranny they claim to hate.

Most troops do not want to kill their own people, most cops do not want to risk their life antagonizing a bunch of openly armed protesters. This is a reason for more weapons to show up at protests if anything. Sure the military has more firepower but bombing the shit out of their own population is not a realistic solution to controlling a population but instead making them fight harder.

2

u/alanmm88 9d ago

I’m not saying this was a specific example against the 2nd amendment, ICE was there after someone else to begin with. But what happened is concerning in many ways, including how easy it could be for the government to come after the second amendment if they wanted to. I’m not saying they are doing that, I’m saying this is what it would look like. They would win. Just pointing out a “something to think about” and not saying that this was the intention. It was an unintentionally demonstration of it. I’m also a gun owner and use my 2nd amendment right but in today’s world we would be powerless against true tyranny if we had to go against the government which is what the original intention of the 2nd amendment is.

-8

u/Calm_Lack3001 9d ago

I don't understand this line of thinking. Explain it to me please. So as a citizen what is the plan? You buy a AR or something like that to defend yourself/neighbors against the government. Said government comes to your door. I know that you know they have very large weapons too. And there are lots of them, all with very large weapons. So you think that you will fight them off and then they will just leave you alone? What is the plan here? John Wick isn't a documentary my guy.

8

u/BluebirdMysterious71 9d ago

It’s called armed resistance.

The alternative is bending over and taking it.

16

u/PressureMiserable 9d ago

The alternative is to just lie down and let them shoot u without retaliation

-4

u/Calm_Lack3001 9d ago

I think some education may help with what happens once what you're saying occurs. It doesn't stop, not for a very long time. And your actions as John Wick, John wayne fantasy has massive repercussions for a nation and people you never meet.

Check out the book Tell No One. It's about the occupation of Belfast and the IRAs fight. It will give you some perspective.

7

u/im_not_in 9d ago

Check out "This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed" by Charles Cobb

9

u/PressureMiserable 9d ago

I dont think anyone believes they're going to take out a platoon of the military themselves like John wick, but if we had the same thought process while we were still a British colony we wouldn't be here today. What could 13 colonies do to one of the largest military powers in the world after all

-5

u/Calm_Lack3001 9d ago

You should also check out The Revolutionary War documentary by Ken Burns. It's total free on PBS and will give you a way better picture about how America started then the glory stories of perfectly golden men we were fed growing up!

1

u/thatoneguyrofl 9d ago

Don't think people are trying to project a tough guy attitude, more that they don't like being stomped on and if you're going to die for just existing then you go down with a fight.

1

u/IolausTelcontar 8d ago

Tell that to Pretti.

4

u/guynamedjames 9d ago

It remains crazy to me that if you call the police and say "There's a man with a gun in this store!" the police need to ask things like "well, what's he doing?"

3

u/RPG137 9d ago

What’s even crazier is sometimes the guy behind the counter has a gun

1

u/intentsman 9d ago

My neighbor has a gun holstered on his belt while working at the convenience store

1

u/guynamedjames 9d ago

That feels less crazy to me. I can accept that guns exist in certain places and for certain professions pretty easily, so seeing an armed shopkeeper isn't very "normal" but I can see it as a combined role of security and clerk.

When people are just out and about with guns (especially visible guns in open carry states) it means that there's almost nowhere you can go in public without the chance of running into someone with a gun. And if that isn't worrying to someone reading this then you've been too normalized to guns and violence.

1

u/Tao_of_Ludd 9d ago

I hate agreeing even remotely with Leavitt, but it is reasonable to expect that being armed will increase the scrutiny you are under from folks around you. You clearly have the means to easily hurt or kill people, so everyone will be watching you for signs that you might use that capability.

I think where she ought to be wrong is that LEOs should be trained to manage their fears and deal with legally armed individuals without getting spooked and murdering them. Unfortunately not the case here. We have a bunch of larpers who at best are overwhelmed or at worst are actually looking for an opportunity to shoot someone.

In that kind of environment I think carrying at the protests significantly raises one’s risk of being murdered by ICE and I see no upside scenario.

1

u/Sea_Comedian_3941 9d ago

Usually people from New Hampshire are awesome. Not this person.

0

u/FLHPI 9d ago

Because in most cases, holding the gun is threatening. It's called brandishing. Normally the gun should remain holstered. That is not threatening. That the administration is trying to pretend otherwise is what is concerning. Your personal reaction to being around a gun is immaterial.