By Don McDougall
Fairfax, Va. -(AmmoLand.com)- What is Hillary’s position on guns?
Hillary is the 1st Democrat candidate to run for President to says that you do not have the right to own a gun. Most registered Democrats seem to agree. Everyone else does not.
Her voice here has been strong and consistent. While she claims support for the 2nd Amendment, her interpretation is that 2A does not apply to you.
All this is here to see in her own words and the words from her campaign.
So rather than let the anti-gun elements of the media tell you how unjust the NRA is for opposing Hillary why not stop and see or read what her position really is.
June 2014, on CNN Hillary called for the banning of automatic weapons. Her staff quickly sent out a (spin)notice she wanted to ban Semi-Automatic weapons, that the reference to automatic weapons was a miss-speak. Hillary is following the path of California, any gun that is semi-automatic and has a magazine is considered an “Assault Weapon”, and should be banned. That eliminates almost ALL the guns used in competitions such as Camp Perry, and about 40% of all hunting rifles.
Let’s look at what she said about Heller and McDonald:
From her Staff:
“Clinton believes Heller was wrongly decided in that cities and states should have the power to craft common sense laws to keep their residents safe, like safe storage laws to prevent toddlers from accessing guns,” Maya Harris, a policy adviser to Clinton, said in an e-mailed statement. “In overturning Washington D.C.’s safe storage law, Clinton worries that Heller may open the door to overturning thoughtful, common sense safety measures in the future.” This was quoted to Bloomberg Politics
Funny thing here, I thought Heller and McDonald were about an individual having a right to own a gun for personal safety. Turns out it was about about owning a gun safe. Silly me.
Then there is this, recorded at a private fundraiser in New York:
“We’ve got to go after this,” Clinton continued. “And here again, the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.”
So in a nut shell YOU do not have the right to own a gun, that was the issue settled in Heller and McDonald by the SCOTUS. The two rules she has vowed to overturn.
Her comments on an Australian gun confiscation are also telling:
HILLARY CLINTON: “Australia is a good example, Canada is a good example, the U.K. is a good example. Why? Each of them have had mass killings. Australia had a huge mass killing about 20-25 years ago, Canada did as well, so did the U.K. In reaction, they passed much stricter gun laws.”
So The UK confiscated most all guns. HOW is that common sense anything? More important it clearly shows that if available she would follow those paths of action and confiscate guns.
But wait there’s more!
“In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buy-back program. The Australian government, as part of trying to clamp down on the availability of automatic weapons, offered a good price for buying hundreds of thousands of guns. Then, they basically clamped down, going forward, in terms of having more of a background check approach, more of a permitting approach, but they believe, and I think the evidence supports them, that by offering to buy back those guns, they were able to curtail the supply and set a different standard for gun purchases in the future….”
Again with the automatic weapons. While she looks uneducated to any gun owner it imparts an image of machine guns on our streets to the uneducated voter. This was from a town hall meeting on 10-16-15, and the question seems to have been planted by her campaign.
The Charleston Loophole; this is just a call for waiting periods on all gun purchases:
Clinton, Feb. 17: “All we want is common sense. We want comprehensive background checks that close the gun show loophole and online loophole. We want to close what is called the Charleston loophole. And let me explain to you what that is. There is a three-day business limit – the time you have to conduct a background check. At the end of three days the person wanting to buy the gun can come back and buy it. Whether or not the background check is complete. Whether or not the records from local and federal law enforcement have arrived on your computer. That’s what the killer in Charleston did. He went and applied to buy that gun. The end of three days he came back. He was sold the gun. Despite the fact that if there had been just one more day, the record of his felony conviction would have gotten there. And he would not have been able to buy that gun. But he did.”
The problem here is that it is a lie, a flat out lie.
The shooter in Charleston got his gun not because of the three-day requirement to pass a background check but because of a clerical error. The whole story is complex. So I’ll include this link to explain it. http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/clintons-charleston-loophole-claim/
Lastly Gun dealers and manufacturers immunity:
So in our next President’s own words:
In another interview “We have to try everything that works to try to limit the numbers of people and the kinds of people who are given access to firearms,” and acknowledged that “not every killer will have the same profile.”
However, she added, “I also believe, so strongly, Gene, that giving immunity to gun makers and sellers was a terrible mistake.” Clinton was talking about the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which protects gun manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when their products are used to commit crimes
“No other industry in America has absolute immunity… and they sell products all the time that cause harm,” Clinton said. “You talk about corporate greed? The gun manufacturers sell guns to make as much money as they can make.”
This was in response to a question from a man who lost his child in a spree shooting.
The problem again is that it is all a lie, there IS NO IMMUNITY for gun manufacturers or gun dealers. Just ask Taurus, who was on the losing end of a $30 million law suit for faulty triggers.
What Hillary wants to remove is the protection from being sued when a legally made product is used by a criminal in an illegal way. This is like suing Ford and the car dealer where the car was purchased, if one of their cars was used in a bank robbery. The ONLY people who benefit from this are the trial lawyers.
Remember why Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act (PLCAA) was passed in the 1st place, Elliot Spitzer (The AG for the State of NY) said he would use the power he had and law suits against gun manufacturer to bankrupt them all and put them and all gun dealers out of business. Using Litigation to get the results they could not through Legislation. Repeal PLCAA and you assure that gun manufacturers and dealers will be gone in 5 years.
There are some common themes in Hillary’s campaigning against gun owners. She seems to be a little fast and loose with the truth. By that I mean she lies. She keeps referring to “Automatic Weapons”, I’m guessing she is just confused.
Lastly, there is a shocking lack of knowledge and understanding of the gun culture in America. In 2008 as she ran against Barack Obama she was Miss Annie Oakley, now she has spun 180 degrees.
One thing is clear; Hillary is in fact coming for your guns. She does not respect your right to own a gun, does not believe that right is protected by the constitution and is willing to flat out lie to get her way.
From a gun owner’s perspective, there is nothing “common sense” about her proposals and more important they would not save a single life. 120,000,000 gun owners agree with this article.
Oh and just a note for the reader:
Each of these quotes has multiple sources and was available from a mainstream media outlet. I verified the date and source before posting it. There were some quotes I believe to be true, but that I choose not to use, as they could not be verified. There is also an echo chamber, and an article on CNN may also appear on Infowars. While it may appear in two places, I did not use Infowars, or Beck, or other sites like, this as my source EVER. One of the most common tool of the gun banning internet trolls is to search a quote and see that it’s on CNN, and then quoted on “Ammoland”. Then they respond as if Ammoland was the ONLY source, and that since Ammoland to them is a radical right wing group, who cannot be trusted, they must have made it up. With this tactic of the left in mind, you now know exactly the criteria I used.
About Don McDougall:
Don McDougall is an NRA instructor and member of the Los Padres “Friends of the NRA”committee. If he’s not at the range you will find him setting the record straight with on gun issues and gun safety on AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.
AmmoLand says Join the NRA