Hillary Clinton & Establishment Democrats Embrace Gun Control

Hillary and Kane
Hillary Clinton & Establishment Democrats Embrace Gun Control
National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)
National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

Washington, DC – -(Ammoland.com)- If there was any uncertainty about the animosity Hillary Clinton and the elites of her party have toward America’s gun owners, those doubts were conclusively resolved by this week’s Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, PA.

Again and again, the convention’s organizers made sure the issue of “gun violence” was front and center, even though – with more guns being sold than at any time in American historythe U.S. homicide rate remains at a historic low.

President Obama’s “fundamental transformation of America” has been so thorough and dramatic in other ways that it seems America’s gun owners and outdoor sporting traditions are virtually all that remain of a country many remember from childhood. No wonder, then, the “gun lobby” – Clinton-speak for NRA and its millions of members and supporters – was the subject of so much attention and abuse.

Let’s not mince words. Hillary Clinton does not believe in the Second Amendment. She does not believe in the U.S. Supreme Court decision that recognized a fundamental, constitutional right to have a firearm in one’s own home for self-defense.

What she does believe in is the confiscatory gun control policies of Australia, a regime that so demonized and abused gun owners that a territorial “public service announcement” even mocked them with the specter of a prison sentence should they fail to comply.

That’s the Hillary Clinton and national Democratic Party of today. How would they behave if they exercised authority without the restraining hand of a strong opposition party and of grassroots organizations like the NRA to hold them accountable? Look no further than Australia and Great Britain, where private ownership of firearms for self-defense has been effectively abolished, or even California, where every legislative session brings ever more hackneyed and superfluous gun control to suppress lawful firearm ownership.

But wait. Weren’t newspapers reporting that Hillary Clinton won’t “repeal the Second Amendment”? Isn’t that what she said fifty minutes into her monotonous, droning acceptance speech that seemed to promise American voters everything and nothing, from every point of view, all at the same time?

How much more does it need to be said? Hillary Clinton – infamous across the political spectrum and amongst broad demographics for her dishonesty – never speaks with more duplicity than when talking about the Second Amendment.

But don’t take our word for it. The national Democratic Party has clear marching order for how its members are supposed to articulate their stance on guns. As an article on Politico’s website explained. “[R]epresentatives from a broad mix of progressive groups sat around a table [the week before the convention] at the Washington offices of Global Strategy Group, where they received a tutorial on how — and how not — to talk about guns.” Members are not supposed to talk about “gun control” but “gun violence prevention.” They are supposed to invoke “common sense.” They are instructed to appeal to emotion with “victim and survivor stories” but not to “[o]verload the argument with numbers” (which of course don’t favor them). They are even told to lie, by characterizing intentional limits to the sweep of gun control laws as “loopholes” and by decrying a “new normal” of “gun violence” that statistics refute.

All this and more is outlined in a glossy booklet produced by the Gabby Giffords anti-gun group, Americans For Responsible Solutions and, according to the Politico article, “distributed to every House Democrat ….”

What does this all really mean? We can’t provide a better explanation than was offered by Mary Bayer, who The Daily Caller described as “a former Democratic delegate and a volunteer organizer for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.” Bayer was caught on tape speaking to an undercover journalist posing as a gun control advocate. Bayer confirmed elements of the speech code in response to questions, but when asked outright if Hillary Clinton would support banning guns, Bayer answered, “Oh, for sure.” Believing she was counseling a fellow traveler, Bayer explained why the party must nevertheless couch its gun control agenda in more benign, focus-group tested phrases, “You say [expletive] like that and people will buy into it.”

And so Hillary Clinton did say “[expletive] like that” in her nomination acceptance speech on Wednesday. “I’m not here to repeal the Second Amendment,” she said (as if any president has the unilateral authority to amend the Constitution). “I’m not here to take away your guns,” she insisted. “I just don’t want you to be shot by someone who shouldn’t have a gun in the first place.” She reminded viewers, “You heard, you saw, family members of people killed by gun violence” (although she omitted the fact that some of those incidents were determined, including by Obama’s Department of Justice, to involve acts of defensive force). “You heard, you saw,” Clinton said, “family members of police officers killed in the line of duty because they were outgunned by criminals” (cravenly ambushed, yes, outgunned, no). She offered no actual solutions but referred to some undefined “common ground” she believes must exist.

Hillary Clinton’s predecessor and ideological compatriot Barack Obama has said similar things. And then came his calls to ban America’s most popular rifle. And the Administration’s actual attempt to ban one of the most popular types of ammunition for that rifle. And his appointment of Supreme Court Justices who voted against an individual right under the Second Amendment and for expansions of federal gun control. And the Administration’s use of banking regulators to try to drive gun dealers out business. And its gun sales to Mexico drug cartels, even as it cited narco-terrorism to call for gun control in the United States. And it’s latest measure to force commercial gunsmiths to fork over thousands of dollars annually to the U.S. State Department to register as “manufacturers,” whether or not they manufacture anything.

And the list continues.

“Fool me once,” the saying goes, “shame on you.” But, “Fool me twice, shame on me.”

There are, perhaps, American gun owners who were fooled by Barack Obama’s reassuring rhetoric before his second term. And there may be a new generation of American gun owners who are tempted to believe that Hillary Clinton will behave moderately in pursuit of “gun violence prevention” and “common sense” gun restrictions.

But if they’re fooled this time, there may not be a second time. After this week’s convention, the consensus of the Democratic Party elite has been laid bare. And this may well be the last chance American gun owners will get to safeguard their rights.

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris Rakes

GUN CONTROL IS HITTING WHAT YOU SHOOT AT. What the Tories want is to PROHIBIT GUNS. So what they want is gun PROHIBITION