DOJ looking for ways to ban trans people from owning guns

[JustAGuy1]

Seems like a real problem. After reading this I am 100% convinced straight men should NEVER EVER have access to guns.

According to the Gun Violence Archive (GVA), over the past decade there have been around 4,400 mass shootings in the U.S. (defined as incidents where four or more people were shot, excluding the perpetrator). Of those, fewer than 10 known suspects were transgender, representing just about 0.11% of cases. Link

• The U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center studied 173 targeted public attacks between 2016 and 2020. Only three attackers (about 2%) were transgender; the vast majority—96%—were male. Link
• Reporting from The Trace notes that out of more than 5,300 mass shootings over the last decade, only four were carried out by individuals known to identify as trans or nonbinary—a fraction so small it doesn’t support any notion of a trend. Link

Some high-profile cases are repeatedly brought up:

• Nashville (2023 Covenant School shooting): Perpetrator Aiden (Audrey) Hale was a trans man.
• Denver (STEM School Highlands Ranch, 2019): One of the two shooters, Alec McKinney, was a trans boy.
• Colorado Springs (Club Q, 2022): The shooter was identified as nonbinary, but experts have questioned the credibility of that claim. Link
• Other claims—like a “rise” in transgender shooters or specific charts showing otherwise—have been repeatedly debunked by AP Link

Your statement is in fact a lie as I proved. Feel free to apologize.

Come take them from us?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Where does the 2A say that.?

.

Back when the 2A was created, men were men and women were women and nobody was on psychotropic drugs which, as they tell you in the packaging, can make you feel like harming yourself and others.

.

 

[Zincwarrior]

If you aren't mentally stable enough to know whether or not you're male or female, you aren't mentally stable enough to own a firearm.

Except the LAW and the CONSTITUTION don't say that. I can't believe I have to defend the 2nd Amendment here.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

How about we blame the criminals and not just the people we dont like? That vast majority of criminal shooters are straight me. By far.

The vast majority are straight you?

That is certainly interesting.

 

[marvin martian]

To the topic, I would imagine both the NRA and the ACLU would join a suit against this. IMagine the permutations if a President can suspend the rights of entire groups of people.

You cheered when Old Joe did it. Along with your fellow Euro cucks.

 

[martybegan]

The DOJ is considering ways to ban trans people from owning guns. Given that the most mass murders are done by right wing nuts, they are looking at the wrong people.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/04/politics/transgender-firearms-justice-department-second-amendment

In 2022, all extremist-related murders in the U.S. were linked to right-wing extremists, with a significant number of these being mass shootings.

Key Findings​

1. Extremism-Related Murders: According to a report from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), all 25 extremism-related murders in the U.S. in 2022 were linked to right-wing extremists. This included two major mass shooting incidents: the Buffalo supermarket shooting and the Club Q shooting in Colorado Springs.
   
   2
2. Mass Shootings and Right-Wing Extremism: The report highlights that right-wing extremists committed every ideologically driven mass killing identified in the U.S. in 2022. This trend indicates an unusually high proportion of mass shootings perpetrated by individuals with ties to white supremacist ideologies.
   
   2
3. Long-Term Trends: Over the past decade, the number of mass killings linked to extremism has significantly increased. The ADL noted that the number of extremist mass killings in the U.S. has tripled compared to previous decades, with a notable spike in incidents attributed to right-wing extremism.
   
   2

Another one of those "could maybe might want to think about doing study it maybe" things.

Get back to me when they actually try to do it.

We have plans to nuke china, Russia, Iran, the Norks and others. Does that mean we are certain to actually do it?

 

[Anathema]

I'd even include everyone who sees a mental health professional.

Be careful with that idea… it’s likely to backfire. I know several gun owners here in Massachusetts who refused any form of mental health assistance until the Commonwealth clarified what it meant by it’s prohibition on mental health patients getting getting firearms licenses.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Except the LAW and the CONSTITUTION don't say that. I can't believe I have to defend the 2nd Amendment here.

.

Ask someone to define what "mentally unstable" meant to those who crafted the 2A.

You can't even imagine this.





.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Except the LAW and the CONSTITUTION don't say that. I can't believe I have to defend the 2nd Amendment here.

We do it for felons. We do it when a PFA has been filed against someone? We do it for addicts. We ban them in all types of public buildings. Are you in favor of that or are there to be zero restrictions?

Every time one of these school massacres take place, which lately has been committed by trannies, all we hear is rhetoric from the left about not doing enough to ban guns. Bear in mind, brown kids are gunned down every weekend in Chicago and not a peep, but the moment a bunch of white kids at school get killed they all come out of the woodwork. I'm not going have my ability to defend myself jeopardized because of the actions of the mentally ill who don't know if they should wear pants or a dress.

Truthfully, I'm speaking tongue and cheek, but federal legislation is being considered right now to do exactly this and I'm really looking forward to seeing the Democratic Party suddenly stand on the side of the Second Amendment, because what choice are they going to have?

