“The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period. The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right that belongs to all law-abiding Americans. The Constitution doesn't create that right – it ensures that the government can't take it away.”
Sources (click to view full provenance)
Propose an edit to this promise's details
Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.
Free — it takes a minute. New here? Create an account and complete the Contributor Agreement once.
Assessments
evidence-backed verdictsThese are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.
All four cited sources were fetched and verified. Each is reachable and each cited quote appears verbatim: (1) govinfo confirms Executive Order 14206 "Protecting Second Amendment Rights" (signed Feb 7, 2025); the cited quote is the document title, which is confirmed (the page is metadata-only, but no substantive claim beyond the title's existence rests on it). (2) The American Presidency Project fact sheet contains the exact UN Arms Trade Treaty withdrawal sentence and corroborates the fugitive-from-justice narrowing and COVID "essential industry" designation. (3) ABC News confirms Trump signed H.J. Res. 40 ending the SSA mental-health-beneficiary reporting rule. (4) The Federal Register confirms the Dec 2018 bump-stock ban requiring possessors to destroy or abandon devices. The CHAMPIONED outcome does not overstate the evidence: Trump took affirmative, leading pro-Second-Amendment actions (executive orders explicitly titled to protect 2A rights, signed repeal legislation, ATT withdrawal), which is "actively led" rather than "merely supported." The rating is balanced and honest — it cites a PRIMARY source documenting the bump-stock ban counteraction and appropriately flags it as the exception holding confidence moderate. Held to the same bar I would apply to the opposite party, the rating stands.
Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)
Sign in to vote.
Discussion
community opinionsComments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Propose a correction
community accountabilitySee an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.
Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.
Debate
sourced community argumentsThese are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.
No arguments yet
Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.
Add a sourced argument
Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.
Sign in or create an account to add an argument.