A simple visit to a gun shop in Summerville, S.C., has spiraled into a significant legal and public relations challenge for former President Donald Trump.

According to PJ Media, campaign aide Steven Cheung mistakenly reported that Trump had purchased a Glock-19 pistol during a visit to a gun dealer in Summerville, South Carolina.

Cheung's post on X (formerly Twitter) caused a stir, as Trump’s legal situation made him ineligible to buy firearms.

The Erroneous Glock Purchase Report

Glock manufactures a special G-19 edition featuring Donald Trump, and during his visit, Trump expressed interest in buying one.

Cheung’s post implied that Trump had completed the purchase, which would violate federal law due to his indictments. The post was soon deleted, with Cheung clarifying that Trump did not purchase or take possession of the firearm but only indicated interest.

This clarification, however, does not resolve the broader issue Trump faces. Despite not buying the Glock, Trump’s legal battles could require him to surrender any firearms he currently owns.

Potential Legal Consequences For Trump

In a 2012 interview, Trump stated he owned two pistols and had a concealed carry permit. The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits convicted felons from owning firearms, and New York law forbids felons from holding concealed carry permits.

With Trump under indictment, questions arise about whether he will be forced to give up his firearms.

Former Democratic presidential candidate has called on New York Governor Kathy Hochul to pardon Trump, which could potentially impact his gun ownership status.

However, if the judge rules against him, Trump must provide a compelling reason to retain his firearms.

The Broader Debate On Gun Laws And Felonies

The controversy touches on the broader debate regarding gun control laws. Critics argue that the laws are arbitrary, treating violent and non-violent offenders the same.

UCLA law professor Adam Winkler points out the inconsistencies:

Many felonies are not violent in the least, raising no particular suspicion that the convict is a threat to public safety. Perjury, securities law violations, embezzlement, obstruction of justice, and a host of other felonies do not indicate a propensity for dangerousness. It is hard to imagine how banning Martha Stewart or Enron's Andrew Fastow from possessing a gun furthers public safety.

The legal precedent is mixed. In 2019, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett argued that only dangerous individuals should be barred from gun ownership.

However, in the 2022 New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case, the court ruled that firearm regulations must align with the nation’s historical tradition.

Trump's Legal Strategy And Future Implications

Trump’s legal team is likely preparing for a potential fight. If forced to surrender his firearms, Trump may have to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. The court’s recent rulings suggest that Trump could argue historical precedent is on his side.

The outcome of this legal battle could have far-reaching implications. If Trump is successful, it may set a precedent for other non-violent felons. Conversely, a ruling against him could reinforce the current strictures of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Conclusion: Uncertain Future For Trump's Firearms

Donald Trump’s interest in purchasing a Glock-19 pistol has highlighted significant legal challenges. Although the initial report was erroneous, the broader issue remains. Trump’s indictments raise questions about his eligibility to own firearms under federal and New York state law.

Legal experts are divided on the matter, with some arguing for a more nuanced approach to gun control laws. As Trump navigates his legal challenges, the question of whether he will have to surrender his firearms remains unresolved.