 

[Zincwarrior]

We do it for felons. We do it when a PFA has been filed against someone? We do it for addicts. We ban them in all types of public buildings. Are you in favor of that or are there to be zero restrictions?

Felons have committed crimes.
We do not do it by fiat of the executive for entire groups of people.

Banning people from buildings has less than nothing to do with this topic.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Felons have committed crimes.
We do not do it by fiat of the executive for entire groups of people.

Banning people from buildings has less than nothing to do with this topic.

A lot of people with PFAs against them have not committed crimes, but there was enough circumstantial evidence that they could. In fact, I know somebody who just yesterday had his ability to carry a gun restored after two years because of a PFA filed against him with flimsy evidence, but the judge granted it. Given the disproportionately high amount of violence committed by transgenders, how it is any different? Again, we have all kinds of restrictions on rights. None are absolute. Like I said, I'm eager to watch the Democrats defend 2A if this legislation comes up for debate in Congress.

 

[Zincwarrior]

A lot of people with PFAs against them have not committed crimes, but there was enough circumstantial evidence that they could. In fact, I know somebody who just yesterday had his ability to carry a gun restored after two years because of a PFA filed against him with flimsy evidence, but the judge granted it. Given the disproportionately high amount of violence committed by transgenders, how it is any different? Again, we have all kinds of restrictions on rights. None are absolute. Like I said, I'm eager to watch the Democrats defend 2A if this legislation comes up for debate in Congress.

PFA? protective order? Thats an adjudicated item.

 

[marvin martian]

Felons have committed crimes.
We do not do it by fiat of the executive for entire groups of people.

Banning people from buildings has less than nothing to do with this topic.

Not true. Firearms were confiscated from civilians in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, by executive order.

Not to mention the forced confiscations all over Europe by your fellow anti-civil rights Euro cuck politicians.

 

[marvin martian]

A lot of people with PFAs against them have not committed crimes, but there was enough circumstantial evidence that they could. In fact, I know somebody who just yesterday had his ability to carry a gun restored after two years because of a PFA filed against him with flimsy evidence, but the judge granted it. Given the disproportionately high amount of violence committed by transgenders, how it is any different? Again, we have all kinds of restrictions on rights. None are absolute. Like I said, I'm eager to watch the Democrats defend 2A if this legislation comes up for debate in Congress.

Being "trans" should be an automatic red flag for gun ownership, just like being an illegal drug user or a mental patient is now.

 

[kyzr]

Why can the FBI reject the purchase simply because SSA has someone getting mental health treatment?
And how does that keep mentally ill people from getting a gun and why do we need a new law cause Trump didn’t think that it should be shared simply that some that SSA is paying for mental health treatment for someone?

Do we need red flag laws or not?
Who should be prohibited from buying a gun?
Should trannies on powerful meds with mental health issues have guns?
Biden already banned assault weapons, subsequently overturned, because of the 2A.
The courts should agree to some restrictions on owning firearms.
Non-citizens should be prohibited. Here legally or not.
No drivers license?
No carry permit?
Where do you draw that "red flag" line?

 

[struth]

Do we need red flag laws or not?
Who should be prohibited from buying a gun?
Should trannies on powerful meds with mental health issues have guns?
Biden already banned assault weapons, subsequently overturned, because of the 2A.
The courts should agree to some restrictions on owning firearms.
Non-citizens should be prohibited. Here legally or not.
No drivers license?
No carry permit?
Where do you draw that "red flag" line?

The only people that should be banned from gun ownership are people that have had that right taken away through actual due process...like a felon, or someone who's been committed to a hospital.

Someone on SS, that happens to go see a counselor for their mental health shouldn't be barred.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

PFA? protective order? Thats an adjudicated item.

Several states passed red flag laws in the aftermath of the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, where guns can be confiscated based on a perceived mental state. If someone makes death threats to their ex should they lose their guns? What is someone makes death threats to politicians or POTUS?

None of the right we have are absolute. They all have "reasonable" restrictions, reasonable, of course, being one's own perception, but where does the line get drawn?

 

[StatesRightsForever]

Felons have committed crimes.
We do not do it by fiat of the executive for entire groups of people.

Banning people from buildings has less than nothing to do with this topic.

People convicted of misdemeanors are criminals too and are often sent to prison but you say let them have guns. The difference between a felony and a misdemeanor is ONE DAY.

 

[kyzr]

The only people that should be banned from gun ownership are people that have had that right taken away through actual due process...like a felon, or someone who's been committed to a hospital.
Someone on SS, that happens to go see a counselor for their mental health shouldn't be barred.

That's your opinion, fine. Mine is if a doctor wants to keep a patient from accessing guns, he should be able to.
After a mass shooting is the wrong time to wish you had done something.

 

[struth]

That's your opinion, fine. Mine is if a doctor wants to keep a patient from accessing guns, he should be able to.
After a mass shooting is the wrong time to wish you had done something.

Well it’s more then my opinion

It’s in the constitution. People can’t be denied life, liberty or property without due process