Donald Trump was convicted of 34 felonies on Thursday. He can no longer possess guns. That outcome was certainly foreseeable, given how many felony indictments he faced and still does. But this eventuality wasn’t broached by gun-rights groups or Trump’s primary opponents in the leadup to his nomination.

This stemmed from the general, inexplicable decision not to make guns a point of contention in the Republican primary.

While some of Trump’s opponents, such as Florida Governor Ron Desantis, seemed to be setting up a record to run to his right on gun policy, nobody did very much at all to go after him on the issue. The topic was basically absent from the Republican debates, where Trump himself was also absent. The former president doubling down on his bump stock ban, whose constitutionality is currently being challenged at the Supreme Court, didn’t garner much pushback from his opponents either.

As with most other issues, Trump’s opponents spent more time going after each other’s vulnerabilities than the frontrunner’s flaws.

It’s not as though there was nothing to exploit. Trump certainly has a track record of pro-gun accomplishments he can and does tout, including appointing three of the six justices from the majority in 2022’s landmark New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen case. But, in addition to the bump stock ban, Trump has also made a series of statements on being open to a myriad of different gun restrictions.

In his book “The America We Deserve,” Trump expressed support for an “assault weapons” ban. After the El Paso shooting, he reportedly had to be talked out of supporting a ban on AR-15s and other popular firearms. After the Parkland shooting, he had a public discussion at the White House with a bipartisan group of Senators where he said, “…take the guns first, go through due process second” when talking about the potential of supporting a “red flag” law.

In the meeting, Trump’s Vice President Mike Pence said the laws can “give families and give local law enforcement additional tools if an individual is reported to be a potential danger to themselves or others.”

“Allow due process so no one’s rights are trampled,” Pence said. “The ability to go to court, obtain an order, and then collect not only the firearms but any weapons in the possession of that individual…”

“Or, Mike, take the firearms first and then go to court,” Trump interrupted. “Because, a lot of times, by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court, to get the due process procedures—I like taking the guns early. Like in this crazy man’s case, that just took place in Florida, he had a lot of firearms, they saw everything—to go to court would have taken a long time, so you could do exactly what you’re saying, but take the guns first, go through due process second.”

Ultimately, his support for working with Democrats to enact new gun restrictions didn’t survive the announcement of his first impeachment. But none of his opponents, or the gun-rights groups for that matter, tried to make these vulnerabilities on gun policy a major issue in the primary campaign.

Then, of course, there was the potential for his felony charges to turn into felony convictions. The indictments alone made it illegal for him to obtain new guns, but there was basically no discussion of this fact. Even after a false claim by his campaign that he’d bought a gun with his face on it at a campaign stop brought the issue into the public eye, there wasn’t a peep from his opponents or any of the major gun-rights groups.

Now, this is all likely because the idea Trump had done nothing wrong, or at least nothing criminal, in attempting to undo the 2020 election results or keeping classified documents or covering up an affair ahead of the 2016 election became dogma within the Republican party pretty quickly. But it’s surprising none of the people running against him really bothered to challenge that dogma. And it’s remarkable gun-rights activists were silent about how it might hurt their cause if any of those cases went against Trump, too.

After all, even if most gun advocates thought the charges wouldn’t stick, it seems only prudent to have at least some discussion of what would happen if they did.

Instead, voters are stuck with a choice between a man who can’t own guns and a man who wants to severely restrict their ownership. It’s a choice many might not have realized they’d be forced to make. None of the gun-rights groups or Republican alternatives brought it up (although some gun news publications did).

Perhaps having to make that choice is worth it for those who wish to see Trump exonerated. I’m sure there will be gun-owning Trump supporters who think sticking with him through the legal battles is more important than nearly anything else. But not even broaching that debate makes little sense in hindsight.