For nearly a decade, Donald Trump has branded himself as the most pro-gun president in American history. He has basked in the loyalty of gun owners, enjoyed millions in backing from gun-rights groups, and repeatedly promised that the Second Amendment was safest in his hands.
Yet once again, Trump’s own words are scrambling the politics of guns in America — and exposing deep contradictions at the heart of his movement.
In the aftermath of the fatal shooting of Minneapolis protester Alex Pretti by federal agents, Trump stunned gun-rights advocates with remarks that sounded less like an NRA rally and more like a gun-control talking point.
“You can’t have guns. You can’t walk in with guns. You just can’t,” Trump said outside the White House, suggesting Pretti bore responsibility for his own death simply because he was armed.
The reaction was swift — and unusually critical — from the very groups that have long defended Trump as a bulwark against gun control.
A Pattern of Saying One Thing, Then Another
This was not an isolated slip. Trump has a long history of rhetorical whiplash on guns.
After the 2018 Parkland school shooting, he famously told lawmakers, “Take the guns first, go through due process second,” openly endorsing a concept that runs directly against constitutional protections. Only after intense backlash from the NRA and other gun-rights groups did he retreat.
Now, nearly eight years later, history appears to be repeating itself.
Despite video evidence and Minnesota law indicating Pretti was legally carrying his firearm, Trump and senior officials framed his possession of a gun as inherently threatening. FBI Director Kash Patel and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem echoed that framing — igniting fury among Second Amendment advocates who saw the administration blurring the line between lawful gun ownership and criminality.
Even the NRA, normally careful not to cross Trump directly, issued a statement reaffirming that “all law-abiding citizens have a right to keep and bear arms anywhere they have a legal right to be” — a clear rebuke without naming him.
A Political Role Reversal
What followed was one of the strangest reversals in modern gun politics.
Republicans — who spent years defending armed protesters — suddenly argued guns should not be brought to demonstrations. Democrats — long critics of open carry — found themselves defending a protester’s right to be armed under the Second Amendment.
“It feels like we’re in a bizarro world,” said UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, noting how sharply both parties appeared to swap long-held positions.
Even California Governor Gavin Newsom, a staunch advocate of gun restrictions, defended Pretti’s legal right to carry — while accusing the Trump administration of selectively ignoring the Constitution.
The NRA Is Weaker — and Trump Knows It
Part of what makes this moment different is the NRA’s diminished power.
Once one of Washington’s most feared lobbying forces, the organization has been crippled by internal scandals, financial collapse, and leadership resignations. Its spending and influence have plummeted since Trump’s first term.
That weakening has consequences.
Trump no longer faces the same political cost for contradicting gun-rights orthodoxy — and his comments reflect that reality. As one GOP strategist bluntly put it, the NRA “doesn’t have the juice they used to.”
Still, gun rights remain central to Trump’s base, even if the institutional power has shifted toward newer organizations like Gun Owners of America and the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
A Dangerous Precedent
Critics argue that the Pretti shooting pierced a long-standing gun-lobby narrative: that lawful gun ownership is always a shield against government overreach.
Instead, the incident raised an uncomfortable question — what happens when armed citizens encounter a heavily militarized federal enforcement apparatus?
As Kris Brown of Brady, a gun-violence prevention group, put it, the “jack-booted thugs” gun owners were warned about didn’t come from a Democratic administration — they came from Trump’s.
The Core Contradiction
Trump’s record still largely favors gun rights in policy. He rolled back Biden-era regulations, appointed pro-gun officials, and cut fees on certain firearms equipment. But his instincts, critics argue, often clash with the constitutional absolutism he campaigns on.
When the moment is chaotic, Trump’s default is authority — not liberty.
That contradiction may not cost him politically in the short term. Historically, his rifts with gun-rights groups have been brief and easily repaired. But the Pretti case is different. It forces Republicans, Democrats, gun owners, and civil libertarians alike to confront an uncomfortable truth:
Support for the Second Amendment means very little if it disappears the moment the government feels threatened.
And in that sense, Trump didn’t just scramble gun politics — he exposed how fragile America’s constitutional commitments can be when power is on the line.
